Dr Ambedkar: Islam and Christianity non social and anti social , hence no religious instructions in education institutions
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Mr. Vice-President, Sir, out of the amendments
that have been moved, I can persuade myself to accept only amendment No. 661
moved by Mr. Kapoor to omit sub-clause (3) from the article, and I am sorry that
I cannot accept the other amendments.
It is perhaps, desirable, in view of the multiplicity
of views that have been expressed on the floor of the House to explain at some
length as to what this article proposes to do. Taking the various amendments
that have been moved, it is clear that there are three different points of
view. There is one point of view which is represented by my friend Mr. Ismail
who comes from Madras. In his opinion, there ought to be no bar for religious
instruction being given. The only limitation which he advocates is that nobody
should be compelled to attend them. If I have understood
him correctly, that is the view he stands for. We
have another view which is represented by my friend Mr. Man and Mr. Tajamul
Husain. According to them, there ought to be no religious instruction at all,
not even in institutions which are educational. Then there is the third point
of view and it has been expressed by Prof. K. T. Shah, who says that not only
no religious instruction should be permitted in institutions which are wholly
maintained out of State funds, but no religious instruction should be permitted
even in educational institutions which are partly maintained out of State
funds.
Now, I take the liberty of saying that the draft
as it stands, strikes the mean, which I hope will be acceptable to the House.
There are three reasons, in my judgment, which militate against the acceptance
of the view advocated by my friend Mr. Is mail, namely that there ought to be
no ban on religious instructions, rather that religious instructions should be
provided; and I shall state those reasons very briefly. The first reason is
this. We have accepted the proposition which is embodied in article 21, that
public funds raised by taxes shall not be utilised for the benefit of any particular
community. 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 none-the-less compelled by the action of the District Local Board to
contribute to the District Local Board funds.
The second difficulty is much more real than the
first, namely the multiplicity of religious we have in this country. For
instance, take a city like Bombay which contains a hetrogeneous population
believing in different creeds. Suppose, for instance, there was a school in the
City of Bombay maintained by the Municipality. Obviously, such a school would
contain children of the Hindus believing in the Hindu religion, there will be
pupils belonging to the Christian community, Zoroastrian community, or to the Jewish
community. If one went further, and I think it would be desirable to go further
than this, the Hindus again would be divided into several varieties; there
would be the Sanatani Hindus, Vedic Hindus believing in the Vedic
religion, there would be the
Buddhists, there would be the Jains-even amongst
Hindus there would be the Shivites,there would be the Vaishnavites, Is the
educational institution to be required to treat all these children on a footing
of equality and to provide religious instruction in all the denominations? It
seems to me that to assign such a task to the State would be to ask it to do
the impossible.
The third thing which I would like to mention in
this connection is that unfortunately the religions which prevail in this
country are not merely non-social; so far as their mutual relations are
concerned, they are anti-social, one religion claiming that its teachings
constitute the only right path for salvation, that all other religions are
wrong. The Muslims believe that anyone who does not believe in the dogma of Islam
is a kafir not entitled to brotherly treatment with the Muslims. The Christians have a
similar belief. In view of this, it seems to me that 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. I therefore
say that in laying down in article 22 (1)that in State institutions there
shall be no religious instruction,we have in my judgment travelled the path of
complete safety.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 28 in The Constitution Of India
28. Freedom as to attendance at religious instruction or religious worship in certain educational institutions
(1) No religion instruction shall be provided in any educational institution wholly maintained out of State funds
(2) Nothing in clause ( 1 ) shall apply to an educational institution which is administered by the State but has been established under any endowment or trust which requires that religious instruction shall be imparted in such institution
(3) 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 instruction that may be imparted in such 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 his consent thereto Cultural and Educational Rights
Comments
Post a Comment