'Caste Symbols' Ban Is A Smokescreen For Justice Chandru's Thinly Veiled
Assault On Hindu Traditions

ARAVINDAN NEELAKANDAN
<https://swarajyamag.com/author/58469/aravindan-neelakandan-editor>

Jun 21, 2024, 02:37 PM | Updated 02:54 PM IST
<https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fswarajyamag.com%2Fculture%2Fcaste-symbols-ban-is-a-smokescreen-for-justice-chandrus-thinly-veiled-assault-on-hindu-traditions>
<https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https%3A%2F%2Fswarajyamag.com%2Fculture%2Fcaste-symbols-ban-is-a-smokescreen-for-justice-chandrus-thinly-veiled-assault-on-hindu-traditions&text=%27Caste%20Symbols%27%20Ban%20Is%20A%20Smokescreen%20For%20Justice%20Chandru%27s%20Thinly%20Veiled%20Assault%20On%20Hindu%20Traditions>
<https://wa.me/?text=https%3A%2F%2Fswarajyamag.com%2Fculture%2Fcaste-symbols-ban-is-a-smokescreen-for-justice-chandrus-thinly-veiled-assault-on-hindu-traditions%20%27Caste%20Symbols%27%20Ban%20Is%20A%20Smokescreen%20For%20Justice%20Chandru%27s%20Thinly%20Veiled%20Assault%20On%20Hindu%20Traditions>
[image: Justice Chandru's recommendations are deeply troubling.]
Justice Chandru's recommendations are deeply troubling.
- Forehead marks, often misunderstood as caste indicators due to colonial
mislabelling, actually represent symbols of Hindu Dharma.

Justice K Chandru (retired) has submitted an exhaustive report to the Tamil
Nadu government to prevent violent caste clashes among students,
particularly school students.

The one-man committee's recommendation is to prohibit students from wearing
coloured wristbands, rings, or forehead marks (*tilak*), claiming that
these articles serve as caste identities. It has led to criticism.

There are two issues with the suggestion:

First, there are some wristbands or threads that signify caste identity. On
social media, numerous videos exist that feature teenagers displaying their
wrist threads, asserting their caste, and sometimes even using them to
demean others.

Second, there are wrist threads that are unrelated to caste but hold
religious significance. These threads symbolise spiritual penance or
religious vows and are worn by various Hindu sects in Tamil Nadu.

The fundamental rights of Hindu students should never be trampled upon due
to the incompetence of a Dravidianist government in discerning caste-marker
wristbands from religion-based sacred threads.

Forehead marks, often misunderstood as caste indicators due to colonial
mislabelling, actually represent symbols of Hindu Dharma.

The retired Madras High Court judge has mischievously mixed up two distinct
issues.

Chandru, known for his anti-Brahmin sentiments, made a casteist and
misogynistic remark against the Union finance minister not long ago.
Curiously, he now wears the cloak of social justice, masking his aversion
to Dharma as a pursuit of justice. This is deeply troubling.

In our educational landscape, institutions administered by non-Hindu
religious authorities enjoy minority status and are government-aided.
However, a disconcerting trend persists: an aversion to Hindu symbols in a
significant number of these institutions.

Periodic protests erupt when Hindu students' religious wristbands and the
sacred *tilak* are forcibly removed. Tragically, the media often
underreport incidents like these, such as the suicides of two girls, aged
12 and 14. The girls attended non-Hindu schools, and the authorities there
had removed these religious symbols from them the day before.

Undoubtedly, there are more unreported instances. The humiliation of Hindus
and the tragic consequences resulting from actions taken against them have
become normalised in the Dravidianist media model.

A government genuinely committed to eradicating caste-based animosity would
carefully examine the issue before considering the imposition of a blanket
ban on sacred wrist threads. It would identify particular threads that are
associated with caste identities.

However, Justice Chandru, driven more by his biases against and disdain for
Hindu Dharma than a genuine interest in social justice, seized this
opportunity to take aim at Hindus.

A genuine effort at eradicating caste-based animosities would also look at
the way castes are stereotyped and abused in Tamil movies — how certain
castes and even violence are glorified, for instance.

Films, being a great influencer as they are readily available to students
on their mobile phones, should be investigated for the role they play. For
example, the 2012 film *Sundarapandian* rationalised honour killings. It
glorified violence by a particular community against a Telugu-speaking
minority community, and everyone knew the caste in question.

The film is available on Sun NXT, a popular over-the-top online streaming
service run by a company close to the first dynasty of Dravida Munnetra
Kazhagam (DMK).

In another instance, a popular comedy in which actor Parthiban's character
tells comedy actor Vadivelu's character to move away from him after
learning that the latter was a sanitary worker in the Gulf, openly with a
perverse sense of humour, advocates untouchability.

Such instances could be multiplied. However, Justice Chandru would not like
to upset the industry that plays a major role in the Dravidianist model.

In their response to the Dravidianist assault, Hindu organisations must
exercise caution. First and foremost, they should disentangle caste from
Dharma. The prevailing notion that caste equates to Dharma or serves as
social capital has inadvertently harmed Hindu society in Tamil Nadu.

Focusing solely on preserving caste hierarchy within their echo chambers
blinds the Hindu movement to broader societal shifts and harms Hindu
society.

Hindus and Hindu organisations should urge the government to differentiate
between religious wrist threads (which, incidentally, even Rahul ‘Gandhi’
wears) and caste threads.

It is in the interest of, and in the spirit of, Sanatana Dharma to clearly
and uncompromisingly disassociate caste from Dharma.

Simultaneously, the ban on the *tilak* should be unequivocally condemned.

Two years ago, a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) scholar from Jawaharlal Nehru
University (JNU) said a child prodigy who won a chess championship was
wearing a "tilak a marker of Hindu religion and top caste," and asked
whether tilak should be "banned in public spaces."

This perplexing assertion, while not surprising, revealed both cultural
illiteracy and latent animosity towards Hindu culture.

The photo of a child prodigy winning a Chess championship went viral. The
kid was wearing a tilak a marker of Hindu religion and top caste. What
message did it give? Why do certain people wear tilak or keep a choti which
are visible? Should these be banned in public spaces?
— Dr. Sanjukta Basu, M.A., LLB., PhD (@sanjukta) February 23, 2022
<https://twitter.com/sanjukta/status/1496392596842848258?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw>

Now Justice Chandru echoes a similar sentiment. He, too, seems to harbour
disdain for Hindu traditions and presents that pathology as a pathway to
social harmony.

Had he engaged with the creators of *Jai Bhim*, a film purportedly based on
an incident involving him, and urged them to remove the caste-suggestive
calendar, his recommendations might have carried a semblance of
genuineness. Instead, what we witness is prejudice and animosity
masquerading as a means to achieve social harmony.

In this complex landscape of cultural discourse, it becomes crucial to
discern between genuine critique and thinly veiled hatred.

Let us continue to engage thoughtfully, seeking understanding rather than
perpetuating division.

Unity beyond caste: To safeguard Hinduism, spiritual leaders must actively
disentangle caste from Dharma and offer healing for the wounds caused by
caste discrimination.

Justice and harmony: True social harmony cannot be built on injustice.
Rather than trampling the rights of Hindu students, let us seek paths that
promote justice and understanding.   KR IRS  22624

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoqRwixW%3DC9E0bT67cofP4LqX6J5LvKGStOfVVWbyO889w%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to