Sanatan Dharma Clash: Udhayanidhi’s Subtle Reply to Pawan Kalyan’s Fiery Remarks

In a recent squabble between Udhayanidhi Stalin, the Deputy Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and Pawan Kalyan, Deputy Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh Sanatan Dharma came under discussion. The fallout of this heated debate erupted when Pawan Kalyan while addressing the public at Tirupati, issued a war cry against the forces which are undermining ortho-religious provisions alluding to Mr. Udayonidhi’s previous speeches where he compared Sanatan Dharma to malaria and dengue among other things.

The Pawan Kalyan milieu also includes the jan podiyal party. The polls came …. enthralling discourse because he wore saffron to indicate his respect for Hindu customs and rituals. He called himself a “Sanatani Hindu to the core.” Sanatan Dharma and its proponents, he emphasized, are so intrinsic to culture in India that it just cannot be ignored. Dimitri Datar to Chair. He has made it very clear without mentioning Udhayanidhi that any act to confiscate Sanatan to be acted upon by those same people would also be abolished. “You don’t destroy Sanatan Dharma,” said Kalyan after!, vowing And that means the one who will be free of such attempts will also be on a dying platform.

Kalyan was thus provoked by Udhayanidhi Stalin’s parable of Sanatan Dharma which should be combated because it is evil, something the former made very clear of in 2023.While giving an exception to the legalities of caste-san sadana, Stalin claimed that it glorifies expletives like untouchability, blood caste and exploitation, which are antithetical to the notions of equity and social justice. He made it clear that his remarks were directed at certain caste-based practices within the wider practice of Sanatan Dharma and were not meant against any particular religion or faith.

When asked about Pawan Kalyan’s comments, Udhayanidhi appeared to be entirely unphased as he simply said “Let’s wait and see,” which suggested that he was determined to avoid any further combat on this topic. He was not trying to resolve any question, but his answer anyway supports a DMK position towards Sanatan Dharma. This, as later problems with ‘Hindutva’ politics would make clear, is consistent with the ethos of the Dravidian movement that opposes caste and is conceived as democracy.

The political party, DMK which Udhayanidhi hails from has a long history of fighting casteism and stands for justice for the oppressed which was inherited from the teachings of Periyar, the father of dravidianism. After Pawan Kalyan had to make such a declaration, DMK leader Dr.Syed Hafeezullah spoke out about their party’s stance that it does not go after anyone’s religion or Hinduism specifically.

Neverthess, he continues to be firm on his stance and explains that he did not attack any religion but the pernicious social customs arising out of some elements of Sanatan Dharma.Though the debate on Sanatan Dharma appeared to be instituted, this much is clear that it has become a flashpoint in the political discourse in the southern part of India. Even as Pawan Kalyan passionately counters any criticism of Sanatan Dharma from certain sections of the electorate, Udhayanidhi’s stance towards social equality and justice is more in line with the ideals of the dravidian political ideology. It is most evident from the words of both these leaders that this was a pre-election tactic to consolidate the support of an electorate ahead of the polls and shame many more of this debate regarding religion and politics is over in India. There exists in both forms a singular deliberative space where the Stalin K. Udhayanidhi and the Pawan Kalyan are not clashing just for differences in religion but rather a wider battle for social and political equality and justice for all. In conventional terms, and as the elections for the lok sabha draw closer in 2024, the politics of Sanatan Dharma is a debate whose time has come particularly in the southern parts of the country.