In a post-9/11 world, where the secular space shrinks every day, the very definition of secularism needs to be constantly refreshed and contemporised.
If indeed my country professes to practice a secularism that is founded on the theory of neutrality or equal distance from all religions, then surely it should follow that either we remove the use of Hindu traditions to mark non-religious gatherings or ensure all religions find equal expression in all forums. Consider the 'arti' done on foreign dignitaries when they visit the country- The lamp-lighting ceremony at government-sponsored cultural festivals- Advertising films selling motorcycles to the chant of Hindu scriptures. Admirable symbols of tradition, piety, sanctity, but clearly, religious symbols. These symbols have now taken on a pan-Indian significance. The growing concern is not with the use of ceremony to mark an occasion. It is the use of religious symbolism. That they are accepted and practised not as Hindu traditions but as Indian traditions. A soothing, tempting position, but not entirely correct.
Clearly the case for removing religion from the non-religious sphere is a strong one. Any step to erase feelings of alienation that Indians who are not Hindus might feel both within and without this country is a step towards peace, not to mention prosperity. Underlying all of this will be the quiet belief that religion has no place in the public sphere. It will require the correct interpretation and implementation of our Constitution to firmly steer the nation away from this sense of divisiveness so deep-seated that questions that should be asked lie unspoken.