Secularism in the Indian Context

Acevedo, Deepa Das

doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.2012.01304.x

Cited by 33 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It may be argued that the newly formed State could not risk a legitimacy crisis, and in an attempt to subvert the possibility of the same, it struck a compromise between the reforming vision of its founding fathers and the political realities that it was bound to. The same bolsters and contextualises Acevedo's (2013) aforementioned critique of Bhargava's (2013) "principled distance" model.…”

Section: The Conception Of Indian Secularismmentioning

confidence: 67%

Unravelling the Indian Conception of Secularism: Tremors of the Pandemic and Beyond

Katrak

Kulkarni²

2021

Secularism and Nonreligion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The State's engagement with religion has formed one of the recurring themes of conflict in India's democratic experiment. The Indian model of secularism, which evolved in an attempt to resolve this conflict, has distinguished itself from separation-model secularism. This paper seeks to analyse the impact of the measures undertaken during the COVID-19 pandemic on the Indian understanding of secularism. To this end, it provides an overview of the nature and evolution of Indian secularism. Thereafter, it encapsulates the steps taken by the State to meet the exigencies of the present contagion and attempts to gauge the impact of the said steps on the jurisprudence on religious freedoms. It then seeks to contextualise this impact by using it to inform the Indian conception of secularism and, thereby, promote a richer, more holistic understanding of how a deeply divided society has functioned as a secular State for seven decades.

show abstract

Section: The Conception Of Indian Secularismmentioning

confidence: 67%

Unravelling the Indian Conception of Secularism: Tremors of the Pandemic and Beyond

Katrak

Kulkarni²

2021

Secularism and Nonreligion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is, to be sure, a key difference: namely, the willingness of Indian courts to wade enthusiastically into religious doctrinal waters. Scholars disagree about whether or not these forays reflect indigenous or foreign interpretive styles, about whether they are democratically defensible given the unelected nature of the judiciary, and even about whether they negate India's ostensibly secular characterbut there is little disagreement over whether or not Indian courts do, in fact, pronounce on the validity of religious beliefs and practices (Das Acevedo 2013;Dhavan 2001;Fuller 1988;Galanter 1971;Mehta 2005;Smith 1963). At various points during the women's entry dispute, for instance, Indian courts have declared both that Sabarimala's ban on women is an "essential" aspect of Ayyappan worship (making it eligible for more robust constitutional protections) and that it is a nonessential aspect of Hinduism that gives way to other constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination (Das Acevedo 2020).…”

Section: Monasticism and Celibacy In Koreamentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Familiar Pleasures of Estrangement

Acevedo¹

2022

Buddhism and Comparative Constitutional Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropological analysis, at any rate the kind that has been emanating from Euro-American departments for the last fifty years or so, is grounded in the discovery of difference. Anthropologists look closely, watch patiently, think critically, and engage in a kind of concentrated musingwhat others have more elegantly called "cultivated attentiveness"all in the hopes of seeing new colors in the rainbow. 1 We are the science, if one cares to use that word, of human specificity. And yet, as much as anthropology trades in human difference, it also delights in sameness. Nineteenthcentury anthropologists of the armchair variety, turn-of-the-century fieldworkers of a functionalist persuasion (as well as their structuralist others), postmodernists, and even twenty-first century anthropologists ever so gingerly attempting an ontological turn are all committed to seeing what can, and what cannot, be considered true of humankind writ large. In the face of difference, we are fascinated by similarity.The chapters in this collection are, therefore, not only a source of incredibly rich insight on the relationship between Buddhism and constitutional law; they are, additionally, the source of a peculiarly anthropological pleasure because they offer a charming lesson in the interpretive possibilities of sameness. For those of us who are not scholars of Buddhism and are only very tenuously students of constitutional law, the chapters cast into stark and provocative relief the assumptions that we may carry about the wide swath of Buddhist contexts examined by the chapter authors. What that means, of course, is that the chapters also reveal the assumptions we as scholars carry about ourselves and our own areas of work.* My thanks to Tom Ginsburg and Benjamin Schonthal for including me in this fantastic project, to all of the participants for sharing their work, and to my colleagues on the April 15, 2021, roundtable for a truly enjoyable conversation. 1 This phrase comes from the syllabus for a graduate anthropological methods class taught at The University of Chicago in 2015 (Sunder Rajan 2015).

show abstract

“…Following this line of reasoning, scholars have characterized Indian secularism in terms of its distinct meaning and form: 'principled distance between religion and state', 'basic symmetry of treatment', 'equal respect for all religions', or an 'ameliorative' model constituted by the attempt to find an equilibrium between religious freedom and social justice (Acevedo 2013;Bhargava 2007;Sen 2005: 294-316;Depaigne 2017: 135-64;Jacobsohn 2003).…”

Section: The Pitfalls Of Cultural Asymmetrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Religious freedom and cultural asymmetry: Some pitfalls of secularism

Roover

2019

Sikh Formations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both in post-Independence India and in contemporary Europe, the problems caused by state interference in religion and tradition are most visible in legal disputes and court decisions. In recent years, the European Court of Human Rights, the Supreme Court of India, and lower-level courts in both parts of the world have had to decide on several major cases: from disputes concerning the wearing of the burqa and hijab in public spaces, through questions about the incompatibility between the right to religious freedom and the fixing of crucifixes on the walls of state school classrooms, to conflicts about government control of the management and practices of temples.Europe, India, and the Limits of Secularism (2015) addresses the theme of legal disputes concerning secularism and religious freedom only tangentially: it briefly looks at claims made by Indian judges about 'Hinduism' and examines one European case, that of Lautsi v. Italy, in some detail. Still, it is not a coincidence that two contributors to this colloquium point to relevant court decisions and note how certain issues at the heart of my book play out in the domain of law. Prakash Shah discusses a British case that involved the question whether the wearing of the Kara (a type of steel bracelet) is a requirement of the Sikh religion, a practice of exceptional importance to the claimant's religion, or neither. Rajalakshmi Nadadur Kannan mentions the important Sabarimala case. Here, the Supreme Court of India decided about the 'constitutionality' of a traditional practice in the temple of the deity Ayyappa in Sabarimala, a major pilgrimage center located in the South-Indian state of Kerala. The practice stipulates that women between 10 and 50 are not allowed to enter the temple. In his decision of 28

show abstract

Secularism in the Indian Context

Cited by 33 publications

References 14 publications

Unravelling the Indian Conception of Secularism: Tremors of the Pandemic and Beyond

Unravelling the Indian Conception of Secularism: Tremors of the Pandemic and Beyond

On the Familiar Pleasures of Estrangement

Religious freedom and cultural asymmetry: Some pitfalls of secularism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About