We’ve all grown used to the one-sided secularism that has been imposed on us since 1947, the kind where members of the Hindu majority are expected to respect all other faiths, while no such reciprocity is demanded from the others. It’s a familiar pattern in Indian public life, and yet, it never fails to surprise when played out in the open with theatrical sincerity.
One such incident has recently surfaced from Tamil Nadu. A video has gone viral showing Mr. Thol. Thirumavalavan, the chief of Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK), a party currently allied with the ruling DMK, wiping off his tilak before posing for a photo. Moments later, he is seen donning a turban while posing with a different group. This odd display of selective identity signaling took place in Madurai a couple of days ago.
Please watch the video here
The video was reportedly shot during Thirumavalavan’s visit to participate in a human chain protest organized by the Madurai Federation for Religious Harmony. The protest was aimed at opposing the Murugan Maanadu, a spiritual conference of Murugan devotees organized by the Hindu Munnani.
The Murugan Maanadu, officially titled Muruga Bakthargalin Aanmeega Maanadu (Spiritual Conference of Devotees of Murugan), is a ten-day event scheduled to begin on June 22. But the lead-up to the event has already been mired in controversy. The Madurai police had earlier imposed restrictions on the gathering, citing law and order concerns. However, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court eventually cleared the way for the event to proceed.
At the heart of the tension lies the Thiruparankundram hill, one of the six sacred abodes (Arupadai Veedu) of Lord Murugan, revered by Tamil Hindus across the world. The hill is famous for the Thiruparankundram temple devoted to Subramanya Swami. The ancient temple is not just a spiritual symbol but a civilizational one.
Recently, the hill has become a flashpoint for religious tensions. Protests erupted after reports emerged that certain Islamist individuals allegedly consumed meat on the hill, an act considered nothing short of desecration in a sacred Hindu space. There have also been allegations of attempts to rename the hill as “Sikander Hill”, after the Sikander Dargah which is also located on the mountain, sparking further outrage among devotees and Hindu organizations.
What we’re witnessing is not just a clash over a religious site, but a deeper conflict over identity, reciprocity, and respect in a pluralistic society. As public figures wipe off tilaks and switch headgear for optics, the real question remains: How long will one-sided secularism continue to be passed off as inclusivity?
Featured Image Source: Polimer News
This news reportage starts with this observation:
“We’ve all grown used to the one-sided secularism that has been imposed on us since 1947, the kind where members of the Hindu majority are expected to respect all other faiths, while no such reciprocity is demanded from the others.”
I feel extremely concerned when even Hindu organizations and people resisting oppression from predatory ideology inspired organizations and people start using the terms used in context to taunt and demean the preyed upon victims.
The words secular, communal, rational, intolerant, etc. must be used on our terms, not those of predators (at least double quote them to indicate the intent).
This article use of the unquoted word “secular” not only shows the ingrainment of a defeatist and subdued mind, but it also indicates the resisting author’s implicit admission of the hopeless unorganized nature of Hindu masses who are instinctively acting in a self-serving manner.
In my perspective, Hindu warriors must not act like whining beseeched wretched Hindu masses who even if they are 80-90 percent majority against predatory Mohammadanism, use words like imposed, made to do etc., use words like secular, communal, monotheism, polytheism etc. with the semantics imposed (!) by predators.
Thanks.
Kshamasva but I think you are reading too much into words, quotes etc. I’ve noticed that you often feel HinduPost writers are plagued by ‘defeatist’ mentality which is far from the truth. We have to make our writing diluted at times for reasons which are difficult to put in words. Hope you wouldn’t be posting such accusing comments repeatedly.
Hi Maitri,
I very much appreciate your effort to read and react to my comments. I apologize for unconsciously creating an impression that HinduPost writers are plagued by ‘defeatist’ mentality. But certain idioms used by them are actually cultural and counter-productive in my view. I do believe though an overwhelming number of Hindus (which in common context include Jains, Buddhists and other dharma originating in our culture) chose to act like passive victims (tolerant Hindus), or Mohammadan appeasing sidekicks ( secular Hindus), and of the remaining resisting Hindus there are extremely few who discuss current events, and our historical contributions in a way that can be critically quoted in circles outside the loyal readership of Hindu publications.
If I have criticized usage of certain terms by HinduPost authors, that is always in reference to quoted examples. The sentence I quoted in my initial email is no exception. I still object to such semantics. But if you feel otherwise, I will stop.
Another example I personally find problematic is title like “Islamist X poses as Y”. To reference this with people outside Hindu publications becomes distracting because of the emphatic judgemental tone employed to discuss an unknown person. Saying “Muslim man, pretending to be a Hindu …” cannot be distracted reasonably by people who are sitting on fence or downright hostile.
I wish HinduPost well, and would like it to be a sober reference against widespread Islamist terror and victmization.
Hi Maitri,
I very much appreciate your effort to read and react to my comments. I apologize for unconsciously creating an impression that HinduPost writers are plagued by ‘defeatist’ mentality. But certain idioms used by them are actually cultural and counter-productive in my view. I do believe though an overwhelming number of Hindus (which in common context include Jains, Buddhists and other dharma originating in our culture) chose to act like passive victims (tolerant Hindus), or Mohammadan appeasing sidekicks ( secular Hindus), and of the remaining resisting Hindus there are extremely few who discuss current events, and our historical contributions in a way that can be critically quoted in circles outside the loyal readership of Hindu publications.
If I have criticized usage of certain terms by HinduPost authors, that is always in reference to quoted examples. The sentence I quoted in my initial email is no exception. I still object to such semantics. But if you feel otherwise, I will stop.
Another example I personally find problematic is title like “Islamist X poses as Y”. To reference this with people outside Hindu publications becomes distracting because of the emphatic judgemental tone employed to discuss an unknown person. Saying “Muslim man, pretending to be a Hindu …” cannot be distracted reasonably by people who are sitting on fence or downright hostile.
I wish HinduPost well, and would like it to be a sober reference against widespread Islamist terror and victmization.
Thanks again for allowing my comments.