The way India has dealt with these fundamental concepts is a testimony to its mental corruption as a result of hundreds of years of colonial rule. We lost our ability to look at the world with our own eyes, instead we became a copy paste society. And, as is often the case, the copy paste, apart from obviously being totally devoid of originality, turned out to be a very cheap, distorted version of what it copied.
Secularism is a western concept. The core tenet of this concept is the seperation between state and religion.
Here, there is a very important warning that needs to be heeded. State being separate from religion does not extend to being separated from its moorings - it's culture, it's traditions, it's heritage, it's icons, it's history, it's "myths". If you separated a state from these, you will have a seriously ill artificial state as we are now in India.
Let me give an example. Britain is a secular but Christian state. The state makes no distinction between the rights and obligations of a Christian and a Muslim, but nonetheless, Britain is a deeply Christian nation. You take Christianity out of Britain, it would be a greatly diminished place. I am a Hindu, I live in Britain but not for one moment have I ever harboured any resentment about Britain being Christian. It is the natural thing, the organic thing for Britain to be Christian. And that is beautiful. And I, as a Hindu living in Britain, not only do not resent that, I value it and admire it. I just do not see any dichotomy here at all. If Britain is not Christian, it is not Britain.
Secularism is based on individual rights, not group rights. No group can claim to have special rights. No group can have a veto. In the eyes of the law, your religion, your group allegiances are utterly irrelevant.
What kind of secularism we adopted in India ? The very opposite of what secularism was supposed to mean. Here, group rights are not only there but in fact they seem to take precedence over individual rights. Take the matter of religious education, separate civil laws, even reservation though that is based on a different kind of group rights.
Why should it surprise anyone if such sick secularism leads to division of society. The very foundation of this sick secularism is division. Our secularism is not based on dialogue but on ghettoisation. Communities were deliberately kept separate. The only dialogue was the cheap Amar Akbar Anthony type - cheap and cheerful and manifestly phoney, and Iftar parties. The various religions never had the opportunity to develop a genuine relationship or to have a go at understanding the other's world view.
What we touted as religious harmony was at best a state of ceasefire perhaps with some cheap Bollywood decorations and even cheaper dialogues.
The edifice of this kind of secularism is clearly built on very shaky grounds and it is a surprise that people are surprised that the edifice is collapsing. It's collapse may be painful but is inevitable.
And dharm ? Dharm is a Bharatiya concept now grievously damaged by mixing up with religion by the culturally illiterate thoughtless "nation builders".
It is about time we as a society paused, took a deep breath and realised not only what we have done to ourselves as a society but also to those groups that we ostensibly set out to protect. That is the job of intellectuals and thinkers.
Any intellectuals, any thinkers over there in India ? Anyone ?