Why Supreme Court issued notice to Centre on 'Hindu' prayers in Kendriya Vidyalayas
On January 10, the Supreme Court asked the Centre to respond to a PIL, which claims school prayers in Kendriya Vidyalayas propagate Hinduism, in violation of the Constitution of India.
The petition has been filed by Veenayak Shah, an advocate from Jabalpur in Madhya Pradesh, whose children went to Kendriya Vidyalayas (KVs).
KVs are run by the central government, and according to Article 28(1) of the Constitution, “No religious instruction shall be provided in any educational institution wholly maintained out of state funds”, unless “established under any endowment or trust which requires that religious instruction shall be imparted in such institution”.
The PIL and the Supreme Court admitting it has set off a charged debate, with many saying it is undue interference in how schools have been run for years. Ironically, though, some claiming that the school prayers no way propagate a religion have also slammed the PIL as an attack on Hinduism.
There are over 1,100 KVs in the country, which impart education to 12,57,099 students (as of September 30, 2017). The schools were established “to cater to the educational needs of the children of transferable central government employees including defence and para-military personnel”, and hence seek to maintain “a common programme of education”.
Thus, every KV in the country has the same syllabus, uniform and prayer. If so many children are spending their formative years in these schools, there is no harm in scrutinising their running, and the matter Veenayak Shah’s PIL raises is an important one.
Is the prayer propagating Hinduism?
The prayer followed in Kendriya Vidayalayas, as mentioned in the Revision of Education Code for Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, 2013, is in Hindi – “daya kar daan vidya ka, humein parmatama dena” – preceded and followed by Sanskrit shlokas.
While the prayer in itself does not overtly invoke any Hindu deity, its tone and form is similar to Hindu prayers. The song is a supplication to an unnamed deity to fill the students’ hearts with knowledge and purify their souls, but uses the imagery of "gyan ki ganga” - "let knowledge flow like the River Ganges", which is sacred to Hindus.
The "shloka" in the beginning of the prayer is a request to be led from darkness to light, lies to truth, death to immortality, while that at the end talks of the almighty giving the students and teacher vigour to work towards achieving knowledge, and wraps up with an invocation for peace upon the universe.
The song and the shlokas both talk of laudable things - spiritual awakening and love and brotherhood among all, teachings that are part of all religions. However, the use of “om”, and of the Sanskrit language, which is the language of the Hindu scriptures, do tie them up more closely with Hinduism than any other religion.
The question here is whether the language and the content of the prayers should be seen as Hindu, or merely Indian - they talk of values essential to the ethos of India and Sanskrit is a language that originated in the subcontinent. However, the danger with this is the conflation of Hindi-Hindu with the Indian identity, which is then used to establish Hindus as the “true” residents of India and other religions as foreign imports, their followers second-grade citizens.
Is it the school’s job to teach faith in God?
Another contention in the PIL is that the concept of prayer teaches students to turn to a higher power for recourse, instead of inculcating in them a scientific temper.
The petition states: “All the students have to begin their day by reciting the common prayer also followed by silent prayer. This practice creates a lot of obstacles in developing a scientific temperament among the students as the whole idea of God and religious faith is given immense priority and the same is instilled as a thought process among the students as well. Students as a result learn to develop an inclination towards seeking refuge from almighty instead of developing a practical outcome towards the obstacles and hurdles faced in everyday life and spirit of enquiry and reform seems to be lost somewhere (sic)”.
This brings us to the question - is it the job of a government-run school to teach students to believe in God? Students join school at a very young age, and what they learn in schools goes a long way in shaping their minds. Should matters of faith be dealt with schools run by a secular state, when their main job is to impart a more worldly education?
Is this not a way of indoctrination?
If yes, then secularism should mean schools teaching students prayers from all religions, so that children of a country like India are exposed to all the faiths practised within it, helping them develop a better understanding and acceptance of various religions.
KVs are run across the country. Making students memorise words in a language they may not understand, and repeat them every day, is not the best way to teach them about God, or to develop a spiritual consciousness.
Can a student refuse the prayer?
The PIL states: “The above prayer is being enforced throughout the country in all Kendriya Vidyalayas. As a result, parents and children of the minority communities as well as atheists and others who do not agree with this system of prayer such as agnostics, sceptisists, rationalists and others would find the imposition of this prayer constitutionally impermissible.”
According to Article 28 of the Constitution, “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”.
However, for this to be applicable in the case of KV prayers, it needs to be established if the prayer is being considered as “religious instruction”.
Prayers are normally compulsory in schools, and teachers are dedicated to ensure the morning assembly is carried out properly. A student refusing to participate is likely to be treated as a discipline problem, with teachers asking him to follow the “school rules”.
While private schools can afford greater flexibility in what they decide are their “rules”, in a government-run institution, is the emphasis on a morning prayer against the right to free speech?
The insistence on “joining one’s hands and closing one’s eyes”, all in the name of maintaining discipline, can end up teaching students that the Hindu way of praying is the default way to engage with God.
This is again religious instruction, which KVs supposedly do not impart.
All these are important points, which deserve greater scrutiny. The SC admitting the PIL, and asking the Centre to respond to it, is a welcome beginning. Hopefully, the debate will help define what is Indian and what is Hindu, and ensure schools do not teach students to conflate the two.
Also read: The mistake of compulsory standing up for national anthem