In India an interesting debate has broken out over what exactly is secular and what is religious. In particular, can the government promote yoga?
At issue is a measure by the Hindu nationalist-led government of the state of Madhya Pradesh, in central India, that required public school students to practice the sun salutation and recite certain chants in Sanskrit during a statewide function on Thursday. The state government, controlled by the Bharatiya Janata Party, or B.J.P., said that it complied with a central government policy to encourage yoga in schools [Link]
The Chief Minister (pictured right) defended this as part of a broader a health initiative:
‘The government was committed to creating awareness about yoga, which helps to keep the body and mind in good health,’ …The yoga policy envisages constitution of a council for practising yoga in the state, provision of facilities required for setting up yoga centres, selection and appointment of yoga teachers. [Link]
<
p>However, minority groups did not see this as innocuous:
The “Suryanamaskar” programme came under attack from minority communities and opposition parties who had dubbed it as “an effort to saffronise education.” The ruling BJP was trying to “incite religious passion under the garb of yoga” among school children, a spokesman of the Catholic Church of Madhya Pradesh said. [Link]
In particular, they took issue with the use of Hindu mantras:
Muslim and Christian groups in the state took issue not so much with the yoga exercise, but with the chants, which they said were essentially Hindu and in worship of the sun. They argued in court on Wednesday that it violated the Indian constitutional provision to separate religion and state. [Link]
 |
|
What time is it? It’s yoga time! |
On Wednesday, the court agreed with the plaintiffs, ruling that “neither the chants nor the sun salutation could be forced on students. [Link]” The MP government has responded by saying that the whole event was voluntary in the first place, but even this remains problematic as it would create a major public event from which non-Hindus would be discouraged from attending.
We’ve blogged before about how Christians in the US are concerned about Yoga, but this story reminds me more about the “War over Christmas” than anything else. It feels like the kinds of debates we have in the US about the suitability of Christmas carols for public events, or for Christmas trees for public spaces. Even in India, certain aspects of Yoga occupy a space between public and parochial.
While I do believe that Yoga can promote health, I think that the impact of doing a quick Surya Namaskar is pretty miniscule. This means that the state is either being transparently cynical, or various ministers believe in the almost mystical powers of yoga to produce health over and above the component physical movements. If it’s the latter, perhaps the opponents of this program ought to respond with some laughing yoga instead 
.
This seems exactly analogous to the Pledge of Allegiance controversy here. I don’t see the pledge as being all that big a deal, since it only refers to “God,” and not “One nation under Jesus and/or the Pope.”
Speedy
Christian missionaries persecuting Hindus, No temples in Saudi Arabia, Hajj airfare subsidy, Bin Laden, Kashmiri Pandits, Dhimmitude, Islamo-fascism, Pope hates Hindus, Clash of civilizations, Pakistan.
I don’t see the pledge as being all that big a deal, since it only refers to “God,” and not “One nation under Jesus and/or the Pope.”
Maybe some of us dont believe in a freaking God.
I see Ennis is back to his Hindu hating posts.
Phew, it’s good to have all of that all out of the way. Maybe I should just include that in my post. Then again, with all of that said, whatever will people have to comment on?
I think options are fine, but when the options are exercised outside the normal school hours. It is fine, like Sunday school — only this would be freakishly early morning school.
True dat. I keep waiting for my saffron balls to come in.
It’s the state-sponsored aspect of this that’s troubling. As an atheist born into a Hindu family, it’s kinda crazy how many compulsory Catholic school morning assemblies I have been in, reciting “Our father in heaven…”, but that’s the trade-off you make for a good education in India.
Not all forms of Surya Namaskar are quick or easy. The harder routines give you same benefits as one of those marine training drills. The mantras are meant for breath control (good for lungs and related health issues). You rattle off 100 (or is it 1000?) names of Surya without pause. My father and uncles are in their 70s and solid as teak (knock on wood). They swear by Surya Namaskar.
The tradition is doing well w/out politicians’ help. I wish they’d butt out.
“It’s the state-sponsored aspect of this that’s troubling. As an atheist born into a Hindu family, it’s kinda crazy how many compulsory Catholic school morning assemblies I have been in, reciting “Our father in heaven…”, but that’s the trade-off you make for a good education in India.”
but don’t “minority-run” schools in india receive partial government funding, making their activities “state-sponsored” to a certain extent?
why not just have options: yoga plus mantras for those who are ok with it and yoga minus mantras for others or no yoga at all for those who can’t stand either?
The Ashtanga version is harder, and involves jumping back, but I don’t think that’s what they’re doing. You also have to do a fair number to get something from it.
I’ve never seen the mantras done myself – what goes on?
But we all have to believe, as it were, in the sun. Whether we all have to worship it is another matter, and then whether Surya Pranam is worship or greeting is a third matter. Whichever it is, it’s a good reason to wake up, but I’m not so sure the State should act as an alarm clock.
I’ve never studied yoga, but one would assume that it’s possible to separate the physical activity from the chanting. After all, isn’t that what they do in all the urban yoga studios across the United States? It may not be yoga in its purest form, but it will still promote physical activity without bringing up church/state issues.
We’ve blogged before about how Christians in the US are concerned about Yoga, but this story reminds me more about the “War over Christmas” than anything else.
No, I think it’s much more like the controversy over prayer in public schools in the United States, i.e. it unnecessarily brings religious elements into a place or institution that doesn’t need it, and it does so as a result of government regulation/endorsement.
The fact that Yoga originates in Hindu traditions, and that its basic principles all stem from Hinduism is not trivial, IMO. It is the equivalent of getting a high school choir voice-trained by having them to Benedictine chants.
If the government’s primary intention is to encourage yoga as a form of exercise for the mind and body, why not eliminate the mantra-chanting aspect of it, and call it calisthenics instead of yoga? When discussing state involvement in religion, labels matter, and this should be especially true in a country that actually calls itself a secular republic.
you can dissociate the poses from the chants if you want to, but relabelling the exact same poses calisthenics or “praise moves” is disingenous and dishonest, in my opinion. the poses themselves are rooted in a certain philosophy and were named so for a reason. you’d still have to call it yoga, even minus the religious mantras. anyone who has a problem with it (and rightly so from their own religious point of view) should just not do it at all, and shouldn’t be required to do it. that would be the more intellectually honest thing to do. it’s the reason why india had a problem with bikram of bikram yoga fame. he basically tried to claim moves that had existed for ages as his own, under his own name. the same way people try to patent indigenous medicines and methods and devalue their originality (which has already happened with yoga).
Happy Desi Republic Day y’all! I’m not so sure we can find exact parallels between events and practices across two nations.
but relabelling the exact same poses calisthenics or “praise moves” is disingenous and dishonest, in my opinion
It is disingenuous. But if the point is to bring yoga to school students, then at least this disingenuous labeling gets you around the legal hurdle.
What is at issue here is whether the state should be sanctioning/encouraging yoga at all. I think it should not. There are plenty of non-public arenas where young people can be taught such things without state involvement. The wonder is this has not come up sooner. I mean, when I was kid visiting India (oh decades ago), I distinctly remember yoga being shown on Doordarshan, i.e. state-controlled television. That strikes me as particularly objectionable, but nobody challenged it back then.
I don’t see how this is comparable to the “War on Christmas” at all. This is school children being asked to comply with a very specific component of a religious ritual as part of their daily schooling. It’s very different than adults being greeted with a quick “Happy Holidays” by employees of a commercial entity.
The “pledge of allegiance” analogy is better, but I still think this is more clear cut. “Under God” is a phrase that covers basically every religious tradition on the planet, with only atheists really being excluded. Now even that is a problem, since atheists have freedom of religion rights as well, but it’s a far cry from this kind of specific push of a religious ritual. This is comparable to forcing kids to say the Lord’s Prayer at the start of every school day.
I grew up in the Bible Belt and I can tell you it SUCKED to be one of the few religious minorities in a situation where the school went out of its way to promote Christianity. I don’t think anyone else should have to go through that.
Prolly because that was the most entertaining show at the time? The horrors of state controlled TV. I still remember Rajiv Gandhi in various clownish head-gears dancing w/ “tribals”. I am stabbing my mind’s eye right now.
Ennis, re: mantra, If nobody posts on the subject by eve., I will try to get detailed answer from pitashree.
“What is at issue here is whether the state should be sanctioning/encouraging yoga at all. I think it should not. There are plenty of non-public arenas where young people can be taught such things without state involvement. The wonder is this has not come up sooner. I mean, when I was kid visiting India (oh decades ago), I distinctly remember yoga being shown on Doordarshan, i.e. state-controlled television. That strikes me as particularly objectionable, but nobody challenged it back then.”
i don’t disagree with your second paragraph. however, as the example of religious minority-run schools receiving government funding shows, where are you going to draw the line? it’s not ok for yoga in govt.-funded govt. schools but ok for other compulsory religious practices in govt.-funded minority schools whose students come from more than one religion? i agree with amrita. india and the u.s. may both be secular nations and may both champion separation of “church and state” but the way in which it is practiced is very different and i think its meaning changes across cultures.
IF the central govt ministry of health has such a policy, then i doubt they meant it to promote hindutva in any way. i think it might have been just that they were trying to promote health awareness in public schools and might have mentioned yoga as a means to of acheving this – similar to us surgeon general promoting health awareness (kind of)
the MP BJP has clearly interpreted this for their own interests and hence the whole sun salutation thingy 🙁
I just saw this clip…haha!!! I love his twinkle fingers and jazz hands combo. Love. It. 😉
BTW, I’m all for the “War on Christmas” personally. I didn’t mean that as an excuse for the government yoga program …
I distinctly remember yoga being shown on Doordarshan, i.e. state-controlled television. That strikes me as particularly objectionable, but nobody challenged it back then.
In India, religious practice is not taken as seriously as it is in the US. All religions are well represented on state controlled tv, religious symbols adorn state offices (pics of Lakshmi or Guru Nanak or Ganpati or Mecca in govt banks, depending on the location.) etc. India does not have separation from church and state as is mistakenly believed. The state takes an active part in religion – including in most cases directly controlling the revenues generated by temples. [DD even had tv serials on Ramayana, Mahabharata, the Bible etc. Of course, Muslims did not have a tv serial since the display of imagery of the prophets etc are banned, else there would’ve been serials on Islam too.]
I went to India in Dec 2006 and saw tons of Xmas related decorations in shops/malls etc. To an outsider it may seem strange to see overtly religious symbols, especially since Christians are such a small %age in terms of population. But that’s how it goes in India. Folks are rather comfortable with it. i.e they don’t think about it too much. 🙂
India and the US engage two different models of secularity. In India, the state is supposed to maintain a similar level of sponsorship for all religions, as opposed to the American model, where the state is supposed to separate entirely from religious belief and practice. The one is inclusive and the other suppressive, and I think the first is a more enriching approach.
india and the u.s. may both be secular nations and may both champion separation of “church and state” but the way in which it is practiced is very different and i think its meaning changes across cultures.
I agree that the analogies are imperfect at best. But there is a significant distinction between religious freedom in the US and in India.
My understanding is that freedom religion is one of the fundamental rights in the Indian constitution, but that the right is not spelled out specifically. (I think the preamble specifies “secular” as well, so that could be another enunciation of religious freedom).
In the US, the First Amendment provides for religious freedom in two ways: through the Free Exercise clause and through the Establishment clause (i.e. Congress shall make no law establishing a national religion). This has been construed to prevent endorsement of religion by states, for example by involvement in religious activities. There is no equivalent provision in the Indian constitution. I assume that means the government is free to endorse religious practices, as long as it endorses all of them equally.
That is, if the Indian government will subsidize Haj travel, then it must also subsidize travel by Hindus to Varanasi (or wherever). But there’s nothing to per se prevent the state from putting religion in a public place. So you can have yoga on TV, Parliament’s opening session can feature coconuts broken to ward away evil, etc.
hema,
or the State Assembly building in Bangalore (Vidhana Soudha) to display the proud words: “Government Work is God’s work” 🙂
I think secularism has a very different context in the US vs India, as far as its impact on the State’s behavior. Indian secularism is fairness through the inclusion of all (enfranchised) religions while in the US, it’s fairness through the exclusion of any specific religion (Justice Moore notwithstanding).
To Whose God is it anyways’ point, I’m not sure if minority-run schools are necessarily state funded, although they may have tax exempt status.
btw, the words ‘secular’ and ‘socialist’ were added in the preamble later.
There was a lot of debate in the constituent assembly about the inclusion of the word “god” in the preamble. One member (Kamath) even wanted the word “goddess” since god was masculine. 🙂
My fault. It was not Kamath. It was Rohini Choudhary. The proceedings are here.
==
We should remember that when we started our political movement, we started it with the singing of Bande Mataram. What does Bande Mataram mean? It means an invocation to a Goodess. It means belief in a Goodess. Sir, we who belong to the Sakthi cult, protest against invoking the name of God alone, completely ignoring the Goodess. That is my submission. If we bring in the name of God at all, we should bring in the name of the Goddess also. As I said, this amendment should not have been brought. But as it has been brought, this is my point of view.
🙂
A bit of a threadjack, but Quizman, seeing as you have a Bangalore reference, were you on the Bangalore quizzing circuit (Questionable Characters, BUDEL etc)? Good times…
I think secularism has a very different context in the US vs India, as far as its impact on the State’s behavior. Indian secularism is fairness through the inclusion of all (enfranchised) religions while in the US, it’s fairness through the exclusion of any specific religion (Justice Moore notwithstanding).
Right. I’ve always wondered if the framers of the Indian constitution did this on purpose, keeping in mind that India is, as a whole, an extremely spiritual place, where religion and society cannot be easily separated.
The US’s more exclusionary version is actually the result of a compromise between two groups that wanted religious freedom expressed in different ways. The Establishment Clause is the result of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison advocating a “marketplace of ideas” approach. That is, as long as the state did not officially sanction any one religion, all the religions would flourish equally. The Free Exercise Clause was the result of other Constitutional Convention delegates who wanted to ensure the government did not corrupt religion by telling people how/what/who they could worship. The problem is, the two clauses are in conflict with each other.
When a state administrative agency decides not to allow Christmas displays, isn’t it technically preventing Free Exercise by Christians?
Cybershrink,
Yes. 🙂
Hema,
Bang on. They did it on purpose. Their view was that secularism did not mean “lack of religion”, but “equality of religions”. The problem is that a lot of my tax money is going on things like the activity Ennis posted.
I saw a debate on an Urdu channel, while in India, where a modern Muslim activist (lady), stated that they should do away with Hajj subsidies since it is such a sore point with Hindus, and that they can raise that money from private charities.
Can’t we all just do Pilates? 😉
I don’t think this is at all comparable to the Pledge, particularly because “under God” wasn’t added in until the 1950s, and it was added in light of a specific political moment.
cybershrink, i was under the impression that minority religious schools are eligible for govt. funding, subsidization of teachers’ salaries etc. (although all may not exercise this option) subject to certain stipulations on admissions. and that hindu religious schools are not eligible for govt. funding, hence the attempts by the ramakrishna people to declare themselves non-hindu ( so that the govt. would also not be able to interfere in their affairs as much). if i’m wrong, i stand corrected.
“There was a lot of debate in the constituent assembly about the inclusion of the word “god” in the preamble. One member (Kamath) even wanted the word “goddess” since god was masculine. :-)”
why not? 🙂 gender equality and all that 🙂
I’ve never been able to understand this mentality. Specially coming from otherwise intelligent and thoughtful people. God forbid anyone get to practice their tradition in good faith. The secularists must rain on the parade. It’s only xmas, the most pagan of all traditions, for goodness sake. It is not some belief system they are thrusting down anyone’s throat (for once). Same goes for yoga, and in fact for hinduism, generally. Hinduism is not a religion. A bunch of foreigners managed to convince hindus that they have a religion and the eternally-enslaved hindus just accept this fact. If yoga is a religion then why is aerobics not? If mantra and meditation are religion, then why is psycho-therapy not considered one too? If deliberating on the nature of the universe is religion then why is the study of atoms not?
Religion happens to revolve around a set of (irrational) beliefs which are held to be true – such as there is a god in this world and he created the universe, etc. Hindusim does not have any belief system, (they just have stories) and by no means do they make any truth claims. There is a philosophy to be sure, but anyone is free to challenge it and in fact there are 6 versions of these “darshans” not to mention innumerable tantras, as well as buddhism, jainism and other traditions each with their own understanding of matters. In other words, these differences are regarded as a matter for inquiry and not as some belief that must be adhered to.
So, if there is no belief system involved in yoga, the only basis for objection seems to be that it is regarded as a rival religion by the so-called minorities of India. I think hindus should work at a better understanding of their traditions and try and crawl out of this religious strait-jacket.
When I lived in NYC I was more tolerant towards xmas, but out here — in middle America — where it’s both more Christmas and inescapable I don’t want it shoved down my throat, especially not in government offices.
And, for what it’s worth, I do yoga without any concern about religion.
Whose God:
My impression was that there was no funding for the schools I was in, but that may have been an elective issue. The State Department’s religious freedom report (Link) sides with you here.
” The Government permits private religious schools, but does not permit religious instruction in government schools. Since most students in Christian schools are Hindu, the schools have voluntarily long restricted religious instruction on Christianity only to Christian students. The Supreme Court ruled that the Government can prescribe merit-based admission for religious colleges that receive public funding, while those that do not may use their own criteria, including determining admissions based upon religious affiliation.
Many Hindu sects have established their own schools, although they do not receive aid from the state. Most Muslim madrassahs do not accept offered government aid, as many Muslims believe that it would subject their schools to stringent security clearance requirements. Muslims objected to attempts by BJP governments in Rajasthan and other states to limit their freedom and ability to propagate their religious beliefs.”
Interesting point that Christian schools have made religious instruction voluntary. I’m still trying to forget all the stuff I was forced to learn in moral science classes! 🙂
I can understand objecting to xmas as an aesthetic because it’s so in your face, but not as religion. Then it is plain wrong to be a spoiler, whether it’s being done in government offices and with government money. If middle america rejoices in it, so be it.
Also, why do you do yoga without a concern for religion? Could it be that your attitude is in fact a reflection of the non-religious nature of yoga and you instinctively grasp this to be true? And yet, there is nothing in your writing that betrays this. Surely this is something we can question?
I went to a private school. Our physical training teacher was a muslim man who served in Indian army. Until he took charge, all we did was some lame-ass stiff shoulder march past.
He was the one who made us do surya-namaskarams along with the OM chanting. He used to make us breathe with the stomach, asking us to talk as if the voice is emanating from belly. He was also the guy taught us bunch of telugu kids how to do Bhangra and he could sing those punjabi tunes with beautiful gutso.
Where are men like him? I think today’s media and politicians are negatively sensationalizing religion and hence we see these twisted minds everywhere. When I read news like this, I take a moment to silently thank Mr. Rahamatullah for being the master he was.
Divya, Very very well stated.
“I mean, when I was kid visiting India (oh decades ago), I distinctly remember yoga being shown on Doordarshan, i.e. state-controlled television. That strikes me as particularly objectionable, but nobody challenged it back then.”
But consider it at those times Yoga was a major form of exercise to many. I don’t think Treadmills and spin classes were oh so the rage then and in some parts even now. Should America being a secular country ask for all participants in a TV exercise program to cover up head to toe so as not to offend members of religions that advocate covering up completely ? Its TV, you can switch it off if you don’t like what you see. Yoga is not just a Hindu tradition, it is to exercise what ayurveda is to medicine. Of course in the schools you can make it easier by not including the chanting aspect and things should be much easier but then again politics always tend to take the indirect approach to solving issues.
it is to exercise what ayurveda is to medicine.
To clarify, yoga is not exercise alone. The Gita lists the various components of yoga. It is also related to dietary habits, behavior, contemplation etc. Unfortunately, some of the charlatans who “teach” yoga in the West have made it appear to be in the same market space as aerobics.
Yoga is not just a Hindu tradition, it is to exercise what ayurveda is to medicine
I’m willing to accept that both yoga and ayurveda have a significant non-religious aspect. In fact, they may be completely divorced from religion. Both have roots in a very Hindu/Buddhist-centric tradition of medicine and well-being. I believe the source of contention is the Sanskrit-based litany (yes, I used the religious term on purpose) that goes with each. The term “surya-namaskar” implies obeisance to the sun, although I concede that may have nothing to do with the divinity of the Sun.
I don’t think you can dismiss the religious aspect so easily (especially as seen by members of other religions).
I’m not even going to touch the “War on Christmas” issue, in part because I am an atheist and in aprt because I hate how it’s already been framed as a combative issue just through the wording.
The issue of teaching yoga in schools is a throny one for sure. I consciously choose to practice the physical parts of yoga without the spiritual, myself, but I also grew up in a fundamentalist church where yoga was considered evil because the meditation would “empty your mind and the devil could then come in” etc etc. I think that especially in India, it would be hard to secularise yoga ( insulting to practicioners) and just as hard to implement the sun salutations plus chanting ( upsetting other faiths). If the schools were able to incorporate yoga into their P.E. along with other forms of movement representing other cultures/faiths, maybe they could get away with it. But it just offers politicians an easy way to make a well-meaning idea ( fit kids) ugly.
I’m with Camille… let them do Pilates instead.
And Divya, aerobics would only be a religion to the obsessive cardio queen!
I don’t want my tax money going to public displays of little baby Jesus in his manger not even “Dear Eight Pound, Six Ounce, Newborn Baby Jesus, in your golden, fleece diapers, with your curled-up, fat, balled-up little fists pawin’ at the air…”
I don’t want children in public schools to have to sing songs about how Christ the Savior is born, especially when they’re not being taught about evolution in some states, or birth control in others
And I choose not to shop in stores where the employees greet me with “Merry Christmas!” If it’s such a secular holiday they can greet me with “Happy Holidays” or “Season’s Greetings” but they wont get a dime from me if they’re peddling religion along with their wares.
I take the First Amendment pretty seriously, and I don’t like having religion thrust at me even in spheres where the constitution doesn’t apply, like stores.
Perhaps I would feel different if Christians weren’t an overwhelming majority where I live, or if they were more open minded and tolerant. But if they push, I’m a gonna push back.
On the one hand, let’s say that yoga (with or without overt Hindu references) is part of the cultural heritage of the majority of kids in India. Ideally, then, there is nothing wrong with their schools teaching it to them. On other hand, let’s say yoga violates the tenets and religious principles of a minority of students in the same schools. I think in this circumstance, in a secular democracy, the contentious practice (in this case yoga) must be left out of the govermental sphere (including public education). The unfortunate (but unavoidable) outcome of this is that the majority of students are missing out on being exposed to a vital part of their cultural heritage. The only solution is for the private sector to carry the torch of those students’ culture.
Yes, very HYPOCRITICALLY spiritual…a lot of show, very little real substance (in my opinion).
And I choose not to shop in stores where the employees greet me with “Merry Christmas!” If it’s such a secular holiday they can greet me with “Happy Holidays” or “Season’s Greetings” but they wont get a dime from me if they’re peddling religion along with their wares.
Wal-Mart’s not getting a dime from me anyway! 😉
The funny thing is that, even without the greeting from store employees, you’re practically hit over the head with Christmas, if you go into any retail store between October and January 1. So I’m not sure what the “war on Christmas” is really about. If there is a war, Christmas has won.
It’s also absurd for the government to be pushing yoga as a health initiative when they’re one of the worse states in terms of childhood malnutrition (close to 50% of the age group measured)
Not half as absurd as what you just said. They’re trying, they’re trying, if only people like you would let them.
And Amitabh, the reasoning in your #47 is precisely what seems to be the problem as far as I can see. Since when is the appeasement of minorities more important than sun salutations? What about the fact that yoga is genuinely beneficial and many, including the minorities, happen to like it? Are these factors more important or is some misguided, decontextualized notion of secularism?