With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the decline of socialist ideology worldwide, religious revivalism became stronger, and religious fundamentalist organizations in various countries became stakeholders in political power. Conversely, on an international scale, public support for free market oriented capitalist systems has grown at the expense of social-welfare centric state ideologies. Consequently, even the states in the West with a varying degree of commitment to public welfare have altered their character. Social sectors such as health, education, power generation, defence, banking, and other essential services are being privatized. This has allowed monopoly capitalism to develop and consolidate further. In various countries, a section of domestic capitalists gradually operated in the interests of this international monopoly capital, and have been building partnerships with them to have a finger in every pie. Day by day they are becoming influential in their national politics. Never-the-less, the capitalism by its nature, intensifies the social crisis and gets trapped into a state of chaotic recession. A vast portion of society's wealth and income remains confined to a tiny minority. In this environment of extreme wealth inequality and in reaction to the looting of national resources by a handful few, public resentment continues to grow. To curb this public anger, these stinkingly rich and powerful sections among capitalists provide support to right-wing religious communal politics. As a result, we are witnessing the empowerment of religious fascist and ultra-nationalist parties throughout the world, including in this Indian subcontinent.
Given this situation, what next? What position should an ordinary, rational, secular person take in engaging ourselves individually, as well as socially? Specifically, what will happen to us “Bengalis”? Today, the essence of "Bengaliness" is not only attacked by Hindutva proponents in our country; in our neighboring Bangladesh, the sword of Islamic hegemonism is also poised to erase a centuries-old, religiously tolerant, liberal, and humanistic cultural identity of this land enriched by the likes of Chandidas[1], Chaitanya[2], Lalon[3], Rabindranath[4], and Nazrul[5]. We must seek answers to these questions in the light of modernity and guide our social and political movements accordingly. However, I want to clarify here that I am not a proponent of Bengali nationalism. Rather, I am a follower of the dream of Indian unity through the harmony of all languages and cultures of multi-ethnic India, as envisioned by our great thinkers, including Rabindranath Tagore. Therefore, we must seek this way forward together. All sensitive and rational people of India need to unite and organize against religious communalism, unscientific propaganda, and blind faith at this critical moment of crisis. The religious issues can no longer be ignored in the social and political movements arising from today's economic crisis and the various undemocratic and anti-people policies of the rulers.
There was a time, when the leaders and activists of the left-wing movement thought that it was possible to counter religious beliefs and divisions primarily through democratic and socialist movements. It is also true that in such movements, a large section of the working class and intellectuals did abandon their religious practices and beliefs. But this process is not one-sided. When the social and political movements retreated and, the leftist leadership formed alliances with religious communal parties in their opportunistic politics, many of these individuals drifted back into the politics of their respective religious communities. Therefore, fundamentalism and communalism can easily influence these movements today. We must be aware of this and participate in these movements and take a clear stand against the fundamentalist and communal forces. Floating along with the tide of popular resentment on religious sentiment is no longer an option.
Furthermore, there are movements where fundamentalist organizations raise their voices and protest against alleged interference in religious matters. In such cases, secular right-wing and left-wing opposition parties often join their chorus in the name of opposing the government. Even when the government introduces administrative reforms consistent with modernity to eliminate religious discrimination, these secular parties join hands with fundamentalist organizations in opposition. They do not want to miss this opportunity for grabbing a low hanging fruit of turning the opinion of a community in their favour and thus get engaged in creating a hulla bolla against the government in the name of secularism and religious freedom. Eventually, they become entangled in the web of fundamentalist-communal forces and deplete their own strength.
In fact, in the past whenever secular forces formed tactical alliances with fundamentalist forces to participate in mass movements, those little "ants" had reaped the benefits. These ants later spread their wings like predatory birds. Their ground would get firmer, and their organizational network spread easily. Whether it was the Communists' alliance with the Muslim League over the demand for Pakistan against the British, or the unification of other secular parties with the Hindutva-aligned Jana Sangh to end the autocratic Congress rule in 1977 parliamentary election; countless such examples exist not only in our country but also in the pages of history across the world. After the mass movement to overthrow Awami League's authoritarian rule in Bangladesh in July 2024, the fundamentalists, who also took part, have gradually become stronger, and the secular forces remain sidelined. There, the secular leaders did not take any firm stand against the fundamentalist forces within the new political party called the National Citizen Party (NCP) that the students who led the anti-discrimination movement had formed. Subsequently, the fundamentalist forces gained more strength, and the secular camps weakened. Truly, building a movement against religious fundamentalism and communalism is a long-term, persistent process. Even a temporary compromise with those forces may alter the very character of an organization.
Finally, as a secular and rational citizen, I wish to present, through a series of questions and answers, my thoughts, framed within the context of modernity regarding what we expect and what our role to be in a democratic and secular state.
(1) Is it merely Theism vs. Atheism?
In today's secular world, many reduce the opposition to a religion to a simplistic denial of God's existence. Intellectual proselytizers consciously employ the strategy of hiding the untruthful explanations and beliefs of their religious fantasies in their infallible scriptures behind complex theological debates about existence of a ‘theoretical’ God. However, on the assumption of their infallibility, they never admit that the descriptions and accounts of the so-called God in their scriptures had been proven false in various ways by modern science. While the possibility of an "atheistic" world cannot be denied, even if one accepts the existence of a theistic world, that world would require a "new" God. In the context of today's modern knowledge, honest believers[6] need to change their 'concept of God' and their interpretation of the 'creation' of the organic and inorganic world. How they do it is their matter! But, the simple truth that, the descriptions in their scriptures no longer stand up to logic and argument, should now be accepted.
(2) How useful is religious reform in this era?
The history of religious reforms has shown that they have never been able to eradicate various inequalities arising from the beliefs and practices of that religion, e.g. the socio-economic-gender discrimination. They have come back again with some cosmetic changes to perpetuate the inequalities of contemporary society. Yet, there is a high chance that someday radical return of fundamentalist forces again may drive away all those progressive reforms as a pretext for social and economic crisis. We also notice that traders of various religions have also spread their nets all over the world in the name of ‘religious reforms’. Their opposition to modern knowledge and science and gender inequality is also quite evident. That is why the attempt to make traditional religions compatible with modernity through ‘reforms’ is futile.
(3) Does communalism have a "color"?
In instances of communalism or violence against other faiths, we often hear that "one should not differentiate between the colors (i.e., religions) of communal forces"; that is, one should not discriminate between religions because every religion has both communal and non-communal people, and thus all communal forces must be opposed in the same way. We frequently hear this rhetoric from our so-called secular leaders and friends. In reality, for the last three decades, Islamic militant organizations have been carrying out attacks one after another in many countries, including India. The state support of a few Islamic nations behind them is as clear as daylight. It is difficult to ignore this simple reality. If we ignore it, the communal forces of the affected community also pitch their voices and make their ground stronger. Unless one distinguishes the religious beliefs of communal ideologies, and takes a clear stand against them, the hands of communal forces in both religions are strengthened.
In this discussion, we have seen that the character of communalism varies among different religions. Hegemonic religions are many times more aggressive toward other communities. In this context, it is essential to give special importance to tackling Islamic fundamentalist and communal organizations in the current world, including our own country. We must analyze why they are expanding their influence. The unprincipled path taken by Western countries, including the USA, in supporting Pakistani rulers to spread fundamentalist education and organizations to counter the Soviet Union in Afghanistan has left the entire world, including this subcontinent, suffering from its poisonous fruits.[7] Trapped in the labyrinth of secularism and driven by the unprincipled urge to cross electoral hurdles, both right and left-wing governments in our country have indulged, rather than hindered, the spread of fundamentalist education in Qawmi Madrasas. Therefore, a religion that, by its very nature, is capable of rapidly spreading communal influence among ordinary believers and inciting violence[8] must not be placed on the same footing as others when addressing communalism.
(4) How appropriate is it for people of one religion to criticize another?
It is generally considered a matter of civility in a civilized society and consistent with the principle of religious tolerance to refrain from making adverse comments about the customs and beliefs of those belonging to different faiths. However, many proselytizers do not follow this. Those who wish to bring people of other faiths under their own umbrella consider such criticism even more necessary. Yet, they are the ones who become incensed and allege "hurting religious sentiments" when their own religious practices are criticized.
I have seen many of my left-leaning Hindu friends harbour the notion that the responsibility for removing religious bigotry and superstition from Muslim society rests solely upon the progressives within that community. They suggest "Hindu" progressives should instead speak out against their own casteism, gender discrimination, and religious superstitions. The "opportunistic" side of this attitude is that it easily ignores the problem of Islamic communalism while granting a license to focus solely on majority (i.e., Hindutva) communalism. This avoids the fear of losing Muslim votes in the electoral arena while securing the support of general intellectuals under the label of "progressiveness." For years, this political opportunism has strengthened the position of "Hindutva" forces in our country.
This same attitude has increased the distance between ordinary Hindus and Muslims in India including in Bengal. An ordinary Hindu in Bengal knows very little about Islamic ethics and religion, especially when it is very different from our native culture. He does not even have the idea of how the Islam of the Middle East is different in terms of the synthesis of the local culture. To him, the men and women wearing beards and caps, hijabs and burqas are all the same kind of devout Muslims. He does not find any kinship between them and the liberal and humane culture of Bengalis. Therefore, people of both religions need to mix with more open minds[9], and at the same time, there is a need to discuss and criticize both religions in terms of good and bad.
(5) When does the boundary of religious sentiments cross?
Whenever any criticism is levelled against a religion, religious gatekeepers and their lackeys frequently raise the allegation of hurting religious sentiments. In many Islamic countries, even minor criticism can put the critic’s life at risk. Often, religious leaders there incite a frenzied, bigoted mob, bringing disaster upon the property, honour, and lives of those unfortunate individuals of other faiths. The administration, under the guise of maintaining law and order, often indulges such incidents. There is no fixed definition for this "boundary of religious sentiment"; it is defined by religious leaders and traders of religion according to their own convenience. Currently, the wind is blowing in favour of these religious gatekeepers. They are no longer willing to tolerate even the slightest criticism of their religious conduct even if supported by science and modern epistemology. And if they smell any indirect criticism in the field of culture, poetry, literature, songs, films and plays, then they immediately take to the field with swords in hand. Before the decade long rule of Hindu nationalists in our country, orthodox Hindus did not raise any dissenting voice about this kind of violation. But now they are as vigilant as their Islamic counterparts.
(6) Is religion indispensable to social life?
It is undeniable that in pre-modern societies, various religions brought socio-economic stability and played an important role in the development of human civilization. However, their worldview and societal outlooks did not evolve at the same pace with the modernity as reflected by the advancement of human knowledge and civilization; rather they became tools for maintaining social inequality by religious traders and business organizations. For this reason, religious rituals and practices deserve no special importance in the daily affairs of the real, secular world. Nevertheless, religious philosophy, literature, music, drama, and dance are integral parts of our culture. In those spheres, religious study certainly holds a distinct significance. We must acknowledge this in our social interactions, work, and ceremonies, judging it with an open mind and within its historical context. We should continue this practice in a manner where all religions coexist with equal dignity and remain consistent with modernity.
(7) Should religious subjects be included in modern educational curricula?
A kind of ‘prohibition’ with a feeling of ‘untouchability’ exists regarding religious education in the modern education system. In order to keep education secular, the subjects of religious books are kept out of the curriculum. We only see general moral codes consistent with modernity and hagiographic accounts of religious leaders and characters finding a place in language studies. Analytical discussion and criticism of the subjects of religious books are absent from the curriculum. Consequently, even the educated mind becomes influenced and overwhelmed by the "mysterious glory" of scriptures as certified by religious preachers. However, if the description and explanation of religious books are also taught along with the subjects of modern knowledge and science, people would become more aware of their myths, morality, relevance, and suitability for the modern age. Therefore, the subject matter of religious scriptures needs to be included in our curriculum in more detail, with authentic analysis and critique. And in this religious education, the subjects of the main religious books of all religions should be taught in the light of modern logic and argument. Along with this, it is necessary to change the system of imparting religious education from childhood onwards. It is inappropriate to provide this type of religious education without teaching modern scientific subjects. Both lines of reasoning—logical and theological—must be placed before the students, by choosing topics fitting to their appropriate age of maturity.
(8) Are religious festivals against modernity?
Many festivals are celebrated in harmony with modern life, centered on religious beliefs. Many of these festivals become festivals for all people regardless of religion or community. On the other hand, there are some festivals that are limited to the participation of only believers of one religion and community. When religious festivals become festivals for all communities, they largely nurture modern ideas and culture. However, fundamentalists always want to occupy the arenas of these festivals more and more to spread their ideology, and strive to make their character communal. It is necessary to be aware of this danger and maintain the initiative to make these festivals universal.
(9) Is it appropriate to participate in the activities of religious organizations and the social service institutions (health, education, etc.) they run?
Even if one is not concerned with religion, many people are generally involved in such social service rendered by religious institutions. In this case, it is necessary to participate while being vigilant about how non-sectarian and loyal to modern epistemology and science the religious institutions are, for carrying out these activities.
(10) What should be the role of a secular state in resisting religious fundamentalism?
A secular state is a state that maintains official neutrality in religious matters and does not support or oppose any particular religion. In such a state, the government treats all citizens equally regardless of their religious beliefs and ensures that religious institutions do not interfere in state affairs, and on the other hand, the state does not hinder the religious propaganda and activities of institutions. The problem lies in this last condition. Although this condition is accompanied by some legal restrictions by the standards of modern civilization, when it violates those provisions depends on the ideology of our rulers and the perception and reaction of the judiciary. And that is the loophole that fundamentalist forces exploit. They use this policy of secularism to consolidate their ground and finally take over the state. Then they completely abandon secularism and establish a fascist regime dominated by the powerful section of their own community. Therefore, secularism needs to be re-evaluated. Religious institutions' commitment to religious tolerance, as opposed to hegemonic religious values, should be one of the conditions for their accreditation. To that end, it is necessary to create an open environment for debate and discussion about their religious texts. It is necessary to draw a distinction between practicing religion and preaching religion. Freedom of practicing religion and freedom of preaching religion are not the same. The latter is much more in conflict with modernity, which is why it needs to be regulated. Again, when religious practices provoke discrimination regardless of race, religion, or gender in terms of modern values, it is necessary to keep a rein on them.
I will conclude this discussion by returning to the role of a religion in the debate between theism and atheism, and the conditions for its survival. Generally, the philosophy of theism is considered a mandatory prerequisite for religion. However, this was not always the case. Buddhism was initially non-theistic, though the belief in reincarnation existed, and in later periods, the Buddha almost attained a god-like status. In Hinduism, too, the non-theistic Charvaka philosophy coexisted for a long time.[10] Over time, those views and paths have vanished. In today’s world, theism is indeed a prerequisite for all prevalent religions.
However, the survival of a religion does not depend on this belief in God. Religion survives through its social recognition; its rituals, customs, ceremonies, and festivals; all become part of our social life. For this reason, when a religion seeks to take root in a different country with a different culture, it must undergo changes to its core character and create a synthesis with the extant culture of that land—just as Arabian Islam transformed in Bengal through the hands of Sufi dervishes (saints).
In ancient and medieval times, the tradition of "the King’s religion becoming the religion of his subjects" was seen in various countries. In this manner, the Greek and Roman religions were rapidly replaced by Christianity across vast regions of Europe. Followers of those ancient religions are no longer found in the modern world. In Indonesia and Malaysia, subjects took turns adopting Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam along with their kings. The same was seen in countries like Myanmar, Thailand, and Cambodia; when Hindu kings became Buddhist, the subjects followed the suit. Similar events have occurred in the history of India as well. However, Islam entered India through the foreign invaders. When the ruler is a foreigner, converting the subjects is not easy to accomplish. Furthermore, indigenous Hindu kings were still powerful. There are very few examples of them changing their own religion. Consequently, for the sake of political stability, a type of compromise gradually developed between Islamic rulers and the kings and subjects of indigenous religions.[11] Thus, India still remains Hindu-majority.[12]
The reasons for the spread of Christianity and Islam among the tribes of Australia, Asia, Africa, and the Americas were somewhat different. In those relatively underdeveloped societies, it was easier to impose the religion of the rulers of an advanced society through a mix of soft and hard power. Yet even there, local cultures forced recognition from religious leaders.
In the modern secular world, the burden of a religion's survival depends less on the existence of theism and more on people's trust and interests in religious institutions. This is exactly what has happened in developed Western countries. Most people there today have turned religion from a place of faith into a mere formality. They celebrate Christmas in church, they marry there, and they celebrate religious festivals with fun, dance, and music; but beyond that, they give no special importance to religion. This does not mean they are all atheists. It is possible that many of them believe in God, but their sense of God lacks loyalty to institutionalized religion. This is probably the future of civilized, rational human beings.
To my religious friends who suffer from a moral crisis regarding a future godless society, I say only this: the real conflict is not between an atheist and a theist! The fortress of their institutional religious belief is collapsing today in the realm of modern knowledge and science. That is where their anger and fear lie! And that's why they have such hatred towards secularism. My only prayer to God, let them be a little more humane and open-minded!
10/4/26
(Translated from a Bengali article written by the author with the help of Google Gemini.)
[1] A medieval Bengali poet in 14th Century, considered to be the first humanist in Bengal with his famous quote “Sobar upor manush shotto tahar upor nai” (“Above all is Humanity, none else.”).
[2] Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (1486-1534): A Hindu saint and scholar in the late 15th and early 16th Century from Bengal founding the Vaishnav movement in worshiping God (Radha and Krishna) by singing devotional songs of love, and compassion, and by treating every human being equal disregarding division of caste, gender, and religion. Chaitanya’s Vaishnavism influenced Islamic rulers in Bengal leading to the development of a humanist culture and harmonious coexistence of Islam and Hinduism in Bengal for centuries. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaitanya_Mahaprabhu
[3] Lalan Fakir (1772-1890): A 19th century cultural icon, religious figure and the greatest exponent of Baul songs in Bengal. His philosophy places humanity above all rejecting all distinctions of caste, creed, gender and class; and takes stand against theological conflicts and racism. He wrote devotional songs influenced by Sufism and Vaishnavism acknowledging both Hindu and Islamic spiritual heritage. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lalon
[4] Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941): The first Nobel Laureate in Literature from Asia, a great humanist, educationist, and a Bengali cultural doyen and polymath, who influenced not only the literary and cultural movement of Bengal, but also that in the whole Indian subcontinent. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabindranath_Tagore
[5] Kazi Nazrul Islam (1899 – 1976): A Bengali poet, lyricist and cultural icon, who is known as the ‘rebel poet’ for publishing anticolonial journal and voicing against the colonial rule. He opposed all forms of bigotry and fundamentalism, including religious, caste-based and gender-based. In 1942, he suffered from an unknown disease loosing his voice and memory, and remained incapacitated till his death. He is honored as the National Poet of Bangladesh. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazi_Nazrul_Islam
[6] I have no expectation of such analysis, practice, or reflection from dishonest "religious entrepreneurs."
[7] A realistic account of jihadi Islamic education and environment in the Deobandi madrasas of Afghan Mujahedeen in Pakistan can be found in the autobiographical writings of Maiwand Banayee, an Afghan author and current Irish citizen. He was educated in a madrasa in the Shamshatoo refugee colony in Pakistan and became a Taliban fighter before overcoming his fanaticism through exposure to modern education and moving to the West. — Maiwand Banayee, "Delusions of Paradise: Escape of a Taliban Fighter," Icon Books Ltd, 2025.
[8] Thanks to YouTube, the vitriol of religious scholars and their followers against modern science, the cultivation of blind faith through the fear and greed of Heaven and Hell, and the naked display of spreading hatred toward other religions and communities are now visible to all.
[9] The ‘Baul’ community of West Bengal and Bangladesh serves as a shining example of this kind of Hindu-Muslim cultural synthesis and way of life.
[10] We find evidence of this view in the speech of Sage Jabali in the 108th Canto of the Ayodhya Kanda in the Valmiki Ramayana. Jabali attempts to persuade Rama to return to Ayodhya, arguing that a father's role in a child's birth is negligible and that offerings to the dead are meaningless. He suggests that scriptures on worship and sacrifice were created merely to subjugate people. — Valmiki Ramayana in Prose (in Bengali), Jyotibhushan Chaki (Ed.), 2005.
[11] A notable example of religious compromise is the seizure of power by Raja Ganesha in 15th-century Bengal. Ganesha, a Hindu landlord, took advantage of the weakness of the Ilyas Shahi dynasty. In 1415, he converted his 12-year-old son, Jadu, to Islam and placed him on the throne, ruling as the power behind the scenes throughout his life. This was a compromise with contemporary Turkish nobles and Sufis. Jadu took the name Jalaluddin Muhammad and ruled with great influence until 1432. — Richard Eaton, The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204-1760, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1993. P.55-63.
[12] However, history is filled with examples of dominant religions establishing themselves through either conversion or expulsion of others. After the rise of Islam, it spread rapidly through the Middle East via the concept of Jihad. Jews were expelled from Palestine; most followers of Zoroastrianism in Persia converted, while a small portion took refuge in India. Buddhism vanished from vast regions of Central Asia, including Afghanistan. A reverse example is found in Southern Spain, where Christian kings defeated the 500-year-old Moorish Empire and expelled Muslims. Even in the modern era, Armenian Christians were expelled from Turkey in the 1910s, and the Holocaust under Hitler remains a dark chapter. The pain of families losing their homes during the partition of India remains with us, and the displacement of minority Hindus from West/East Pakistan due to communal violence has continued long after the partition.
