The dangerous pattern of mocking Sanatan and Hindu faith

Ajay Kumar, Lucknow (UP)

The incident dates back to May 28, 1996. Then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee was addressing the Lok Sabha while seeking a vote of confidence for his government. During that speech, he warned the Congress and other opposition parties over the Ram Temple/Ayodhya issue, saying, “You may fight the BJP, but do not fight Lord Ram.” During the debate, a voice was heard from the back benches reportedly saying, “If you fight Ram, you will be finished.” Although this remark has circulated widely over the years, the identity of the person who made it has never been conclusively established. Nevertheless, many political observers argue that the Congress, after repeatedly taking positions perceived as being against Lord Ram, has witnessed one of the weakest phases in its political history. At different times, the party questioned the historical existence of Lord Ram, made controversial submissions regarding the Ram Setu, and several of its senior leaders, including prime ministers, were often criticized for avoiding visits to the Ram Temple in Ayodhya. Even when they visited Ayodhya, they were accused by critics of not offering prayers at the shrine. According to its detractors, the same pattern continues today. Under the pretext of the alleged donation theft at the Ram Temple, the Congress and the Samajwadi Party have once again crossed all limits by, in their critics’ view, undermining Sanatan traditions and hurting the religious sentiments of Hindus.

The alleged irregularities involving offerings and donations made by devotees at the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Temple in Ayodhya have become a major political issue in the country. While the temple trust and the local police are conducting a detailed investigation, and a Special Investigation Team (SIT) has been constituted to examine the role of suspected employees and volunteers, many devotees of Sanatan Dharma and members of the saint community have expressed strong resentment that, even before the investigation reaches its conclusion, attempts are being made to place the entire saintly tradition and the Sanatan faith under suspicion. Respected saints of Ayodhya have clearly stated that if any employee or individual associated with the temple is found guilty of wrongdoing, he should face the strictest possible punishment. However, using the alleged misconduct of a few individuals to malign India’s thousands-of-years-old saintly tradition and the saffron robes worn by ascetics for political purposes, they argue, is completely unjustified.

The scenes witnessed during the Monsoon Session of Parliament deeply shocked and angered many followers of Sanatan Dharma across the country. At the Makar Dwar entrance of the Parliament complex, Independent MP Pappu Yadav from Purnia was dressed in saffron robes, given a tilak on his forehead, and made to sit holding a donation box in the attire of a Hindu saint. Opposition leaders then staged what they described as a political skit in which the person dressed as a saint was shown putting money from the donation box into his pocket before running away with it. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, Samajwadi Party MP Dimple Yadav, SP MP from Ayodhya (Faizabad) Awadhesh Prasad, along with several other leaders and workers of the INDIA alliance, participated in the demonstration. Rahul Gandhi symbolically acted as a donor, after which leaders of the Samajwadi Party and other opposition members applauded and raised slogans during the performance.

The controversy intensified further when Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav publicly supported the protest through a post on X (formerly Twitter). His endorsement triggered sharp reactions from akharas, religious scholars, and citizens across the country. Many argued that in a democracy there are numerous constitutional and dignified ways to register political protest. However, using the premises of India’s highest legislative institution to stage a performance portraying saffron-clad saints as thieves amounted, in their opinion, to a serious violation of parliamentary decorum. Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla also expressed his strong displeasure over the use of disguises and theatrical performances inside the Parliament complex, stating that Parliament exists for discussing national policies and public issues not for staging such spectacles. Several legal experts and religious leaders have argued that insulting religious symbols, saffron robes, and the attire of Hindu saints in a manner that hurts the sentiments of millions of Sanatan followers warrants strict legal scrutiny. Some have even suggested that the Supreme Court should take suo motu cognizance of such incidents to discourage the political misuse of religious faith in the future.

According to critics, this is far from the first instance in which sections of the opposition have attempted to target Sanatan Dharma and its traditions through political rhetoric. They point to a series of controversies over the past several years that they believe have hurt the sentiments of the Hindu majority. These include the use of the term “Saffron Terror”; controversial remarks by Swami Prasad Maurya regarding verses from the Ramcharitmanas and reports of copies of the text being burned; and DMK leader Udhayanidhi Stalin’s comparison of Sanatan Dharma to diseases such as malaria, dengue, and COVID-19 while calling for its eradication. Critics also cite what they describe as the silence or indirect support of the Congress and other opposition allies in response to such remarks as evidence of their ideological hostility toward Sanatan traditions. They further recall the affidavit submitted before the Supreme Court questioning the historicity of Lord Ram and argue that the opposition’s decision to boycott the consecration ceremony of the Ram Temple by dismissing it as merely an electoral issue reflects a consistent pattern of antagonism toward Sanatan symbols.

Another aspect of the recent parliamentary protest that has drawn public attention is the participation of non-Hindu and Muslim political leaders in demonstrations involving Hindu religious symbols. Critics argue that whenever issues concerning the symbols, attire, or beliefs of other religious communities arise, opposition parties frequently advocate tolerance, communal harmony, and religious sensitivity. However, when it comes to saffron robes, Hindu saints, or the Ram Temple, the same leaders are accused of showing little hesitation in publicly ridiculing these symbols, sometimes alongside leaders from other faiths. The participation of non-Hindu leaders in such performances, critics contend, has deepened mistrust among sections of Hindu society. They argue that this apparent double standard not only weakens India’s social fabric but also raises an important question: has secularism come to mean respecting every faith except the beliefs and traditions of the Hindu majority?

Following the incident, the chief priest of Ayodhya, representatives of the Akhil Bharatiya Akhara Parishad, and prominent saints from Kashi and Mathura unanimously stated that if any financial irregularity has indeed taken place in the management of donations at the Ram Temple, it must be investigated impartially, and every guilty individual regardless of status or influence should be prosecuted and sent to prison. The saint community itself, they emphasized, supports transparency and accountability. However, they strongly objected to what they described as an attempt to use the alleged incident to portray the entire saintly tradition as corrupt, dishonest, and involved in theft. The saffron robes, they argue, have symbolized sacrifice, character, wisdom, and the message of universal brotherhood throughout India’s civilizational history. Presenting them at the main entrance of Parliament as a symbol of theft, they believe, amounts to a direct assault on India’s cultural and spiritual heritage. Today, many followers of Sanatan Dharma are asking the opposition a direct question: How long will political hostility continue to manifest itself through attacks on the cultural and spiritual soul of India?

(The writer is a senior journalist from Lucknow and can be reached at Mob: 9335566111)