Row over Sanatana Dharma: More a Political Slugfest than a Religious Crusade

The Sanatana Dharma controversy kicked up in Kerala has many shades, not just a religious angle as construed by vested interests. It has a wider political angle intrinsically associated with rival parties. It was equally true with a similar row in Tamil Nadu last year. It might flare up again, and again, to boost the fortunes of political parties. Hence, an analysis of the issue is not time-barred.

The spark for the latest controversy was lit by none other than Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan with his comments on Sree Narayana Guru, one of the greatest social reformers of India in the 19th and 20th Centuries. Speaking at the 92nd Sivagiri pilgrimage (Sivagiri is the place where the Guru breathed his last and his samadhi exists), Vijayan highlighted the social reformer’s opposition to Sanatana Dharma, an observation that made the blood of the Hindutva forces boil.

For the BJP, which has Hindutva forces as its foot soldiers, nothing was more provocative than casting aspersions on Sanatana Dharma. Several party leaders jumped into the fray attacking Vijayan for propounding ‘despicable’ views on Sanatana Dharma. They claim that Sree Narayana Guru was a proponent of Sanatana Dharma, and stating the opposite is an injustice to him.

There are two aspects to this raging controversy: First, the religious view related to Sanatana Dharma. Second, the BJP’s attempt to appropriate the Guru as an icon of Sanatana Dharma and thereby win the support of the powerful Ezhava community to which he belonged.

On equal measure, the CPI (M) wants to retain the support of the community which has hither to been one of its main vote banks. Any erosion in their support would hit the very existence of the party in the State.

Categorised as Other Backward Classes (OBCs), Ezhavas constitute around 23 per cent of the State population. Many of them have been hardcore supporters of the CPI(M) for decades; on the other hand, the BJP, which has been trying to make its mark more visible in the State by winning a few seats in the Assembly and the Parliament, has been unable to make any headway as they have little support among Muslims, Christians and OBCs who constitute about 65 to 70 per cent of the population.

 A reading of the recent election results is vital to understanding the present fight for a larger slice of the Ezhava community cake. The CPI (M) had a vote share of 25.38 % in the last Assembly election in 2021 which was lower by 1.14 % compared to the previous Assembly election. The BJP got a vote share of 11.30 % which was 0.77 % more than its previous election tally. The Lok Sabha election results of 2024 are more revealing. Though the CPI(M) vote share remained at around 25 %, the BJP’s share saw an impressive rise. It reached 16.68%, a big leap of 3.68 per cent compared to the previous general elections.

The results are a firm indicator that the BJP has apparently made some inroads into the Ezhava community, and to a limited extent into the Christian community as the increased votes could have hardly come from the Muslim community. At the same time, the CPI(M) has realised that the sand could slowly slip from under its feet if it couldn’t hold on to the Ezhavas. “I had been an ardent supporter of the Communist party till recently. I am now disillusioned with them as they have deviated from the communist principles of simple living and working for the common people. It has now become a party out to amass wealth. Moreover, Modiji is doing a good job,” these words of Krishnan, a mason, who belongs to Ezhava community, are a clear expression of which way the wind is blowing.

Here comes the tussle for Ezhava votes. And the best way to reach the hearts of the community members is through the Guru who is not only their icon but a revered social reformist for all. The BJP knows well that by linking Sree Narayana Guru to

Sanatana Dharma, a term mostly associated with Hinduism, the party can retain its Hindutva vote bank, which has always been its backbone, apart from making inroads into an additional strong community. Hence, several BJP leaders jumped into the fray to lambast

Vijayan for ‘insulting’ Sanatana Dharma and the Guru. But Vijayan countered it by equating Sanatana Dharma to the principles of Varnashrama which is the bedrock of Hinduism and caste divisions in the society. In his opinion, the bid to portray the Guru as a champion of Sanatana Dharma is an affront to him as he was in the forefront of a movement to eradicate castes and their oppressive ways. In other words, Sree Narayana Guru and Sanatana Dharma have nothing in common.

One should not forget that Kerala society was entrenched in the vicious caste system and its malicious ways. When Gandhiji came to Vaikom Mana (a Brahmin household) in Kerala to discuss the Dalits’ demand for the right to access the public roads around the Vaikom temple, he was asked to sit outside on a bench in the courtyard and hold talks. The reason: Gandhiji belonged to the Vaisya community, hence barred from entering a Brahmanical household. (It is another matter that the same ‘Mana’ has now become the office of the toddy tappers’ union affiliated to All India Trade Union Congress, a wing of the Communist Party of India).

The reform movement ignited by the Guru continues to inspire his followers in many ways. The Sivagiri Madhom president Swamy Sachithananda’s recent remarks that the ‘regressive’ practice of making men remove their shirts before entering temples should end is a case in point. It is a clear indication that the Guru’s followers do not want to walk the path the orthodox Hindus tread on. This reinforces the fact that Sree Narayana Guru too was opposed to the views of orthodox Hinduism, its rituals and traditions. The Chief Minister quickly came out in support of Swamy’s views, buttressing the fact that the ruling party in the State wants to be seen in the good books of the Ezhava community and its leaders.

It is equally significant to look at the Sanatana Dharma controversy in Tamil Nadu in 2023 when Chief Minister M. K. Stalin’s son Udhayanidhi Stalin compared the Sanatana Dharma to ‘dengue’ and ‘malaria’ and called for its eradication. The BJP had, then also, mounted an unprecedented attack on DMK for belittling the Hindu religion.

However, Udhayanidhi stuck to his guns. His observation was not against Hindu religion but orthodox Hinduism that is identified with Sanatana Dharma, which he says is ‘against social justice and equality.’ Hence, an analysis of Sanatana Dharma is important to throw more light on the issue. According to Late D.N. Jha, a historian of ancient and medieval India and former Delhi University professor, Sanatana Dharma can be translated in various ways: ‘eternal religion’, eternal law’, `eternal law of life’ etc. Even when Bhagwat Gita uses the term, it means ‘venerable norms for families’ and describes ‘Krishna as the protector of the established norms. In the Manu’s law book Sanatana Dharma stands for established ‘customs and statues of the countries, castes and families. In puranas too, the term is used to mean virtues. For example, in Matsyapurana, Sanatana Dharma is rooted in ‘virtues like absence of greed and attachment, practise of celibacy, forgiveness, etc.’

However, since the late 19th century, Sanatana Dharma has come to be stereotyped as a venerable, eternal, all-encompassing, and inclusive religion. In other words, it was identified with Hinduism as distinct from other religions. Hindu orthodoxy was a reaction to the reform movements being carried out by Brahmo Samaj and Arya Samaj. This, Dr. Jha believes, was a political necessity of the period.

Julius Lipner, a professor of Hinduism and Comparative Study of Religion at the University of Cambridge, noted: “Many Hindus call themselves Sanatanists, that is, those who follow the eternal dharma. But…it is far from clear what this eternal dharma is.”

Historian John Zavos in his 2001 article, ‘Defending Hindu Tradition: Sanatana Dharma as a Symbol of Orthodoxy in Colonial India’ noted that the term gained popularity in the late 19th century with the emergence of various sabhas designed to promote Sanatana Dharma.

Hence, the problem lies in using Sanatana Dharma as a synonym for orthodox Hinduism which is rooted in the Varnashrama system. Social reformers like Sree Narayana Guru had been uncompromising critics of caste-ridden Hinduism. He believed in the unity of all beings in one God, and that all people are equal and belong to one caste, the caste of humankind. 

The Guru’s challenge to the Brahmanical order was demonstrated in his act of taking a stone from a river and consecrating it as a Shiva idol. This was a radical violation of Hindu orthodoxy as it broke the monopoly of priesthood and the age-old tradition of only Brahmins installing idols. 

It is nothing but a travesty of truth to identify Sree Narayana Guru as a symbol of Sanatana Dharma which is associated with orthodox Hinduism. Sadly, one of the most acclaimed social reformers has been caught in the rival parties’ bid to garner votes.