At a non secular gathering in Hosur final Saturday, Justice GR Swaminathan of the Madras Excessive Court docket declared, “There are rationalists in Tamil Nadu who name these of us who deal with gurus as gods nugatory (ayogya), fools (muthar) and savages (kathumurandi),” earlier than hitting these phrases again at them, saying, “Those that say which can be really nugatory fools and savages.”
The decide, who has occupied an unusually excessive profile public area in latest months at an occasion often called the Guru Vandana Utsava, framed his remarks inside private testimonies of religion, describing God as an “summary idea” whereas gurus are concrete, dwelling beings whose “aura” dispels damaging power.
“My daughter accomplished her legislation course in Patiala, Punjab,” he mentioned of the late-night drive again to Delhi in a thick fog. “Visibility was very low, lower than 5 toes.” The automobile’s tire went flat. The driving force struggled to vary a tire as vehicles sped by. At that second, Justice Swaminathan mentioned, he realized he was muttering, “Gurnatha, Gurunatha.”
“God is an summary idea, however a Guru exists. You may’t contact God, however you’ll be able to contact the Guru’s toes. That evening modified my life. Once we really feel helpless, solely the Guru will help us, and nobody else can,” the decide mentioned in a deeply private testimony of his religion.
Borrowed from Periyar
Nevertheless, the invocation of religion was accompanied by criticism from rationalists. The decide’s phrases weren’t new to Tamil political tradition. These replicate essentially the most well-known inscriptions related to rationalist chief EV Ramasamy ‘Periyar’, who died in 1973. On the pedestal of Periyar’s statue is a declaration: “There is no such thing as a God, and there’s no God in any respect. Those that create God are fools, those that propagate God are miscreants, and people who worship God are barbarians.”
Born in 1879, Periyar constructed a self-respect motion round an uncompromising critique of caste hierarchy, ritualism, and Brahminical domination. He referred to as on individuals to desert caste suffixes, promoted interdining, advocated girls’s proper to divorce, and advocated rationalism in public life. His rhetoric was deliberately offensive and iconoclastic at a time when the social order was rigidly stratified and opposition on such points was uncommon.
Within the Twenties and 30s, the Periyar controversy aimed to dismantle entrenched energy buildings. His successors tempered his radicalism. CN Annadurai, who was as soon as Periyar’s disciple, later mentioned, “I can’t destroy Ganesha idols or coconuts.” Over the many years, Periyar has grow to be extra of an ideological figurehead than a political agitator, a logo of social justice and Tamil self-respect that even rival events declare to be his heirs.
In distinction, Justice Swaminathan’s speech unfolded in a special context. His assertion didn’t problem caste or class, however was in response to criticism of his religion. However the rhetorical symmetry is placing: the identical phrases – “nugatory, idiot, savage” – have been addressed to the rationalists. Nevertheless, its that means adjustments relying on the speaker’s surroundings, tone, and workplace.
By repeating the political language of a bygone period, he launched a militant aspect into his speech. In Periyar’s time, the phrase was meant to shock conservative society and provoke debate. In fashionable courtroom tradition, their reappearance within the decide’s voice takes on a special resonance.
in public
Justice Swaminathan has been within the highlight in latest months for a number of causes. In December final 12 months, he intervened in a spiritual dispute in Madurai and ordered the lighting of lamps on the disputed web site of a Hindu temple and the adjoining dargah. The decision was harshly criticized by the DMK, and every week later, 107 opposition members filed a discover with Congress chief Om Birla to provoke a removing movement.
The decide additionally spoke about Sanatan Dharma and mentioned he would preserve it in thoughts for the remainder of his time period. In court docket, he has had controversial exchanges together with his defenders. In a single occasion, advocate S. Vanchinathan, in a petition to the Chief Justice of India, accused Justice Swaminathan of caste and communal bias, an allegation rejected by the decide. In a single listening to, he described the critic as a “comedy pawn” and bluntly referred to as the lawyer a “coward.”
These episodes led to elevated scrutiny of Justice Swaminathan’s public statements. For his supporters, the Hosur speech was a testomony to a person of religion addressing a sympathetic viewers. For critics, the language and timing name into query the tone anticipated of a sitting decide.
Periyar’s radicalism as soon as upset the Madras Excessive Court docket itself. In the course of the state of emergency, a petition referred to as for the removing of “offensive” inscriptions from his statue. The court docket dominated that Periyar believed what he mentioned and rejected it.
In Hosur, Justice Swaminathan’s message centered on defending his religion. Nevertheless, by borrowing the vocabulary of insults that Periyar had as soon as used, he bridged two traditions which have traditionally been handed on to one another slightly than to one another.
