Sanatan Dharma Row: Sitharaman Says Udhayanidhi Should Discuss Taking Ministerial Responsibility

Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said on Saturday about the Sanatan Dharma controversy that DMK leader Udhayanidhi Stalin should speak understanding his role as a state minister. She said that even after seeing insults to “Lord Rama” in Tamil Nadu in 1971, Sanatan Dharma refrained from retaliating violently.

The finance minister stated in a statement to reporters in Chennai that it is incorrect for Udhayanidhi Stalin to anticipate that there won’t be a response to his remarks against the Sanatan. She questioned if minister Udhayanidhi, a member of the DMK and of the INDIA group, launched the discussion on Sanatan with an eye on the next election (the 2024 Lok Sabha election).

She was responding to a query on assertions made by Thol Thirumavalavan, head of the Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi, that the BJP was engaging in Sanatan debate in light of polls. “The debate was not started by us; it was started by you.” Everyone has the freedom to express themselves. She said that after becoming a minister, one should talk while keeping in mind their obligations.

It is improper to use phrases that might instigate violence or have violent undertones. Since the country established the Constitution after gaining independence, it has been important to refrain from using words that may incite violence.

The only thing that should be done is what is necessary to stop hatred. She reacted angrily when Udhayanidhi declared that his party would discuss Sanatan Dharma for a century. She remarked, “You may talk and only talk.” However, she said that no one should engage in violent behavior and that no one should talk in a way that would incite violence.

Sitharaman said that she grew up in a Tamil Nadu when a procession was brought out and a garland of sandals was thrown on a picture of Lord Rama. She said that she was still troubled by it and that she was hurt as she remembered the incident.

Sanatan Dharma, however, refrained from acting violently in response to even that. Sanatan Dharma is that. We didn’t follow the “eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” rule. If an other faith had been singled out in this way, “you know what would have happened.” She said that the Sanatan Dharma “described” atheists, perhaps implying that there was room for them within the larger context of the religion and the way of life it stood for. Non-believers in the Sanatan Dharma are thus nothing new.