After M K Stalin’s son Udhaynidhi Stalin’s remark on Sanatam Dharma, the entire troupe of BJP have come together against him. The self-proclaimed saints and other notable personalities too have objected to Stalin’s comments. The issue is being discussed for the last two days as if the country has no other concerns to pay attention to. However, that is BJP’s speciality. The saffron party will divert the focus from real issues at hand and will target those whose statements do not align with their ideology.
There have been remarks made in the past, similar to Udhayanidhi’s but they were made in different contexts. Those remarks questioned Sanatan Dharma and certain practices attached to it. Ofcourse, there are issues within Sanatan Dharma and the sections of society which have faced the brunt of it speak against them every now and then. However, these remarks are often neglected and not given any prominence. Therefore, the havoc wreaked over Udhayanidhi’s statement does not make sense. He likened Sanatan Dharma to dengue and malaria and said that instead of just opposing it, it should be eradicated.
Udhaynidihi’s comparison of Sanatan Dharma to malaria and dengue is what drew the ire from the BJP. Therefore, one must take into consideration the entire statement of the DMK leader and also the context behind it. Udhayanidhi is Minister for Sports in Tamil Nadu’s cabinet and was invited to ‘Sanatana Abolition Conclave’, a discursive programme, as a speaker. There were leaders from a few other parties as well and it was clear what sort of discussion will be held in the programme. Interestingly, nobody objected to organising such a programme. If Udhaynidhi’s statements had offended the respective leaders then they should not have been fine with organising such a programme in the first place. That did not happen and so, it seems that the ruling party’s dissent is only politically-driven.
According to Udhaynidhi, there are practices in Sanatan Dharma which are discriminatory in nature. Since these practices have become dated they should be eradicated instead of just opposing them. This is his personal opinion and not everyone has to agree with it. Those who do not agree with him should pay no heed to it. There are practices in Sanatan Dharma such as casteism and superstitions which have been historically opposed by many prominent leaders in the past. Babasaheb Ambedkar and Mahatma Phule were such leaders who had faced repercussions of these practices which is why they had protested against it. The community which Ambedkar belonged to were not allowed to use the water of public tanks and so, Chavdar Tale Satyagraha happened.
There have been countless social reformers in the neighboring state of Maharahstra who relentlessly opposed and protested against the discriminatory practices. A movement to eliminate superstitious beliefs is still ongoing. In Udhaynidhi’s statement, the BJP leaders have found a hill to die on.
The leaders who otherwise never raise their voices regarding the issues which matter, have questioned Sonia and Rahul Gandhi’s silence on Udhaynidhi’s remarks. Is it mandatory for all the leaders to react to someone’s comments made during a seminar? Infact, one should prefer to stay silent if their response is only going to escalate the situation. However, that is precisely what the ruling party wants. They encourage issues with no significant importance so that the public’s attention can be diverted from the burning ones. This disturbs the social fabric of the entire country and creates a divide. On the other hand, Udhaynidhi should have also thought about not making statements which could have been misinterpreted and used as a medium to hurt the nation’s harmony. Mahabharat would have never happened if Draupadi had kept quiet for that one moment when she mocked Duryodhana saying “The son of blind is also blind.” Therefore, everyone needs to think hard before making public statements.
