Traces from Romila Thapar's lecture on Secularism

Romila Thapar, eminent historian of India, was in Mumbai for a lecture this Monday where she spoke on secularism in India.

Following are traces from the lecture:
---

Without secularism, people in India will have to imagine and identify themselves through religion, caste, class, language, etc., she began elaborating. These parameters will become primary in establishing one's identity.

At the outset, she went on to distinguish between the terms "secular", "secularism" and "secularisation". "Secular" is that which relates to the world that is distinct from the religious. "Secularism" demarcates that boundaries for the social institutions to exercise control over how people should live and conduct within a society. "Secularisation", finally, is the process by which a society recognises distinction. 

The observance of law is strengthened when people know its purpose. 

Religion had emerged as a social and personal need. This eventually became an organised instition. Thus it became important, and authoritarian. 

The control of religious institutions over the social, which secular wants to keep distinct.

Religion has its sanction from faith

Social laws are the spine of the society. They protect the rights to live. Education is one of the things which socializes a child into the society.

Civil law - how people conduct within the framework of rights and duties.
Social law - must prescribe the absolute minimum - things like standards of basic health and education. 

Secularism helps keep a negotiated distance between the religious and the social.

Religion should not dictate / prescribe the civil laws. Social essentially tries to entail the right to live.

Indian definition of secularism just talks about the "coexistence" of religion. however, secularism is not just that, said thapar.

"Is secularism a western concept?" some argue. But so are the ideas of nationhood, democracy, etc. Certainly, more contemporary ideas of liberalization are western imprints. 

Colonial views of indian religions have been almost  internalized today. These were constructed as monolithic projections of the hindu and the muslim nations - without registering the finer nuances within them. Not everyone within "hind" or the "muslim" behaves and believes in a singular ideology or manner. Evading the nuances,  the English made the two appear hostile to each other. They did this for they wanted to control. Such a move was clearly political. However, there have always been fights and aggressive negotiations between the two religions throughout history. this image was imprinted on india distancing the two religious. This was thus a colonial construct.

Hindu and muslim, both are not monolithic religious entities, they are themselves composed of different caste, class, and sects. The interaction between caste, sect and religion with the state was the way in which indian society moved forward. Sects allow the less orthodox to assimilate new ideas. They are not as rigid aand monolithic as religions. This allows, and is thus, fluid(ity)

All forms of arts literature, music, classical art forms were positively hybridized and even patronized by courts and sultans. This evidences the constant negotiations and dialogue between the two cultures.

Siddhpur, Gujarat

Siddhpur is a town two hours away from Ahmedabad City. While many ancient buildings around it date back by 900 years, much of its present architecture came up about 100 years ago. The town has several neighbourhoods, the prominent one being that of the Bohra Muslims who settled here before independence. Composed of merchants who benefitted from the trade right across the Gujarat sea, architecture of Siddhpur borrows distinct Art Deco language for the havelis spatially informed by a Bohra lifestyle. It reflects a balanced mix of modernity and tradition. Much of the town today is remanent of a period claimed by the rise of trade and industry within Indian mainland. Today however, most Bohras have moved to bigger cities, leaving behind modest mansions that talk of a community that once flourished through cultural and economic exchanges.

While the grid-ironed, neatly laid out Bohra mansions become the centre piece of the town, the peripheries  dissolve into meandering pathways that take you to older neighbourhoods, or wadas as they call it, reminding of the pols of Ahmedabad. The facades of these mansions fuse different forms of column capitals - corinthian to ionic to composite. These are punctuated regularly by segmental arches. The width of most houses is between 6 to 8 metres, lined up in a row within a block. Thus many of these mansions have openings only on two ends. They donot technically share a common wall, for each house builds their own side walls even if adjoining each other, which eventually allows them to carve out space for storage and furniture. The smaller ends, in conjunction with the central skylight / open well allows the house to breathe, at the same time maintain ambient light within. 

Frontages of Bohra houses are mini caverns. They are a hybrid between the traditional otlas and the rajasthani haveli entrances. Taking you on a high plinth, the entry steps dig into the facade, creating a cozy portico, well shaded and inviting. The entrance is not as heavily treated as that in the Rajasthani haveli. Backyards are not elaborate. Back face of houses have a series of windows on either sides. The center is ususally reserved for inlaid furniture. 

The spatial structuring of the house is layered. One enters a series of spaces one after the other, arranged from public to most private. You enter the house through a lobby which is the fulcrum from where you divert into different directions. You either take a staircase to the upper floors, or turn on either side for the wash area/bathroom or the kitchen - planned on either sides of the entrance. Modern logic of servicing a space are well incorporated within these houses - seen in the pipes concealed within the walls, but taken out through the external facade of the building. Beyond the lobby are a series of three layers / spaces.

The first layer is a common room where visitors sit. This space has a wash basin on one corner, and water pot (panihara) on the adjacent side. This space is often lit by an open skylight. There are changing rooms behind the panihara. The second layer is generally a small vestibule with a cot and a seating place, generally for a semi private recluse. The innermost layer is a large private hall, often the most well kept, with exquisite in-laid furniture and cushions for floor seating. This space is lit up by two large windows. The spaces on the upper level generally include a room for larger gatherings.

Such layout reminds one of Louis I Kahn's diagram of the served and serving spaces. The servicing areas of the house are clearly clubbed and zoned towards the external face, while the remaining spaces are set off from the lobby in varying intensities of privacy. 

The bohra community is well held between two converging primary lanes. One of them is the Bazaar street - the most active and bustling part of the town. It is lined with several shops on either sides selling all necessities. In parallel, on the streets are vendors on carts. The Bazaar street eventually extends to the railway station, one of the boundaries of the town. The other boundary is the large cemetry. 

Siddhpur is an ideal town. It has taken me long to clearly distinguish a village from a town, and more importantly a town from a city (Dont we always refer to South Mumbai as "town"?). However, Siddhpur (after New Haven, where I spent two years), has made me more clear about the characteristics of a town. A town fits right between the village and the city, blending characteristics of both in its pace of life, kind of people, scale of activities and access to amenities. These observations may seem very obvious. But these experience of a town life makes one re calibrate the way in which you relate to a place. Being bred in a metropolis, a city like Mumbai, a town is certainly relieving - offering a good speed - not as slow as the village. It offers you conveniences of the city, not making you travel far to meet people. A town can be easily navigated on foot, or if you had a bike, unlike a city. The density of information it throws at you is controlled. It is not a village because you have modern day facilities, institutions and so on. That in essence, was my learning from Siddhpur.