Chennai: A vociferous verbal offensive from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), an FIR for “outraging religious feelings”, even a Rs 10 crore reward on his head — Tamil Nadu minister Udhayanidhi Stalin’s remarks on Sanatana Dharma have ignited a national furore over the past few days. But what they haven’t done is make an impact in his home state.
That’s because Udhayanidhi was just reiterating what Dravidian parties have been saying for more than 70 years, say political analysts.
According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, the term Sanatana Dharma denotes the ‘eternal’ or absolute set of duties or religiously ordained practices incumbent upon all Hindus, regardless of class, caste, or sect.
On Saturday, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader was speaking at an event called the ‘Sanatana Abolition Conclave’, organised by the Tamil Nadu Progressive Writers’ Forum. Praising the organisers for the name of the event, Udhayanidhi said, “There are certain things we have to eradicate and not merely oppose. Like mosquitoes, dengue, COVID-19 and malaria require eradication, not mere opposition, so does Sanatana.”
The following day, while the issue snowballed into a major controversy outside the state, most Tamil newspapers simply mentioned the minister’s remarks in their inside pages. And while the BJP in Tamil Nadu was severe in its censure of the CM’s son, the criticism from its Dravidian ally, the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), was tepid in comparison; it merely slammed Udhayanidhi’s words as being “part of the DMK’s political strategy”.
Why the difference? According to Priyan Srinivasan, a Chennai-based political analyst, “Udhayanidhi’s remark is not new for the people of Tamil Nadu, but the BJP is trying to project it (DMK) as anti-Hindu to tag the INDIA bloc as anti-Hindu. Dravidian parties have always opposed Sanatana Dharma, stating that it is against social justice and equality.”
Dravidian ideology calls for the dismantling of Brahminical authority, the eradication of the caste system, the revitalisation of the Dravidian languages (Telugu, Kannada, Malayalam and Tamil), social reform and equality for women.
The harbinger of the Dravidian Movement, which grew to prominence in Tamil Nadu between 1925 and 1950, was Periyar or E.V. Ramasamy Naicker, a staunch atheist.
The DMK is an offshoot of the Dravidar Kazhagam, which Periyar had formed. The party’s website states that its ideology is to “establish a non-dominant society, and carry out reform work based on rationality to promote the revival of Dravidian ideology”.
The Dravidian Movement has dominated Tamil Nadu’s political landscape since 1967, when the DMK, then under C.N. Annadurai — a one-time Periyar protégé before the two fell out — stormed to power. The AIADMK, the other pole of Tamil Nadu politics, also has its roots in the movement.
Speaking to ThePrint, DMK leaders highlighted some of the reforms the party has brought in over the years, including legalising “self-respect” marriages — which don’t require the presence of a priest — the abolition of hereditary priesthood, the induction of priests from all castes, more inclusive temple trustee boards and succession rights for women.
Also Read: Take pride in Tamil, oppose Hindi — how Dravidian ideals are influencing young voters in TN
Tamil Nadu ‘voting for atheist leaders’ for decades
Udhayanidhi’s comments had been in the making as a response to Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi’s defence of Sanatana Dharma, say political analysts.
Ravi has spoken on the subject on on multiple occasions. In January this year, he said that Sanatana Dharma had originated in Tamil Nadu and spread across the world. Then in May, in an interview with a media house, he termed the DMK-led Tamil Nadu government’s Dravidian model “a political slogan, a desperate bid to sustain an expired ideology”.
In June, the governor, on the occasion of the 200th birth anniversary of Ramalinga Swamigal (Vallalar, a major Tamil poet of the 19th Century), called him the “brightest sun of Sanatana Dharma”.
A.S. Panneerselvan, political analyst and fellow at Chennai’s Roja Muthiah Research Library, told ThePrint, “A space was created to confront the remarks of the governor. If a governor can depend on an ideology, a minister has a much bigger right to express his view. Confronting Sanatana Dharma is an old Tamil tradition.”
Political analysts say Tamil Nadu — which reportedly has the greatest number of temples of any Indian state — has been voting for atheist leaders for the last 60-70 years, and that people in the state have confined faith to their private space.
They also emphasise that the state saw anti-Sanatana and anti-caste sentiments long before Periyar’s movement.
“This is going to be the 200th year of Vallalar. Vallalar has written enough material saying that spiritual position is different from religious bigotry. Therefore, in Tamil Nadu, there is a very clear understanding (about this),” said Panneerselvan.
Vallalar, in the last years of his life, had preached against blind faith, rituals and caste, and had even called them “garbage”.
“The idea here is universal equality and spirituality without hate. That is why the issue (Udhayanidhi’s remarks) has not created much furore here, because it is part of the commonsensical understanding of the state, and it is not getting sucked into the national manipulation,” added Panneerselvan.
‘We are not opposed to God’
It was in 1925 that Periyar started the self-respect (Dravidian) movement. In 1937, he became the head of the Justice Party, and renamed it the Dravida Kazhagam in 1944.
While Periyar refused to enter into electoral politics, a section of the Dravida Kazhagam under the leadership of Annadurai split from the parent party in 1949 to form the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, with the aim of contesting polls.
While the influence of Periyar’s thought on the party has remained clear to this day, Annadurai showed a more tolerant approach towards religion.
In late 1952, soon after India’s first general elections, the DMK released the political film Parasakthi, which was scripted by the late M. Karunanidhi, CM Stalin’s father, former Tamil Nadu CM and long-time leader of the Dravidian Movement.
The key argument in the film, Panneerselvan told ThePrint, was that “we are not opposed to temples per se, but we do not want temples to become the den for nefarious activities”.
Further, in 1953, when Periyar called for protests to break the idols of Vinayagar (Ganesha), Annadurai distanced his party from the event and famously said: “I would neither break the Ganesha idol nor the coconut (meaning he won’t make a religious offering).”
Later, Annadurai also coined the DMK’s stand on God: “Ondre Kulam Oruvane Deivam (there is one race and one God).”
Karunanidhi, who took over the reins of the DMK after Annadurai’s death, remained an atheist, but never imposed his views on others, his son Stalin had told The Hindu in an interview in 2018.
“He (Karunanidhi) was not against faith in God or in religion. Why should he desilt the Kapaleeswarar temple tank if he was against the faith? Would he have come forward to repair a portion of the Tiruvannamalai temple when it collapsed? Would he have taken efforts to run the Tiruvarur temple car in 1969 which remained idle for 20 years and allowed Mannai Narayanansamy, who was a minister in his cabinet, to participate in it?” Stalin was quoted as saying.
Stalin has brought further changes to the DMK’s approach towards religious belief and practice. In 2018, in his first speech as head of the party at its general council meeting, he reportedly asserted that “we are not opposed to God”.
Another Tamil Nadu political party that has its roots Annadurai’s teachings is the All India Anna Dravida Kazhagam (AIADMK), which was formed by actor-turned-politician M.G. Ramachandran (MGR) in 1972 with a breakaway faction of the DMK.
The AIADMK, today the main opposition party in the state, was, however, different with regard to its spiritual stand from its inception, say political analysts.
“MGR never indulged in Dravidian politics or anti-Hindu politics because he used to go to Kollur Mookambika temple (in Karnataka). He was an ardent devotee and was actually a follower of equanimity or equality. He had won the hearts of minorities, Scheduled Castes and Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Most Backward Classes,” political analyst and author J.V.C. Sreeram told ThePrint.
He added that (the late Tamil Nadu CM and AIADMK leader) J. Jayalalithaa had followed MGR’s legacy.
Public religiosity & temple policy
There’s a visible change in the DMK today when it comes to public religiosity. Many leaders openly display their beliefs and symbols, in stark contrast to the party’s early days.
Chief Minister M.K. Stalin’s wife, Durga, is often spotted frequenting temples in the state. Similarly, Palanivel Thiaga Rajan, a minister in Stalin’s cabinet, has been seen sporting vermillion on his forehead and a sacred thread on his wrist.
Analyst Priyan said it was a misconception to think that everyone in the DMK was an atheist, adding that “Annadurai had himself relaxed the Periyar stand for vote-bank politics”.
The Stalin government has also put an emphasis on the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) department, which administers temples in the state.
Earlier this month, the department was reported to have informed the Madras High Court that it had retrieved Rs 5,132.82 crore worth of encroached land (5,513.64 acres) in the period from 7 May, 2021, (the time the DMK assumed power in Tamil Nadu) till 20 August, 2023.
The department has also made a push to ensure that documents relating to temples and their assets are uploaded online. “This will ensure transparency and also ensure that there is no mismanagement in the future as everything is digitised and on record,” a senior HR&CE official told ThePrint.
DMK’s ‘political strategy’
Priyan also spoke of the DMK’s need to ward off the threat of the BJP, which is in power at the Centre and has been trying to find a foothold in Tamil Nadu.
“The DMK is not an atheist party but also has theists in it. Unlike the Karunanidhi era, Stalin is in a tougher period. During the Kalaignar’s period, there was no BJP in the state, but now even if the BJP is not prominent in the state, the national party is (speaking) from the Capital against the Sanatana Dharma remarks,” said Priyan.
While the BJP strongly condemned Udhayanidhi’s remarks on Sanatana Dharma, the party’s senior ally in Tamil Nadu, the AIADMK, which has won a majority seven times in the state, alleged that the anti-Sanatana Dharma stand of the DMK was a “political strategy”.
Former AIADMK MP Dr J. Jayavardhan said, “The narrative set by the DMK and its allies is a clear propaganda against Hinduism. They have a way in which they target Sanatana Dharma, and claim to be the forces which will stop Sanatana Dharma.”
He added that “while the rest of the country did not see any difference between Hinduism and Sanatana Dharma, the DMK, when questioned, hid behind its storyline that they only oppose Sanatana Dharma and not Hinduism”.
Talking about the DMK’s strategy, Sreeram argued that the party was likely trying to appease minority groups through “Sanatana Dharma bashing”.
“The strategy has been to simply divide voters on caste lines and unite the minority vote by making anti-Hindu remarks,” said Sreeram, adding that little has been done by the Dravidian parties to change the caste-based voting system prevalent in the state.
“25 to 30 per cent of votes in Tamil Nadu are caste-based, and although the Dravidian parties deny it, they are dependent on it,” Sreeram said.
(Edited by Nida Fatima Siddiqui)
Also Read: Periyar’s legacy serves as a reminder for Dravidian parties to be caste conscious