There seems to be no end to the centuries-old trend of denigrating and mocking anything that’s connected even remotely with Sanatan Dharma (aka Hinduism). And the recent hullabaloo over the inauguration of India’s new parliament building by Prime Minister Narendra Modi once again exposed the prevalence of such a deep-rooted and disturbing mindset among many.

While the moot point of contention between the ruling coalition and the opposition was over who should have inaugurated the new complex, it soon degenerated into something more sinister as many opposition leaders, prominent citizens and even media were seen clearly regaling at taking potshots at the country’s rich Dharmic traditions. They mocked Modi for laying prostrate on the ground with his forehead smeared with saffron paste, performing puja, meeting saffron-clad seers from various adheenams of Tamil Nadu and installing the Sengol in the new parliament. They were left fuming that the Prime Minister of a “secular” country had openly displayed the nation’s rich Dharmic tradition, clearly oblivious to the intrinsically non-sectarian nature of these practices.

However, many Indians educated in Western values and systems began to be influenced by the concept of secularism and started interpreting it as per their own convenience, before foisting it on the citizens of this great country. A plain reading of the original Preamble to the Constitution of India clearly reveals the non-sectarian/non-religious nature of the polity, yet the words “Socialist Secular” were deliberately inserted subsequently out of a political compulsion to pander to other groups at the cost of the majority community. And, as they say, the rest is history. The term “secularism” began to be loosely used as a ruse to purge all traces of Dharmic thoughts and traditions from the popular mainstream narratives. Ancient Hindu temples and institutions were taken over by the government, while places of worships and other institutions belonging to other religious groups were allowed to run independently sans any interference. And not just that.

But, they ought to remember that elaborate Christian rituals are conducted during the coronation of a new monarch in the UK or even the new US President takes the oath of office by the Bible (not to speak of the incumbent attending a mass prior to the oath-taking ceremony) and that heads of Islamic nations openly invoke Allah every moment. Leaders of all these countries never shy away from displaying their religious identity. Only India has to remain tethered to a seemingly out-of-the-world concept where the majority faith has to be compulsorily under wraps.

Hence, the likes of Qutub Minar and Taj Mahal or even the old Parliament building built by the British are supposed to be national treasures, but the intricately done Konark Temple or Meenakshi Amman Temple or Kailasa Temple are just some stone relics of a bygone era. Also, any social evil in this country is always conveniently tagged with Hinduism. So, the term “Hindu growth rate” was used liberally by academicians vis-à-vis India’s economy for decades until the 1990s, but a similar expression has never been used to describe the poor state of the economy in the Islamic world or Latin America or Africa.

Yours truly holds no ill-will against followers of other faiths or questions their beliefs and practices, nor advocates any curbs on them. But, there should be an even-handed approach from the government when it comes to dealing with matters of faith of different communities. The state cannot be seen pandering to one particular group or groups of people at the peril of others purely out of political considerations.

Bottomline is, Sanatan Dharma is fundamentally different from dominant Abrahamic faiths in terms of principles. It is a vast ocean where everything immerses into itself. It is about time to understand its core philosophy and acknowledge its universality, instead of trying to assign it a particular character on the lines of organised faiths.