UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM & ENERGY STUDIES

COLLEGE OF LEGAL STUDIES

B.A.,LL.B.(HONS.)

SEMESTER

ACADEMIC YEAR: 2017-18 SESSION: AUG-DEC, 2017

RESEARCH PAPER

FOR

Sociology

(LLBG 132)

Under the Supervision of: Dr. Priyanka Sharma Khanduja

(TO BE FILLED BY THE STUDENT)

NAME:--DIGVIJAY SINGH

SAP NO-- 500053198

ROLL NO --R154216040
 Synopsis

TOPIC: Religious Intolerance

Introduction- It has been seen over the past centuries that the human nature has strongest
belief in their faiths whatever be they like or we can say that faith is the factor for a belief
system. Among all the faiths the strongest they have in their religion. The religious faith
when neglects or disapproves or refuses to tolerate other’s religious faiths then it can be
termed as religious intolerance.

Problem: Religious intolerance in itself is a problem as in today’s developing and changing

Methodology: Both doctrinal and non-doctrinal methods are used for the research purpose.
As articles are referred for doctrinal research and questions with reference to topic are also
asked from the different peoples of different strata’s for non-doctrinal research.

Results and suggestion: After doing my research I got very interesting results. I got to know
that religious faiths are the strongest faiths and are the influencing factor of when it comes to
obeying laws and norms. When a person finds any law as a attack on his religious faith or he
believes any other community’s religious practices or beliefs are contradictory to his beliefs
or because of the law or religious belief of other community he finds his religious belief, faith
or community in danger then he react to it. This reaction by the other community or
institution is considered as religious intolerance. Due to this intolerance people denies to
follow laws and they themselves supersede faith in comparison to law.

In my opinion laws should be made to protect religious faiths and anybody trying to do such
an act which is likely to harm other religion faith should be punished. Laws should also be
made if possible in a way that they do not harm other people’s religious beliefs or faiths.
Perception of adaptation should also be adopted by the society so that the feeling of fear of
existence of faith minimize.

Keywords: Religious intolerance, faith, Religion, community, Laws, Religious faith.

India is a country of many religions. Every religion has its own faith and beliefs. Persons
following a particular religion have faith in that religion only. It is very oblivious that faith of
one religion may contradict the other or the member of one religion does not believe in other
religion. The religious faith when neglects or disapproves or refuses to tolerate other’s
religious faiths then it can be termed as religious intolerance. This paper examines the issue
of religious intolerance. Religious intolerance is unaccepted in society or we can say society
portrays itself of being secular. In the changing world and society the majority beliefs in
secularism. Religious intolerance reflects communalism and vice versa. It has very negative
impact on the society. Sometimes due to blind and very strong belief in faith gives rise to
religious intolerance and that results in superseding of faith over laws. Some peoples find this
right and do not take it as a negative aspect. They don’t give names to their actions as
religious intolerance but try to rationalise their work.

This paper examines the area of religious intolerance with different perspectives of peoples
and also examines why and how faith supersede law and in what forms religious intolerance
is present in the society and what is the perception of different status peoples on religious
intolerance.

Indian culture and religious Intolerance

India is also known by the name of land of many religions. It is the birthplace of four major
religions- Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism. It also has the second highest
population of Muslims in the world, next only to Indonesia. India also has the third largest
Shia population in the world and is considered as the cradle of Ahmadiyya Islam. It is one of
the very few countries in the world with at least One million Ahmadi Muslims.
Zoroastrianism and Judaism also have an ancient history in India, and each has several
thousands of Indian adherents. India has the largest population of people adhering to
Zoroastrianism (i.e. Parsis and Iranis) and Bahá'í Faith in the world, even though these
religions are not native to India. Many other world religions also have a relationship with
Indian spirituality, such as the Baha'i faith which recognises Buddha and Krishna as
manifestations of the God Almighty. This diversity is a major reason of religious intolerance
in India. It prevails in the root of societies in India which can be seen analyzed and seen
easily.
In the 2nd century BC, Patanjali tells us that the relationship between Brahmins and
Buddhists is like that between the snake and the mongoose; and its actual violent
manifestation is supported by a plethora of historical evidence. Similarly, there is copious
proof of the Shaiva-Vaishnava antagonism. The persistent animosity between Shaivism and
Jainism, and the persecution of the latter by the former, is also well documented. In the 11th
century Alberuni tells us that the Hindus are “haughty, foolishly vain and self-conceited” and
“believe that there is no religion like theirs”.

But ignoring all this, Indian politicians constantly chant the aphoristic statement “vasudhaiva
kutumbakam” (the world is one family) out of context.

In the 19th century, some Indians also began to speak of the tolerance of Hindus, but they
clearly privileged Hinduism over other religions. Dayananda Saraswati (1824-1883), who
founded the Arya Samaj in 1875, claimed to believe “in a religion based on universal
values... above the hostility of all creeds...”. But as a champion of the Vedic religion, he
sharply opposed all other religions: to him, Mohammad was an “impostor” and Jesus “a very
ordinary ignorant man, neither learned nor a yogi”. His contemporary Ramakrishna (1836-
1886) spoke of the equality of religions, but in his view “the Hindu religion alone is the
Sanatana Dharma”.

His disciple Vivekananda (1863-1904) also laid emphasis on toleration and picked up the
famous Rigvedic passage “ekaüsad viprà vahudhà vadanti” (The wise speak of what is One in
many ways) in support of his vision that “India alone [was] to be...the land of toleration”. But
this was incompatible with his view that “from Pacific to the Atlantic for five hundred years
blood ran all over the world” and “that is Mohammadanism”, even though his Rigvedic quote
has become a cliché through being endlessly milked by politicians.

Similar views continued to be held by some leaders in the early 20th century. Bal Gangadhar
Tilak (1856-1920), for example, couched his views in the vocabulary of tolerance and quite
often cited the above Rigvedic passage but, in reality, espoused militant Hinduism. Even the
Muslim-hater MS Golwalkar (1906-1973) spoke of the Hindus as the most tolerant people of
the world, although this sounded like the devil quoting scripture, for he identified Muslims,
Christians and Communists as internal threats to the country. It would appear that these
leaders, from Dayananda to Golwalkar, used tolerance as a camouflage for Hindu
belligerence: they privileged Hinduism over other religions and did not provide enough space
to them. Unlike them, Mahatma Gandhi, who lived and died for communal harmony,
genuinely found Hinduism to be the most tolerant of all religions even if his excessive pride
in its inclusivism may have tended to make it exclusive. But only claim by one religion that it
is very tolerant and the other is not does prove the tolerance or intolerance feature of that
religion.

Relation of politics and religious intolerance

Religion plays a very decisive role in framing the political scenario in a country like India.
Where there is a majority religion and some minorities and have a regular conflict. The
conflict gives rise to religious intolerance. Political parties use religious intolerance as a tool
for polarising votes. Some peoples to prove their secularism portrays to resist religious
intolerance or opposes it. People generally vote on religion and caste basis because they fear
of endangering their faiths, religions and customs and essence of religious intolerance gives
spark to the same beliefs. We have also seen how religious intolerance was made a
propaganda by elite as well as political society in India few months earlier. We will discuss
about some issues in which we can see the instances of religious intolerance.

Instances where religious intolerance can be easily seen

1- Anti-Sikh Riots (1984)

In the 1970s, Sikhs in Punjab had sought autonomy and complained about domination by the
Hindu.[193] Indira Gandhi government arrested thousands of Sikhs for their opposition and
demands particularly during Indian Emergency.[193][194] In Indira Gandhi's attempt to
"save democracy" through the Emergency, India's constitution was suspended, 140,000
people were arrested without due process, of which 40,000 were Sikhs. After the Emergency
was lifted, during elections, she supported Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, a Sikh leader, in an
effort to undermine the Akali Dal, the largest Sikh political party. However, Bhindranwale
began to oppose the central government and moved his political base to the Darbar Sahib
(Golden temple) in Amritsar, demanding creation on Punjab as a new country.[193] In June
1984, under orders from Indira Gandhi, the Indian army attacked the Golden temple with
tanks and armoured vehicles. Thousands of Sikhs died during the attack.[193] In retaliation
for the storming of the Golden temple, Indira Gandhi was assassinated on 31 October 1984
by two Sikh bodyguards. The assassination provoked mass rioting against Sikh1.[193] During
the 1984 anti-Sikh pogroms in Delhi, government and police officials aided Indian National
Congress party worker gangs in "methodically and systematically" targeting Sikhs and Sikh
homes.[196] As a result of the pogroms 10,000–17,000 were burned alive or otherwise killed,
Sikh people suffered massive property damage, and at least 50,000 Sikhs were displaced2.

2- Ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus

In the Kashmir region, approximately 300 Kashmiri Pandits were killed between September
1989 to 1990 in various incidents. In early 1990, local Urdu newspapers Aftab and Al Safa
called upon Kashmiris to wage jihad against India and ordered the expulsion of all Hindus
choosing to remain in Kashmir. In the following days masked men ran in the streets with AK-
47 shooting to kill Hindus who would not leave. Notices were placed on the houses of all
Hindus, telling them to leave within 24 hours or die.

Since March 1990, estimates of between 300,000 and 500,000 pandits have migrated outside
Kashmir due to persecution by Islamic fundamentalists in the largest case of ethnic cleansing
since the partition of India.The proportion of Kashmiri Pandits in the Kashmir valley has
declined from about 15% in 1947 to, by some estimates, less than 0.1% since the insurgency
in Kashmir took on a religious and sectarian flavour3. Many Kashmiri Pandits have been
killed by Islamist militants in incidents such as the Wandhama massacre and the 2000
Amarnath pilgrimage massacre. The incidents of massacring and forced eviction have been
termed ethnic cleansing by some observers.

3- Anti Muslim violence

On 6 December 1992, members of the Vishva Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal destroyed
the 430-year-old Babri Mosque in Ayodhya - it was claimed by the Hindus that the mosque
was built over the birthplace of the ancient deity Rama and a 2010 Allahabad court ruled that
the site was indeed a Hindu monument before the mosque was built there, based on evidence
submitted by the Archaeological Survey of India. This action allegedly caused humiliation to
the Muslim community. The resulting religious riots caused at least 1200 deaths.Since then
the Government of India has blocked off or heavily increased security at these disputed sites
while encouraging attempts to resolve these disputes through court cases and negotiations.

1
Charny, Israel W. (1999). Encyclopedia of genocide. ABC-CLIO. pp. 516–517. ISBN 978-0-87436-928-1.
Retrieved 21 February 2011.
2
Mukhoty, Gobinda; Kothari, Rajni (1984). "Who are the Guilty ?". People's Union for Civil Liberties.
3
Kashmir: The scarred and the beautiful. New York Review of Books, 1 May 2008, p. 14.
4- Cow slaughter in India
Cattle slaughter is a controversial topic in India because of the cattle's traditional
status as an endeared and respected living being to many in Hinduism, Sikhism,
Jainism and Buddhism, in contrast to cattle being considered as a religiously
acceptable source of meat by many in Islam, Christianity as well as some in Hinduism
and other Indian religions. More specifically, the cow's slaughter has been shunned
because of a number of reasons such as being associated with god Krishna in
Hinduism, cattle being respected as an integral part of rural livelihoods and an
essential economic necessity. Historically, cattle slaughter has also been opposed by
various Indian religions because of the ethical principle of Ahimsa (non-violence) and
the belief in the unity of all life.
Question on religious tolerance were also asked from law students so that the issue of
religious intolerance can be deeply analyzes and to cover different aspect of the issue.
Total number of people asked questions- 20
Questions can be given as follows:-
Q1- Do you think it is very common that customs or religions sometimes supersedes
laws even if law does not permit the same?
Analysis- This question was asked to makeup the mind of people so that they can be
comfortable for upcoming questions.
Out of 20 people 18 said yes and the rest 2 denied the same. So it can be inferred that
it is likely and a common thing that sometimes customs and faith of a particular man
or whole community supersedes law.
Q2- Do you think most of the political parties uses religion as a tool to polarize the
votes?
Analysis- Out of 20 people 16 said that yes, most of the political parties uses religions
as a tool for the polarization of votes.
It can be inferred that political parties are doing things which in some way or the other
promoting communalism and so religious intolerance.
The degree of intolerance a person might express all starts at home. Parents usually
dictate and influence their children's religious belief, and how they view others
outside their belief system. As their first role models, children usually follow their
parents for spiritual guidance or at least through their prepubescent lives. Later on,
many children will rebel, especially in extremists’ households. They'll try and deviate
from their parents beliefs, but many return as humans love the familiar. This can be a
problem when the familiar messages are those of hate. When hate is indoctrinated into
a person from a very young age, the individual is more likely to express all of that
hate. "Our world today is torn asunder by men and women who claim that God is on
their side, and who, secure in the righteousness of their positions, perpetrate acts of
violent destruction".
In the teenage years though, it is common to break off nevertheless from what the
parents want so the teenager can find their own spiritual path (Piper). Older siblings
can oftentimes act as a catalyst for more dramatic changes, as these siblings have been
more exposed to the outside world. Extended relatives such as grandparents or aunts
and uncles can swing one way or the other, Older generations showing a more
concentrated version of intolerance due to the culture they were raised tending to be
one of more discrimination. Sometimes a child may experience a complete break from
their parents beliefs, with a new found hatred for their previous beliefs. This is called
a conditioned response, or a response that is a reaction that changes to learned
behaviour because of an outside occurrence.
Another thing that impacts how someone perceives how they should treat people of a
different belief system is school. A child may go to a school where they are
surrounded by others of their same belief system and therefore don't always develop
the necessary skills to deal with other people who are different from them. Instead
they learn a diluted and oftentimes incredibly inaccurate view of the world around
them. This education is carried with them through the rest of their lives.
In life, after they have grown up and moved out, this education will be incredibly
apparent in their actions. A persons religious beliefs and the level of acceptance they
were taught for people with differing views around them affects everyday behaviors.
Even as they lead lives outside of the home, they carry with them knowledge that is
often not so much as actual facts as they are stereotypes.
A person is also affected by their culture. Culture is fraught with stereotypes, and
caricatures of a certain religious group. The belief that atheists are arrogant, criminal,
cocky, cheating, Satan worshipers (though since atheism is a lack of belief, this
doesn't actually make sense.) is popular among the more extreme religious. There is
also the popular stereotype that religious people are misogynistic, ignorant,
bible/quran/book of Mormon beating, self righteous, backwards, close-minded
conservatives.These stereotypes tend to come from a particularly vocal minority, who
usually paint their entire group as having their beliefs, and popular media. How could
everyone believe, for example, that Muslims aren't all American hating religious
radicals when the only information they get is from what they know of 9/11 and the
constant negative reports from Muslim dominated countries on the news? The
prevalence of stereotypes makes it hard for anything to change, as it is hard to change
a publicly accepted idea.
Now in more modern history how one religious group might discriminate against
another group, because they're different and they've dehumanized them . A benefit of
having that sort of mentality is feeling a closer kinship with others on the team, which
fulfils humans basic need of companionship.
That pack mentality runs through religious and nonreligious groups. When confronted
with someone who challenges their beliefs, people will usually go on the defensive. If
not from just fear that the other person will prove them wrong, also the fact that they
might have had some type of experience with this before and wish to avoid it . It is
when this type of thinking is used that discrimination is fostered, and that sometimes
even segues into segregation. In the war between the holy and the atheists is fear of
the unfamiliar, otherwise known as Xenophobia. It's an instinct, to have suspicions or
dislike anything that has not been encountered before. However, once aware of the
phenomenon, it is simpler to shake of the fear and see past the unfamiliarity
(Winters).Due to the fact intolerance is supported by instincts, it is nearly impossible
to completely eliminate all intolerance from the world. However the behaviours
associated with it can be greatly reduced. Behaviours are a result of a combination of
learned and innate behaviour and therefore can be controlled to a degree by changing
what a person learns is acceptable. No human being is entirely full of either learned
behaviours or inherited traits. In fact, every person is composed of a combination of
traits from each of these categories. Some traits are easy to link to genetics, while
others are obviously learned behaviours.
Conclusion
We have discussed a lot on religious intolerance and seen how religious intolerance is
deeply rooted in Indian society. As India is a very diversified country and there are lot
many of religions which have their different customs and faiths which often clashes
from the other religious which leads to religious intolerance. This intolerance is acting
as poison for the societal harmony. The need of the hour is to curb out this
communalism and religious intolerance for the growth of harmonious society and
proper functioning of the legislature and administration as the blind faith beliefs are
the big hindrance in implementation of laws as faith supersedes laws several times. To
curb out this sense of religious intolerance the people should be taught sense of
belongingness.