RELIGIOUS EDUCATION
I. History of the Problem 1. Pre-British Period. 2. The British Policy of Religious Neutrality 3. The Education Commission of 1882. 4. Its Recommendations. 5. Mr. K.T. Telang's Views. 6. Government's Decision. 7. The Indian University Commission of 1902. 8. The Calcutta University Commission 1917-19. 9. The Central Advisory Board 1944-46.
II-The Present Position 10. The relevant Articles of the Constitution. 11. Conscience- Clause. 12. American Example. 13. Australian Constitution.
III.-The Secular State 14. The Abuse of Religion. 15. The Secular State. 16. Democracy and Religion. 17. The Indian View of Religion. 18. Religion as Realisation. 19. Spiritual Training. 20. Self-Effort. 21. Freedom of Enquiry. 22. Freedom in Social Practices. 23. Respect for Other Religions. 24. Universal Religion. 25. India's Role.
IV.-Religious Education : Practical Measures 26. The Need for Religious Instruction. 27. The Values of Religion. 28. Gandhiji's Views. 29. The Need for Religion in a Secular State. 30. Practical Measures. 31. Silent Meditation. 32. Study of Great Books. 33. Study of Religious Scriptures. 34. Philosophy of Religion. 35. Christian Missions. 36. Recommendations.
I.-History of the Problem 1. Pre-British Period-In the Hindu and the Muslim Periods the teaching of religion was an essential part of education. It was assumed that education should not stop with the development of intellectual powers but must provide the student, for the regulation of his personal and social life, a code of behaviour based on' funda- mental principles of ethics and religion. Where conscious purpose is lacking, personal integrity and consistent behaviour are not possible. For a satisfactory and successful life, a person must not only be intellectually alert but must be emotionally stable, able to endure the contacts and tensions that life is almost certain to bring. We cannot leave to chance the emotional and ethical development of the young people. One of the major aims of education should be the development of the whole man.
2. The British Policy of Religious Neutrality-As foreign rules of the country , the British adopted a policy of religious, neutrality
287
288
RELIGIOUS EDUCATION [CHAP. VIII.
Christian Missions to whom India is greatly indebted for their edu- cational and medical work, were not happy in regard to this principle of religious neutrality as they were keenly interested in the propagation of the Christian Faith. Dr. Alexander Duff giving evidence before a Select Committee of the House of Lords on the3rd of June 1853 said: "While we rejoice that true literature and science are to be substituted in place of what is demonstrably false, we cannot but lament that no provision whatever has been made for' substituting the only true religion-Christianity-in place of the false religion which our literature and science will inevitably demolish." The Dispatch of 1854 expresses the hope that "institutions conducted by all denominations of Christianity, Hindus, Muhammadans, Parsis, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains or any other religious persuasions may be affiliated to the universities, if they are found to afford the requisite course of study, and can be depended upon for the certificates of conduct which will be required."
In reply to an address by the Christian Missionaries. Lord William Bentick, the Governor-General, said : "The fundamental principle of British rule the compact to which the Government stands solemnly pledged, is strict neutrality. To this important maxim Policy as well as good faith have enjoined upon me the most scrupulous observance. The same maxim is peculiarly applicable to general education. In all schools and colleges supported by Government, this principle cannot be too strongly enforced, all interference, and injudicious tampering whith the religious beliefs of the students, all mingling, direct or indirect teaching of Christianity with the system of instruction ought to be positively forbidden." These views were affirmed in a Despatch of the Court of Directors dated 13th April, 1858.
3. The Education Commission of 1882-The report of the Education Commission of 1882 observes :-"The declared neutrality of the State forbids its connecting the institutions directly maintained by it with any one form of faith and the other alternative of giving equal facilities in such institutions for the inculcation of all forms of faith involves practical difficulties which we believe to be superable." Again, "It true that a Government of other secular institution meets, however incompletely, the educational wants of all religious sects in any locality and thus renders it easier for them to combine for educational purposes; while a denominational college runs some risk of confining its benefits to a particular section of the community and thus of deepening the lines of difference already existing.
289
CHAP. VIII.] RELIGIOUS EDUCATION
4. Its Recommendations-The Commission recommended in paragraph 338
"(8) That an attempt be made to prepare a moral textbook based upon the fundamental principles of natural religion, such as may be taught in all Government and non-Government Colleges:
"(9) That the Principal or one of the Professors, in each Govern- ment and Aided Colleges, deliver to each of the College classes, in every Session, a series of lectures on the duties of a man and a citizen."
5. Mr. K.T. Telang's Views-In regard to these recommendations, Mr. K. T. Telang who was a member of the Commission, wrote: "There are only two possible modes, which can be adopted in justice and fairness, of practically imparting religious instruction. Either you must teach the principles common to all religions under the name of Natural Religion, or you must teach the principles of each religious creed to the student whose parents adopt that creed." Again, "At all events on this I am quite clear, that our institutions for secular instruction should not be embarrassed by any meddling with religious instruction ; for such meddling, among other mischiefs will yield results which on the religious side will satisfy nobody and on the secular side will be distinctly retrograde."
6. Government's Decision-The Government of India in its Resolution No. 10/309, dated the 2nd October 1884, reviewing the Report of the Commission, said on this point.-" It is doubtful whether such a moral textbook as is proposed could be introduced without raising a variety of burning questions ; and strongly as it may be urged that a purely secular education is imperfect, it does not appear probable that a textbook of morality, sufficiently vague and colourless to be accepted by Christians, Muhammadans and Hindus would do much, especially in the stage of Collegiate education, to remedy the defects or supply the shortcomings of such an education. "
7. The Indian Universities Commission of 1902- The Indian Uni- versities Commission of 1902 considered the question of the inadequacy of a purely secular education but was unable to suggest any definite measures for improvement. It turned down the suggestion to have a course in Theology in view of the opposition "not to the recognition of Natural Theology as a, subject of University study, but to the introduction of the Theology of any one religion into the curriculum of the University."' It decided "that it is neither practicable nor expedient to make provision for a Faculty of Theology."*1
8. The Calcutta University Commission, 1917-1919-The question of religious education was not considered by the Calcutta
I Paragraph 47 and Recommendation 4 under Faculties
290
RELIGIOUS EDUCATION [CHAP. VIII.
University Commission in view, apparently, of the difficulties of the problem in a country where religions seemed to be a source of strife and disunion.
9. The Central Advisory Board, 1944-46-The memorandum on the Post-war Educational. Development in India (1943) agreed that "religion in the widest sense should inspire all education and that a curriculum devoid of all ethical basis will prove barren in the end."' The Central Advisory Board at its meeting held in January, 1944, recognised the importance of ethical and religious instruction and appointed a special committee under the Chairmanship of Rt. Rev. G.D. Barne, the Bishop of Lahore, to examine the desirability and practicability of providing religious instruction in educational institutions.
The Committee presented an interim report in 1945 and a further report in 1946 at the twelfth meeting of the Board held at Mysore. "After fully considering all aspects of the question the Board resolved that while' they recognise the fundamental importance of spiritual and moral instruction in the building of character, the provision for such teaching, except in so far as it can be provided in the normal course of secular instruction; should be the responsibility of the home and the community to which the pupil belongs." If we are not prepared to leave the scientific and the literary financial of Pupils to the home and the community, we cannot leave religious training to these. The child is robbed of its full development if it receives no guidance in early years towards a recognition of the religious aspects of life. If this guidance is left to homes and communities, the chances are that communal bigotry, intolerance and selfishness may increase.
II.-The Present Position 10. The Relevant Articles of the Constitution .-The Constituent Assembly of India adopted certain principles in regard to religious instruction in educational institutions. The relevant articles are 19, 21, 22 (1) and (2).
Article 19 affirms freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religions. 19(1)-"Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this part all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion."' This is a principle of true religion that every one should have the right to believe and teach according to the dictates of his own conscience.
I Introduction 7.
291
CHAP. VIII.] RELIGIOUS EDUCATION
Payment of Taxes for the Promotion of any Particular Religion- Article 21 reads : "No person may be compelled to pay any taxes, the proceeds of which are specifically appropriated in payment of expenses for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion or religious denomination." This means that public funds raised by taxes shall not be utilised for the benefit of any particular religion.
The Honourable Dr. B.R. Ambedkar explained in the Constituent Assembly the significance of this section. He said : "For instance, if we permitted any particular religious instruction, say if a school established by a District or Local Board, gives religious instruction, on the ground that the majority of the students studying in that school are Hindus, the effect would be that such action would militate against the provisions contained in Article 21. The District Board would be making a levy on every person residing within the area of that District Board. It would have a general tax and if religious instruction given in the District or Local Board was confined to the children of the majority community, it would be an abuse of article 21, because the Muslim community children, or the children of any other community, who do not care to attend these religious instructions given in the schools would be nonetheless compelled by the action of the District Local Board to contribute to the District Local Board Funds"'.
"22 (1) : No religious instruction shall be provided in any edu- cational institution wholly maintained out of State funds-
Provided that nothing in this clause shall apply to an educational institution which is administered but has been established under an endowment or trust which requires that religious instructions shall be imparted in such institution."
(2) No person attending any educational institution recognised by the State or receiving aid out of State funds shall be required to take part in any religious institution or to attend any religious worship that may be conducted in such institution or in any premises attached thereto unless such person, or if such person is a minor his guardian, has given hi's consent thereto".
No religious instruction shall be provided in any educational institution maintained wholly out of State funds. The reasons which impelled this resolution are obvious. We have in our country followers of the Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Zoroastrian and Jewish faiths. State educational institutions cannot hope to provide religious instruction in all these faiths. In
*1 Constituent Assembly Debates, Vol. VII, No. 21, P. 883.
292
RELIGIOUS EDUCATION [CHAP. VIII.
the words of Dr. Ambedkar "to assign such a task to the State would be to ask it to do the impossible." Besides, these religions claim exclusive possession of truth. "We should be considerably disturbing the peaceful atmosphere of an institution if these controversies with regard to the truthful character of any particular religion and the erroneous character of the other were brought into juxtaposition in the school itself"*1
There are however certain institutions maintained out of funds provided by private donors or ancient rulers which are now being administered by the State. The instrument of foundation of these endowments might have in terms provided for religious instruction being given. This class of cases is saved by the proviso to article 22.
In aided institutions as distinct from institutions wholly main- tained by the State such as Hindu, Muslim or Christian missionary institutions, religious instruction is not prohibited but no, person shall be required to take part in religious instruction. Any pro- vision in a Statute or municipal law under which students are required to attend such religious instruction will be void and of no effect.
11. Conscience Clause-While the State is precluded from giving religious instruction itself, it is not precluded front recognising and giving aid to institutions which can provide this type of education so long as the religious freedom of parents and of students when of age is protected by a conscience clause. The Constitution requires that religious instruction may be imparted to all those who desire to take part in it. It does not put it negatively that religious instruction may be imparted to all as a rule except to those who object. It says that religious instruction shall not be imparted except to those who expressly desire to have it. Actually for the words : "unless such person or if such person is a minor, his guardian, has given consent thereto," an alternative was suggested, "unless such person or if such person was a minor, his guardian has given written notice of his objection thereto"'. This suggested amendment was not accepted.
In the course of the discussion of Article 22 in the Constituent Assembly, the question was raised whether in institutions wholly maintained out of State funds like the Government Sanskrit College in Calcutta, where the Upanisads and the Gita are studied, their study would be permitted and Dr. Ambedkar replied : "My own view is this, that religious instruction is to be distinguished from
293
CHAP. VIII.] RELIGIOUS EDUCATION
research or study. These are quite different things. Religious instruction means this. For instance, so far as the Islamic religion is concerned, it means that you believe in one God, that you believe that Pagambar the Prophet is the last prophet and so on, in other words, what me call dogma. A dogma is quite different from study."I In other words, even in institutions maintained by Government, religion can be studied critically, as part of a course in general culture. There is a difference between the preaching of dogma and a philosophical study of religion. While the former is precluded, the latter is permitted. There shall be no sectarian indoctrination in State institutions. But history of religion and of religious insti- tutions, comparative religion, philosophy of religion can all be studied even in institutions maintained wholly out of State funds.
The Constitution makes out that the State should not get mixed up with the encouragement of any particular form of religion. It provides equal opportunities for all religions. There are no special privileges or special disabilities for any religion. This principle is in accord with the spirit of democracy.
12. American Example The American Republic has created a secular state, neither religious nor irreligious for the precise purpose of preserving respect for individual conscience. The fist amendment to the American Constitution neither approves nor rejects the religious Sanctions of morality. It states Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It guarantees that all Americans may worship God in accordance with their own conscience Without any interference from, the State. If the State is given power to direct religious matters then freedom of religion would cease. On this point the late Lord Bryce observed in The American Commonwealth: " Half the wars of Europe, half the internal troubles that have vexed European states, from the Monophysite controversies in the Roman Empire, of the fifth century down to the Kulturkampf in the German Empire of the nineteenth, have arisen from theological differences or from the rival claims of church and state. This whole vast chapter of debate and strife has remained virtually unopened in the United States. There is no established church. All religious bodies are absolutely equal before the law and unrecognised by the law except as volunatry associations of private citizens."
13. Australian Constitution-The Australian Constitution has for establishing any religion, for imposing nay religious observance the following clause: "The Common wealth shall not make any law
294
RELIGIOUS EDUCATION [CHAP. VIII.
or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth". It conserves the right of each and' every citizen to follow his own religious convictions. It recognises the right of every man and woman to worship or not to worship God' according to the dictates of his or her own conscience.
III.-The Secular State 14. The Abuse of Religion-The difficulties through which India. passed in recent years led to the formulation of these principles. The intention is not to ban all religious education but to ban dog- matic or sectarian religious instruction in State Schools. If we teach sectarian creeds to our children in public schools, instead of developing in them the spirit of peace and brotherly love we encourage the spirit of strife, as the children become conscious of their divisive creeds and group loyalties.
There was a time when it was almost an article of faith that one cannot be a true believer in one's own religion unless one also. believed that all other religions were false. Other religions may teach the same doctrines, even use the same words, but still we were taught that the one Voice came from Heaven and the other from the opposite region.
Many atrocities were perpetrated and many corrupt practices hallowed in the name of religion that we are tempted to look upon religion as a reactionary, obscurantist influence and a cause of dis- union. Those who suffered wrong in the past or witnessed its in- fliction on others, in a mood of natural resentment, wish to ban re- ligion altogether from the country.
We must not be carried away by sentiment. What is responsible for the communal excesses is not religion as such but the ignorance, bigotry and selfishness with which religion gets mixed up. Selfish people, in an attitude of cynical opportunism, use religion for their own sinister ends. In his thirty second year Napoleon professed himself ready to adopt any religion which might serve his purpose. "I finished the war in the Vendee by calling myself a Catholic. I was a Mohammadan to establish myself in Egypt, and it was as an ultramontane that I gained support in Italy. If governed a people of Jews I should rebuild the temple of Solomon".
15. The Secular State-The abuse of religion has led to the secular conception of the State. It does not mean that nothing is sacred or worthy of reverence. It does not say that all our activi- ties are profane and devoted to the sordid ideals of selfish advance- ment. We do not accept a purely scientific materialism as the philo-
295
CHAP. VIII]. RELIGIOUS EDUCATION
sophy of the State. That would be to violate our nature, our svabhava, our characteristic genius, our svadharma. Though we have no State religion, we cannot forget that a deeply religious strain has run throughout our history like a golden thread.
16. Democracy and Religion-Besides, in the preamble to our Constitution, we have the makings of a national faith, a national way of life which is essentially democratic and religious. Whenever a human being strives upward toward enlightenment, goodness and concern for others, the spirit of religion is active. If we bear in mind that the whole future of our democracy depends on freedom of conscience, freedom of inquiry, moral solidarity, our secularism is an act of supreme courage and sublime loyalty to our national faith.
17. The Indian View of Religion-The adoption of the Indian outlook on religion is not inconsistent with the Principle of our constitution. We may briefly refer to the central features of the Indian view of religion.
18. Religion as Realisation- Religion is not to be identified with a creed to be believed, or an emotion to be felt or a ceremony to be performed. It is a changed life. We do not judge a man's religion by his intellectual beliefs but by his character and disposition. By their fruits and not by their beliefs do we know, them.
19. Spiritual Training---If religion Is a matter of realisation, it cannot be reached through a mere knowledge of the dogmas. It is attained through discipline, training, sadhana. What we need is not formal religious, education but spiritual training.
20. Self-Effort-It is a law of nature that every one should digest his own food. So also every one must see with his own eyes. By the exercise of one's own will and reason one has to attain spiritual, enlightenment.
21. Freedom of Inquiry-While dogmatic religion hap always discouraged freedom of thought and prevented free inquiry whenever and wherever it had the power to do so, India has insisted that we cannot grow in spirit by following any Person or institution blindly. As long as men are willing to follow blindly there will be, men really to take advantage of the Opportunity and lead them, blindly. But we have always insisted on logical reflection (manana), questioning (pariprasana), inquiry ( jinasa). Liberty is the first condition for the quest of truth. When we see the universe and all that is in it,souls and bodies, events and experiences in irreversible movement through time space we wish to gain some gleam of insight into the meaning of this mysterious process this samsara. The universe becomes intelligible to the extent of our ability to apprehend it as a whole. We
296
RELIGIOUS EDUCATION [CHAP. VIII.
are actors in a drama of which we do not know the eventual ending, Even as momentary actors in the crowded and agitated stage of life we must have some sense of the whole. Religion should come as a sense of fulfilment of this primary need of man.
We teach religious dogmas not to provoke doubts of questions but to give comfort to the human spirit. To introduce these studies in a University is to make a sharp break with the critical methods of inquiry followed in other disciplines of the curriculum. To prescribe dogmatic religions in a community of many different faiths is to revive the religious controversies of the past. To turn the students over to theologians of different denominations for instruction in the conflicting systems of salvation is to undermine that fellowship of learning which defines a college or a university.
Horace Mann put it with great force: "One Sect may have the ascendancy to-day; another to-morrow. This year there will be three persons in the Godhead; next year, but one, and the third year, the Trinity will be restored, to hold its precarious sovereignty, until it shall be again dethroned by the worms of the list it has, made. This year, the everlasting fires of bell will burn to terrify the impenitent; next year, and without any repentance, its eternal flames will be extinguished to be rekindled for ever , to be quenched for ever, as it may be decided at annual town meeting. This year the ordinance of baptism is inefficacious without immersion; next year one drop of water will be as good as forty fathoms."*1
The philosophical attitude which Indian religion emphasises lifts us above the wrangling of dogmatist. To-day dialectical materialism sets itself p as a system of dogma to combat another orthodox dogma. If a reconciliation is to be effected, it is only by the renunciation of the dogmatic approach.
One of the major causes of misunderstanding and conflict among individuals and groups is the habit of the Uncritical acceptance of beliefs and doctrines and transmissions of them to our children through the methods of teaching, conditioning and indoctrination, As a result of the adoption of these methods we grow to accept, these beliefs as self-evident or revealed truths which we should preserve and protect at any cost. Doubt becomes difficult and the obligation is felt to be sacred, that we should spread the faith and compel others to come in. This type of competitive indctrination has been in practice for centuries in the sphere of religion and is now adopted by political faiths or "Ideologies as they are called. A healthy scepticism is the only remedy for these disturbing phenomena. In universities