India is not a nation of immigrants; it
is a homeland, a civilization society. Since liberal multiculturalism is a
product of immigrant societies, there is a danger that India may not fit into
the Western liberal multicultural scheme. The Indian constitution does not
declare India to be multicultural. Nevertheless, there are guarantees in the
Constitution that has made a multicultural society possible in India. Like all
other modern states, India identity itself with the majority Hindu Culture,
thereby communities that differ from it are designated as minorities. The problem,
here, does not lie with the definition of majorities and minorities but with
the idea that “irreconcilable difference exist between majority and minority
culture.” Worse, minorities and majorities are seen to increasingly clash over
such issues as language rights, regional autonomy, political representation,
education curriculum, land claims, national anthem or public holidays (Kymlicka
1996:1). Hindu majority culture is itself not a culturally homogeneous
community because of presence of four hierarchical Castes (almost similar to
class in Western context) and numbers numerous sub-castes within them, is
itself pluralist. Hierarchical caste system, which has dominated Indian society
for over 3000 years, was developed by the Brahmins (Hindu Priests) to maintain
their superiority over the less educated and less skilled(Kethineni:2010:101).
Over time, the caste system was formalized into four distinct classes (varnas).
At the top of the hierarchy are the Brahmins, who are considered arbiters in
matters of learning, teaching, and religion. Next in line are the Kshatriyas
who are warriors and administrators. The third category is Vaisyas, who belong
to the artisan commercial calss. Finally, the Sudras (Backward Caste) are
farmers and peasants. These four castes are significant as conversion to
Christianity or accepting Christ as Saviour had taken place since the first
century when Christ’s disciple Thomas brought Gospel of Christ to people of South
India to the present.
Beneath the four castes there is a fifth
group, which is not included as part of the Indian Caste system. Individuals
from this group are literally untouchable for the rest of the Castes or
socially excluded people who describe themselves “Dalit.” The word Dalit is
derived from the root Dal, incidentally common to both Sanskrit and Hebrew
(Massey: 2004;1-34) In both languages it has the same meaning i.e. weak,
crushed, split open and trampled upon. The various lexicographical declensions
connote these various meaning from physical to psychological levels of the
oppressed and excluded people. For centuries, Dalits were not treated as part
of the mainstream Indian Society and were traditionally assigned menial and
degrading jobs. Gandhian liberals referred them as Harijans (children of God)
and Government of India officially calls them “schedule castes.” Indeed this
was based on the British government notification whereby the Simon Commission
drew up an official list
of socially excluded caste and tribes in
1930 called the “Schedule Castes”(SC) and “Schedule Tribes” (ST). “Scheduled”
means they re on a government schedule that entitles them to certain protection
and affirmative actions. There are approximately 170 million Dalits out of
India’s billion populations.(Minority Rights Group International, 2006). It
estimated that 16 or 17 million Dalits are Christians. The Schedule Tribes or
Adivasi (Indigenous people) constitute 80 million of Indian population. Among
them about 8 percent or 6 million is Schedule Tribe or Adivasi Christians.
Minorities in India India has its share
of minorities—generally defined in religious terms—though the Constitution does
acknowledge the existence of linguistic minorities. Indeed the Constitution of
India has taken the identification of Indian minority from the report prepared
by the Advisory Committee on minorities submitted to the Constituent Assembly
in August 1947(Sunder Raj: 1988:90)
As
the report records, till this stage, the seven minority communities as
officially accepted were (1)Anglo-Indian; (2) Parsees; (3) Plain tribesman in
Assam; (4) Indian Christians; (5) Sikhs; (6) Muslims; (7)Scheduled Caste. While
the Constituent Assembly in the process of “practically unanimously” accepting
the *Christopher S. Raj is currently Professor of American Studies and
Coordinator of Canadian Studies;
Dean of School of International of
International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi; Ordained Priest
of the Church of North India, Pastoring at the Cathedral Church of Redempition,
Delhi Diocese.
Report, K.M. Munshi by a super strategem
swept the floor unaware into approving an amendment to the Report. This ardent
Brahmin leader asked for a seemingly innocent amendment: To (a) delete
Scheduled Castes from the list of the minorities, (b) include the following
addition, “I-A: The section of the Hindu Community referred to as Scheduled
Castes as defined 1 of the Government of India Act 1935, shall have the same
rights and benefits, which are herein provided for minorities specified in the Schedule to para 1” The forum that day
pre-occupied fully and only with the electoral structuring of the society
especially of the minority communities, missed completely the religious
implication of this “constitutional fraud” (Rajshekar: 1983:73-77). The inner
motive for the amendment is best expressed by the words of Munshi himself. He
said, “Any safeguard as a minority, so far as the Schedule Castes are concerned
will possibly prevent their complete absorption in the Hindu fold” (Constituent
Assembly Debates: 1947:Vol.5:234-238) Munshi logic for his amendment is the
most illogical in Parliament debates (Sunderraj: 1988:91).
If untouchable are not a minorithy, why
did Munshi ask for the untouchables “the rights and benefits of a minority?”
Munshi said that according to him the untouchables are not a minority. Who
decides who is a minority? In a democracy it is always a community which
defines itself. He stated, “Harijans are part and parcel of the Hindu
community. Safeguards are given to them till they are completely absorbed in
the community” (Constituent Assembly Debates: 228). If they are part and parcel
why the process of absorption? Munshi stated that minorities according to
international law are racial and linguistic minorities. Munshi himself an
Indologist, knew beyond any doubt that the untouchables are a distinct
racio-religious minority. Munshi’s lie won that day (Sunderraj:91). This debate
and Munshi’s affirmation was fatal to the Schedule Caste who became Christian
were denied the same privileges enjoyed by the Schedule Caste who are not
Christian which is a subject of review later and matter of equity in this
paper.
According to the 2001 Indian census Christian
constitute 2.3 or 2.7 % of the Indian population (about 27 million); Muslim 13 to 15% (157
million); Sikh 1.9% (19 million); Buddhist 0.8 (8 million) Jains 0.4% (4
million); and Hindus 80% (about 800 million). Even though Indian society
incorporates a “bewildering” numbers of minorities identified by factors like
religion, caste, class or region, the “quintessential” minority in most
people’s perception was the religious minority (Joseph:1999). The presence of
such diverse population has necessitated the adoption of policies aimed at
safeguarding minority concern. The Indian Constitution is liberal document that
makes the protection of the minority interest’s one of its principal
objectives. The issue of fair and equal treatment of minorities is undoubtedly
an important one from the multiculturalist’s point of view. Multiculturalism
believes that the mere presence of many, plural communities were not enough.
What was important was to see
Whether different communities were
treated as equal within the democratic polity. In other words, difference must
not be a source of discrimination (Mahajan: 1999). This is a principal concern
of multiculturalism. Significantly, Indian state not only recognizes
difference, but guarantees equal citizenship and equal rights. Constitutional
recognition and protection is offered to religious, cultural and linguistic
minorities. What is more, state policies toward minorities are guided by equal
respect, fairness and non-discrimination (Jospeh: 1999). But then, Indians have
aced against each other with cultural prejudice. India, Cultural prejudice runs
high, both at individual level and group levels. Even though multiculturalism
speaks of equality of cultures and cultural communities in the public domain,
multicultural India has seldom been able to eliminated discrimination by
“other” culture. Interestingly. Neither Indian variety of state socialism nor
the post-1991 free market economy has been able to rid Indians of cultural
prejudices (Ray: 2009:71). In fact, revolution in modern means of communication
has strengthened cultural prejudices by commercializing and popularizing
element of dominant cultures at the expenses of other cultures. The Indian
State has appeared unable—even unwilling—to stall this cultural downside. In
such a situation, people with culture distinct from the dominant culture are
finding it difficult to “conserve” their cultures in the face of the cultural onslaught
of the dominant group. Indeed refusal to acknowledge any plurality of the
Indian society has been disastrous, as Hindu nationalist have learned of late.
Any attempt to promote separateness in the name of plurality had too has been
disastrous, as many secessionist movement since Independence have shown (but
secessionist of all hues have always maintained that there was pressure on their
Page:3 communities to assimilate with “mainstream” Indian society, that there
were attempts by “Indians” to eliminate their own distinct culture, language,
and lifestyle). Modern societies are increasingly confronted with minority
groups demanding recognition of their identity, and accommodation of their
cultural differences, often phrased as challenge of “multiculturalism”
(Kymlicka 1996:10). Significantly,
Indian constitution has addressed to some of the challenges of “multiculturalism”
as identified by Kymlicka. Article 29(1) of the Constitution of India is a
guarantee for the protection and preservation of the cultural rights of the
minority communities: “Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of
Indi or any part thereof having distinct language, script or culture of its own
shall have the right to conserve the same.” It is also a safeguard against
discrimination—based on cultural differences—by the state and other cultural
groups. Also “minority” or “any section of the Citizens’ may mean a linguistic
or cultural minority.
Article
25(1) guarantees religions rights, “All persons are equally entitled to
freedom of Conscience and right freely to profess, practice and propagate
religion.” Indian constitution also grants every religious denomination the
right to establish religious and charitable institutions, manage its own
religious affairs, and acquire and administer property in accordance with law
(Article 26), provided they did not contravene public order, morality or
health. This right is further strengthened by Article 30(1) which gives all
minorities, whether based on religion or language, the right to “establish and
administer educational institutions of their choice.”
Article
29(2) seek to protect the educational rights of minority communities:
“No citizen shallbe denied admission into any educational institution
maintained by the State or receiving aid out of the State funds on grounds of
religion, race, caste, language, or any of them.” This is a particular Safeguard
against discrimination that may arise out of the ethnic orientation of Indian
state. Any student of any religion, race, case, or language group can seek and
get admission to any government owned—or government aided—educational
institution in any part of India. The criteria for admission shall be academic
merit. Of course, seats in such educational institutions can be reserved for
local students (students belonging to the state). Alternatively, seats can be
reserved for outstation—or out of state—candidates.
Under the amended Article 15 as well as
Articles 29 and 47 of the Constitution, the Government of India fulfil the
education obligation for Dalit and Schedule Tribe by reserving seats up to 15%
and 7% in Government established education institutions and also government
aided educational institution. Article 16 make provision of reservation in jobs
for Dalit 15% and schedule Tribe 7% initially applied only in recruiting for
Central and State government job. The 1957 this was expanded to include
promotion post as well as initial employment. Moreover, concessions a higher
maximum qualifying age or lower qualifying marks on examination have been
granted to make it easier for Dalit and Schedule Tribe enter the higher ranks
of government jobs or services.
With regard to employment in public
sector undertaking, reservation were granted “in principle” in 1954 but
officially introduced only 15 years later. Moreover, provision of Article 330
and 332 of the Constitution provides for reservation of seats in the Indian
Parliament Lok Sabha and also in the State legislatures. Articles 39, 41 and 16
(section 2 and 4) calls for fair treatment of Dalits and Schedule Tribe in the
workplace (Webster: 2009:177-186). Indian Christian Minority As per 2001 census
there are about 27 million Christians in India (2.5% Christians and among them
1.8 million Catholics, nearly equal to the population of Canada in 2001).
Christianity is India’s largest religion after Hinduism and Islam. Christian
population is concentrated in three major centers: South India; (2) on the
Konkan Coast; (3) among the Tribal people of Jharkhand States and other seven
states of North East. In South India the major Christian centers of
Christianity are Kerala, Tamilnadu and Andra Prdesh. Majority of the Christians
in Kerala, constituting about 19 per cent of the population of the state, trace
their origins to the first phase, the first Century missionary activity of
Thomas, the disciple of Christ. While the Portuguese Mission tried to bring
them under the Latin rite many of them continued to adhere to their traditional
rites, some under the Catholic Church and others outside. The Tamil Church is
over laden with layers of traditions,
India is not a nation of immigrants; it
is a homeland, a civilization society. Since liberal multiculturalism is a
product of immigrant societies, there is a danger that India may not fit into
the Western liberal multicultural scheme. The Indian constitution does not
declare India to be multicultural. Nevertheless, there are guarantees in the
Constitution that has made a multicultural society possible in India. Like all
other modern states, India identity itself with the majority Hindu Culture,
thereby communities that differ from it are designated as minorities. The problem,
here, does not lie with the definition of majorities and minorities but with
the idea that “irreconcilable difference exist between majority and minority
culture.” Worse, minorities and majorities are seen to increasingly clash over
such issues as language rights, regional autonomy, political representation,
education curriculum, land claims, national anthem or public holidays (Kymlicka
1996:1). Hindu majority culture is itself not a culturally homogeneous
community because of presence of four hierarchical Castes (almost similar to
class in Western context) and numbers numerous sub-castes within them, is
itself pluralist. Hierarchical caste system, which has dominated Indian society
for over 3000 years, was developed by the Brahmins (Hindu Priests) to maintain
their superiority over the less educated and less skilled(Kethineni:2010:101).
Over time, the caste system was formalized into four distinct classes (varnas).
At the top of the hierarchy are the Brahmins, who are considered arbiters in
matters of learning, teaching, and religion. Next in line are the Kshatriyas
who are warriors and administrators. The third category is Vaisyas, who belong
to the artisan commercial calss. Finally, the Sudras (Backward Caste) are
farmers and peasants. These four castes are significant as conversion to
Christianity or accepting Christ as Saviour had taken place since the first
century when Christ’s disciple Thomas brought Gospel of Christ to people of South
India to the present.
Beneath the four castes there is a fifth
group, which is not included as part of the Indian Caste system. Individuals
from this group are literally untouchable for the rest of the Castes or
socially excluded people who describe themselves “Dalit.” The word Dalit is
derived from the root Dal, incidentally common to both Sanskrit and Hebrew
(Massey: 2004;1-34) In both languages it has the same meaning i.e. weak,
crushed, split open and trampled upon. The various lexicographical declensions
connote these various meaning from physical to psychological levels of the
oppressed and excluded people. For centuries, Dalits were not treated as part
of the mainstream Indian Society and were traditionally assigned menial and
degrading jobs. Gandhian liberals referred them as Harijans (children of God)
and Government of India officially calls them “schedule castes.” Indeed this
was based on the British government notification whereby the Simon Commission
drew up an official list
of socially excluded caste and tribes in
1930 called the “Schedule Castes”(SC) and “Schedule Tribes” (ST). “Scheduled”
means they re on a government schedule that entitles them to certain protection
and affirmative actions. There are approximately 170 million Dalits out of
India’s billion populations.(Minority Rights Group International, 2006). It
estimated that 16 or 17 million Dalits are Christians. The Schedule Tribes or
Adivasi (Indigenous people) constitute 80 million of Indian population. Among
them about 8 percent or 6 million is Schedule Tribe or Adivasi Christians.
Minorities in India India has its share
of minorities—generally defined in religious terms—though the Constitution does
acknowledge the existence of linguistic minorities. Indeed the Constitution of
India has taken the identification of Indian minority from the report prepared
by the Advisory Committee on minorities submitted to the Constituent Assembly
in August 1947(Sunder Raj: 1988:90)
As
the report records, till this stage, the seven minority communities as
officially accepted were (1)Anglo-Indian; (2) Parsees; (3) Plain tribesman in
Assam; (4) Indian Christians; (5) Sikhs; (6) Muslims; (7)Scheduled Caste. While
the Constituent Assembly in the process of “practically unanimously” accepting
the *Christopher S. Raj is currently Professor of American Studies and
Coordinator of Canadian Studies;
Dean of School of International of
International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi; Ordained Priest
of the Church of North India, Pastoring at the Cathedral Church of Redempition,
Delhi Diocese.
Report, K.M. Munshi by a super strategem
swept the floor unaware into approving an amendment to the Report. This ardent
Brahmin leader asked for a seemingly innocent amendment: To (a) delete
Scheduled Castes from the list of the minorities, (b) include the following
addition, “I-A: The section of the Hindu Community referred to as Scheduled
Castes as defined 1 of the Government of India Act 1935, shall have the same
rights and benefits, which are herein provided for minorities specified in the Schedule to para 1” The forum that day
pre-occupied fully and only with the electoral structuring of the society
especially of the minority communities, missed completely the religious
implication of this “constitutional fraud” (Rajshekar: 1983:73-77). The inner
motive for the amendment is best expressed by the words of Munshi himself. He
said, “Any safeguard as a minority, so far as the Schedule Castes are concerned
will possibly prevent their complete absorption in the Hindu fold” (Constituent
Assembly Debates: 1947:Vol.5:234-238) Munshi logic for his amendment is the
most illogical in Parliament debates (Sunderraj: 1988:91).
If untouchable are not a minorithy, why
did Munshi ask for the untouchables “the rights and benefits of a minority?”
Munshi said that according to him the untouchables are not a minority. Who
decides who is a minority? In a democracy it is always a community which
defines itself. He stated, “Harijans are part and parcel of the Hindu
community. Safeguards are given to them till they are completely absorbed in
the community” (Constituent Assembly Debates: 228). If they are part and parcel
why the process of absorption? Munshi stated that minorities according to
international law are racial and linguistic minorities. Munshi himself an
Indologist, knew beyond any doubt that the untouchables are a distinct
racio-religious minority. Munshi’s lie won that day (Sunderraj:91). This debate
and Munshi’s affirmation was fatal to the Schedule Caste who became Christian
were denied the same privileges enjoyed by the Schedule Caste who are not
Christian which is a subject of review later and matter of equity in this
paper.
According to the 2001 Indian census Christian
constitute 2.3 or 2.7 % of the Indian population (about 27 million); Muslim 13 to 15% (157
million); Sikh 1.9% (19 million); Buddhist 0.8 (8 million) Jains 0.4% (4
million); and Hindus 80% (about 800 million). Even though Indian society
incorporates a “bewildering” numbers of minorities identified by factors like
religion, caste, class or region, the “quintessential” minority in most
people’s perception was the religious minority (Joseph:1999). The presence of
such diverse population has necessitated the adoption of policies aimed at
safeguarding minority concern. The Indian Constitution is liberal document that
makes the protection of the minority interest’s one of its principal
objectives. The issue of fair and equal treatment of minorities is undoubtedly
an important one from the multiculturalist’s point of view. Multiculturalism
believes that the mere presence of many, plural communities were not enough.
What was important was to see
Whether different communities were
treated as equal within the democratic polity. In other words, difference must
not be a source of discrimination (Mahajan: 1999). This is a principal concern
of multiculturalism. Significantly, Indian state not only recognizes
difference, but guarantees equal citizenship and equal rights. Constitutional
recognition and protection is offered to religious, cultural and linguistic
minorities. What is more, state policies toward minorities are guided by equal
respect, fairness and non-discrimination (Jospeh: 1999). But then, Indians have
aced against each other with cultural prejudice. India, Cultural prejudice runs
high, both at individual level and group levels. Even though multiculturalism
speaks of equality of cultures and cultural communities in the public domain,
multicultural India has seldom been able to eliminated discrimination by
“other” culture. Interestingly. Neither Indian variety of state socialism nor
the post-1991 free market economy has been able to rid Indians of cultural
prejudices (Ray: 2009:71). In fact, revolution in modern means of communication
has strengthened cultural prejudices by commercializing and popularizing
element of dominant cultures at the expenses of other cultures. The Indian
State has appeared unable—even unwilling—to stall this cultural downside. In
such a situation, people with culture distinct from the dominant culture are
finding it difficult to “conserve” their cultures in the face of the cultural onslaught
of the dominant group. Indeed refusal to acknowledge any plurality of the
Indian society has been disastrous, as Hindu nationalist have learned of late.
Any attempt to promote separateness in the name of plurality had too has been
disastrous, as many secessionist movement since Independence have shown (but
secessionist of all hues have always maintained that there was pressure on their
Page:3 communities to assimilate with “mainstream” Indian society, that there
were attempts by “Indians” to eliminate their own distinct culture, language,
and lifestyle). Modern societies are increasingly confronted with minority
groups demanding recognition of their identity, and accommodation of their
cultural differences, often phrased as challenge of “multiculturalism”
(Kymlicka 1996:10). Significantly,
Indian constitution has addressed to some of the challenges of “multiculturalism”
as identified by Kymlicka. Article 29(1) of the Constitution of India is a
guarantee for the protection and preservation of the cultural rights of the
minority communities: “Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of
Indi or any part thereof having distinct language, script or culture of its own
shall have the right to conserve the same.” It is also a safeguard against
discrimination—based on cultural differences—by the state and other cultural
groups. Also “minority” or “any section of the Citizens’ may mean a linguistic
or cultural minority.
Article
25(1) guarantees religions rights, “All persons are equally entitled to
freedom of Conscience and right freely to profess, practice and propagate
religion.” Indian constitution also grants every religious denomination the
right to establish religious and charitable institutions, manage its own
religious affairs, and acquire and administer property in accordance with law
(Article 26), provided they did not contravene public order, morality or
health. This right is further strengthened by Article 30(1) which gives all
minorities, whether based on religion or language, the right to “establish and
administer educational institutions of their choice.”
Article
29(2) seek to protect the educational rights of minority communities:
“No citizen shallbe denied admission into any educational institution
maintained by the State or receiving aid out of the State funds on grounds of
religion, race, caste, language, or any of them.” This is a particular Safeguard
against discrimination that may arise out of the ethnic orientation of Indian
state. Any student of any religion, race, case, or language group can seek and
get admission to any government owned—or government aided—educational
institution in any part of India. The criteria for admission shall be academic
merit. Of course, seats in such educational institutions can be reserved for
local students (students belonging to the state). Alternatively, seats can be
reserved for outstation—or out of state—candidates.
Under the amended Article 15 as well as
Articles 29 and 47 of the Constitution, the Government of India fulfil the
education obligation for Dalit and Schedule Tribe by reserving seats up to 15%
and 7% in Government established education institutions and also government
aided educational institution. Article 16 make provision of reservation in jobs
for Dalit 15% and schedule Tribe 7% initially applied only in recruiting for
Central and State government job. The 1957 this was expanded to include
promotion post as well as initial employment. Moreover, concessions a higher
maximum qualifying age or lower qualifying marks on examination have been
granted to make it easier for Dalit and Schedule Tribe enter the higher ranks
of government jobs or services.
With regard to employment in public
sector undertaking, reservation were granted “in principle” in 1954 but
officially introduced only 15 years later. Moreover, provision of Article 330
and 332 of the Constitution provides for reservation of seats in the Indian
Parliament Lok Sabha and also in the State legislatures. Articles 39, 41 and 16
(section 2 and 4) calls for fair treatment of Dalits and Schedule Tribe in the
workplace (Webster: 2009:177-186). Indian Christian Minority As per 2001 census
there are about 27 million Christians in India (2.5% Christians and among them
1.8 million Catholics, nearly equal to the population of Canada in 2001).
Christianity is India’s largest religion after Hinduism and Islam. Christian
population is concentrated in three major centers: South India; (2) on the
Konkan Coast; (3) among the Tribal people of Jharkhand States and other seven
states of North East. In South India the major Christian centers of
Christianity are Kerala, Tamilnadu and Andra Prdesh. Majority of the Christians
in Kerala, constituting about 19 per cent of the population of the state, trace
their origins to the first phase, the first Century missionary activity of
Thomas, the disciple of Christ. While the Portuguese Mission tried to bring
them under the Latin rite many of them continued to adhere to their traditional
rites, some under the Catholic Church and others outside. The Tamil Church is
over laden with layers of traditions,
