TL;DR: Nandamuri Taraka Rama Rao (NTR), former Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, saved the Tirumala Temple from private control by establishing the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) and ending the exploitation by hereditary priests. This article explores the historical significance of NTR’s reforms, contrasting it with the recent moves by actor-politician Pawan Kalyan to revive the Sanatana Dharma through a Protection Board. We delve deep into how Sanatana Dharma has perpetuated casteism, untouchability, and oppression against women, all under the guise of "tradition." While opposing Sanatana Dharma doesn’t mean opposing Hinduism or Brahmins, it means challenging those trying to misuse faith for control over society. Let’s understand the difference between Hinduism as a pluralistic way of life and Sanatana Dharma as a tool for social control.
NTR’s Legacy: Saving Tirumala Temple from Private Control 🙏🏛️
Nandamuri Taraka Rama Rao (NTR), former Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh and one of Tollywood’s biggest stars, left an indelible mark on the cultural and religious landscape of India, especially with his bold reforms to protect the Tirumala Venkateswara Temple 🛕 from exploitation by hereditary pujari (priest) families.
Before NTR’s intervention, the temple, which is one of the richest in the world 🌍, was controlled largely by a few powerful priestly families who had inherited the management of the temple. These families not only managed the day-to-day religious activities but also controlled the vast wealth that the temple generated 💰. Much of this wealth was either misused or pocketed by the pujari families, leaving very little for the upkeep of the temple or for the devotees.
NTR recognized that this was not only a religious issue but also a social justice problem. The wealth of the temple should have been used for public welfare, charity, and temple maintenance rather than filling the coffers of a select few. In 1987, NTR restructured the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) Trust Board to take control of the temple administration and end the monopoly of these families.
This was no easy feat. The priestly families had deep-rooted influence, and there was strong resistance to NTR’s reforms. But NTR, drawing on his popularity as an actor and his moral authority as a political leader, was able to overcome these obstacles and set up the TTD, which remains a transparent and successful management body today.
NTR didn’t stop there. His films also served as platforms to highlight the corruption within temple administrations and the exploitation of devotees by corrupt priests. In films like Dana Veera Sura Karna, NTR played characters that exposed the hypocrisy and greed of those who manipulated religion for personal gain. His efforts, both on-screen and off-screen, were instrumental in ending the exploitation at Tirumala and setting an example for other temple administrations across India.
Pawan Kalyan’s Sanatana Dharma Protection Board: A Step Backwards? ⚠️
Fast forward to today, and we see a very different approach being proposed by another actor-turned-politician: Pawan Kalyan. The current Deputy Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, Pawan Kalyan, has called for the establishment of a Sanatana Dharma Protection Board 🕉️, which he claims will help protect Hindu traditions. However, many see this move as an attempt to undo the progress that NTR made by reforming temple management.
What Pawan Kalyan is proposing is, in many ways, a return to the Brahminical hierarchy that NTR fought so hard to dismantle. The Sanatana Dharma Protection Board is not about preserving Hinduism as a pluralistic, inclusive way of life, but about promoting a narrow, orthodox version of Hinduism that serves the interests of a select few.
Pawan Kalyan’s move is dangerous because it blurs the line between faith and politics. Instead of advocating for secular governance and keeping religion out of public administration, he is promoting a religious agenda that could divide communities and reinforce caste-based hierarchies.
What Is Sanatana Dharma, and Why Is It Problematic? 🧐
Before we dive deeper into the criticisms of Sanatana Dharma, it’s essential to understand what it is. The term "Sanatana Dharma" is often used to refer to the eternal duty or natural law of Hinduism. However, in practice, Sanatana Dharma has been used to justify the caste system, gender discrimination, and untouchability.
1. Promoting the Caste System 📜
One of the biggest criticisms of Sanatana Dharma is that it has historically been used to reinforce the caste system 🏠. According to Hindu texts like the Manusmriti, society is divided into four main castes: Brahmins (priests), Kshatriyas (warriors), Vaishyas (traders), and Shudras (laborers). Below these castes are the Dalits, who were once considered "untouchable."
The caste system is a rigid social hierarchy that limits social mobility and perpetuates inequality. Sanatana Dharma has been used to argue that this system is divinely ordained and that everyone should remain in the caste they are born into. This has led to the oppression of lower castes, especially Dalits, who have been denied basic human rights for centuries.
In contrast, Hinduism as a broader spiritual tradition is not inherently tied to the caste system. Bhakti movements and reformist leaders like Kabir, Basava, and Mahatma Gandhi have challenged the caste system, advocating for equality and social justice within the framework of Hinduism.
2. Untouchability ✋
Another major criticism of Sanatana Dharma is its role in perpetuating untouchability. Under the caste system, Dalits were treated as "impure" and were not allowed to interact with people from higher castes. They were forced to do the most menial jobs, such as manual scavenging, and were excluded from religious and social life.
Untouchability is not just a relic of the past. Despite being banned by law, it continues to exist in many parts of India, particularly in rural areas. Sanatana Dharma, by upholding the caste system, has contributed to the dehumanization of millions of people.
3. Gender Discrimination Against Women 🚫
Sanatana Dharma has also been used to justify the subjugation of women 👩🦱. Many of the social practices that oppressed women, such as sati (the burning of widows), child marriage, and dowry, were defended under the guise of Sanatana Dharma.
For centuries, women were denied the right to education, ownership of property, or participation in religious ceremonies. They were expected to remain in the domestic sphere and serve the men in their families. While Hinduism, as a spiritual tradition, includes powerful female deities like Durga, Lakshmi, and Saraswati, Sanatana Dharma has often been used to restrict women's freedoms and maintain a patriarchal social order.
4. Brahminical Hierarchy 📜
When we talk about opposing Brahminical hierarchy, it’s important to understand that this doesn’t mean opposing Brahmins as a community. Brahminism refers to a system of social control where power is concentrated in the hands of the Brahmin priesthood, who are seen as the custodians of religious knowledge and authority.
Opposition to Brahminism is about challenging a system that gives undue power to a small elite based on birth, rather than merit or moral authority. Many Brahmins themselves have been critical of this system, including reformers like Periyar and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, who fought for the rights of marginalized communities and called for an end to caste-based discrimination.
Additional Criticisms of Sanatana Dharma: Unveiling Its Dark Sides 🚨
As we dive deeper into Sanatana Dharma, it's critical to address more of the specific criticisms that have been raised about its underlying philosophies and the oppressive structures it perpetuates. While Sanatana Dharma is often promoted as the "eternal way of life" 🕉️, it has faced serious opposition from social reformers, scholars, and even modern-day activists who argue that it serves as a vehicle for exploitation, discrimination, and the perpetuation of a rigid social order. Let’s explore some of these major criticisms in more detail 👇.
5. Sanatana Dharma and the Justification of Patriarchy 👩🦱🚫
One of the starkest criticisms of Sanatana Dharma is its role in promoting patriarchy, which results in the systemic oppression of women. Several traditional texts considered part of Sanatana Dharma, like the Manusmriti, impose strict gender roles and clearly state that women should be subservient to men.
For instance, Manusmriti states:
"In childhood, a female must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband, and when her husband is dead, to her sons. A woman must never be independent."
This patriarchal mindset has resulted in many regressive social practices that were considered part of "Sanatana Dharma" but were actually designed to keep women subjugated. These include:
Sati: The practice of burning widows on their husband’s funeral pyre 🔥. While this horrific practice has been outlawed, it was justified in the name of Sanatana Dharma for centuries.
Child Marriage: Girls were often married off before puberty to avoid their families being "tainted" by female sexuality.
Dowry System: While dowry may not directly come from religious scriptures, it has been intertwined with the traditional patriarchal mindset, making women economic liabilities in marriages.
By enforcing strict patriarchal roles, Sanatana Dharma denied women the right to education, property ownership, and spiritual authority. It cast women into domestic roles and used religion to justify this oppression for centuries.
Criticism from Social Reformers
Several prominent social reformers have condemned the patriarchy inherent in Sanatana Dharma:
Raja Ram Mohan Roy, who fought to end Sati, was highly critical of the way women were treated in the name of religion.
Savitribai Phule and Jyotirao Phule, social reformers from Maharashtra, dedicated their lives to women's education and spoke against religious customs that kept women uneducated and dependent.
Thus, opposing Sanatana Dharma’s patriarchal structures doesn’t mean opposing the Hindu way of life, but rather opposing the systemic oppression of women based on a rigid interpretation of religion.
6. Caste-based Violence and Social Exclusion 🏘️⚠️
Caste-based violence remains one of the most significant and painful criticisms of Sanatana Dharma. The caste system, which is deeply rooted in Sanatana Dharma, has led to widespread discrimination, exploitation, and social exclusion of lower castes, especially the Dalits and Adivasis.
Dalits (formerly known as “untouchables”) have been excluded from many aspects of social life for centuries. Under the caste system, they are relegated to the lowest jobs—manual scavenging, garbage disposal, and other dehumanizing tasks.
Even today, caste-based violence continues to exist in many parts of India, with Dalits facing daily discrimination, harassment, and violence for trying to assert their basic human rights 🛑.
Sanatana Dharma’s Role in Sustaining Caste-based Violence
Sanatana Dharma has used religious justifications to enforce these social hierarchies. The Varna system—which divides society into four major classes—has been repeatedly used to rationalize the exclusion of certain communities, branding their birth and social standing as "divinely ordained."
According to the Manusmriti:
"For the sake of the prosperity of the worlds, the Brahma created the Brahmin, the Kshatriya, the Vaishya, and the Shudra from his mouth, arms, thighs, and feet."
This doctrine perpetuates the belief that Shudras and Dalits are “lesser beings” who should remain in their place as servants to the upper castes.
Violence Against Dalits
Despite being illegal, caste-based discrimination is rampant across India. Caste-based honor killings, attacks on Dalits for entering temples, and even murders over inter-caste marriages are reported frequently 🚨. This violence finds its roots in Sanatana Dharma’s rigid social structure, which brands people as “untouchables” based on their birth.
7. Stifling Social Mobility 📉⛔
Sanatana Dharma reinforces the idea that people must remain in the caste they were born into and serve the functions prescribed by that caste for their entire lives. This leaves no room for social mobility 🛑.
A person born into a Dalit or Shudra family would remain there for life, barred from education, economic opportunities, or religious participation that was reserved for the upper castes. Even if they managed to improve their socio-economic standing, social stigma would continue to haunt them.
This denial of basic rights based on caste goes against the foundational principles of democracy, social justice, and equality. The Bhakti Movement and reformers like Kabir and Tulsidas attempted to break down caste barriers, advocating for equality in the eyes of God. Yet, Sanatana Dharma’s caste system remains entrenched, stifling upward mobility.
8. Oppressing Adivasis and Tribal Communities 🏞️
The Adivasis (tribal communities) of India, who are some of the most marginalized people, have also faced oppression under the guise of Sanatana Dharma.
Adivasis, traditionally seen as outside the Varna system, have been excluded from social, religious, and economic participation. The Adivasis often have their own spiritual traditions that differ significantly from mainstream Hinduism. However, under Sanatana Dharma, efforts have been made to assimilate them into Hinduism, often erasing their unique cultures and forcing them into the lower rungs of society.
In many cases, Adivasi lands have been taken over by upper-caste Hindus for religious and economic reasons. For instance, tribal lands have been appropriated for temples and other religious projects, with little regard for the displacement and destruction of Adivasi livelihoods 🏞️.
9. Lack of Representation in Religious Authority 🙏
Sanatana Dharma places religious authority almost exclusively in the hands of Brahmins. This Brahminical monopoly on religious rituals, temple management, and priesthood has meant that other castes—including Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and especially Shudras and Dalits—have been systematically excluded from performing religious functions ⛔.
Even today, many temples in India, particularly those managed under Brahminical systems, refuse to allow Dalits or lower-caste individuals to serve as priests 🙅♂️. This lack of representation extends beyond religious duties to include decision-making roles in the management of temple assets, land, and wealth.
In contrast, reform movements within Hinduism—such as those led by Periyar or the Self-Respect Movement—have called for greater inclusivity in religious leadership, challenging the monopoly of Brahminical priests over Hindu temples and religious functions.
10. Preservation of Hierarchical Structures in Society 🏛️
Sanatana Dharma has long been used to justify social hierarchies, not just through caste, but also through rituals, customs, and religious practices that place certain people above others. The concept of karma—that a person's actions in their past life dictate their status in the current one—has been used to explain and rationalize social inequalities as "deserved" or “divinely ordered” 🌱.
Critics argue that this philosophy prevents social justice and equality because it reinforces the idea that some people are born into privileged positions while others are destined to suffer due to their past lives. This perpetuates poverty, discrimination, and inequality, making Sanatana Dharma a system that resists modern principles of human rights and social justice.
11. Religious Conversion and Threat to Pluralism 🌏
While Sanatana Dharma supporters often claim that it promotes tolerance and pluralism, critics argue that it has been used to assimilate and erase other cultural and religious practices, especially those of tribal communities and minority groups.
Conversion efforts, either through subtle coercion or socio-political pressure, have aimed to bring Adivasis, Dalits, and other marginalized groups into the Hindu fold under Sanatana Dharma. This push for assimilation erases their unique cultural identities, spiritual traditions, and social structures. Hinduism vs. Sanatana Dharma: A Critical Distinction 🌟
One of the most significant confusions being promoted by supporters of Sanatana Dharma is that opposing it means opposing Hinduism 🕉️. This is not true. Hinduism, as a spiritual and cultural tradition, is vast and diverse. It includes many different paths to the divine, from Bhakti (devotion) to Karma (action) to Jnana (knowledge). Hinduism is a religion that embraces pluralism and encourages individuals to find their own path to spiritual fulfillment.
Sanatana Dharma, on the other hand, is a rigid, hierarchical system that seeks to impose a narrow interpretation of Hinduism on society. It is exclusionary, promoting casteism, untouchability, and the subjugation of women. By equating Sanatana Dharma with Hinduism, proponents are attempting to confuse the public and make it seem as though any criticism of Sanatana Dharma is an attack on Hinduism itself.
Pawan Kalyan’s Sanatana Dharma Protection Board: What’s the Real Agenda? 👀
The proposed Sanatana Dharma Protection Board is being presented as a way to "protect Hindu traditions," but what traditions are being protected, and at what cost? 🤔 By promoting Sanatana Dharma, Pawan Kalyan and others are essentially advocating for a return to a caste-based society where social hierarchies are maintained, and lower-caste communities remain marginalized.
This agenda is anti-progress and goes against the spirit of social equality that leaders like NTR and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar fought for. The Sanatana Dharma Protection Board is not about protecting Hinduism as a diverse and inclusive way of life; it’s about preserving Brahminical control over religious and social institutions.
NTR vs. Pawan Kalyan: A Tale of Two Visions 👑
NTR’s vision for Andhra Pradesh and Hinduism was one of inclusivity, transparency, and social justice. By restructuring the TTD and exposing the corruption within temple management, NTR ensured that religion could be a force for good in society, serving the people rather than oppressing them.
In contrast, Pawan Kalyan’s Sanatana Dharma Protection Board threatens to reverse these gains by promoting a narrow, hierarchical interpretation of Hinduism that serves the interests of a select few. His approach is not about empowering the people but about maintaining social divisions based on caste and gender.
Conclusion: Opposing Sanatana Dharma Is Not Opposing Hinduism 🚫
It’s crucial to understand that opposing Sanatana Dharma is not about rejecting Hinduism or Brahmins as a community. It’s about standing against a system of social control that has oppressed millions of people for centuries. By challenging Sanatana Dharma, we are advocating for a more inclusive, egalitarian society where everyone—regardless of caste, gender, or birth—has the right to dignity and freedom.
NTR’s legacy serves as a reminder that faith and social justice can go hand in hand, but only if we are willing to challenge those who seek to misuse religion for their own gain. As Pawan Kalyan pushes for the Sanatana Dharma Protection Board, we must ask ourselves: is this really about protecting religion, or is it about protecting power?
#NTRvsPawanKalyan #SaveTirumala #SanatanaDharmaCriticism #CasteSystem #BrahminicalHierarchy #HinduismExplained #EqualityForAll
