Tamil Nadu Minister Sivasankar claimed that there is no evidence of Lord Ram's existence and he urged to celebrate Rajendra Chola's legacy.
Tamil Nadu minister and DMK leader SS Sivasankar on Friday triggered a controversy after he claimed that there was no historical evidence to establish that Lord Ram existed. Drawing parallels with Chola dynasty kings, he said that the kingdom’s buildings still serve as a piece of evidence to prove their existence.
While speaking at an event to mark the birth anniversary of Rajendra Chola in Gangaikondacholapuram in Ariyalur district, the DMK minister said it was the duty of everyone to celebrate the legacy of Rajendra Chola (Rajendra I of Chola dynasty) or else the “people will be compelled to celebrate something which is irrelevant to them”.
“We celebrate the birthday of Rajendra Chola, an emperor of the Chola dynasty, because we have archaeological evidence such as inscriptions, the temples built by him and the lake created by him. But, there is no evidence to trace the history of Lord Ram,” Sivasankar said.
While drawing a comparison, the DMK leader said, “They claim that Lord Ram lived 3,000 years ago and call him an avatar (incarnation). An avatar can’t be born. If Ram was an avatar he could not have been born. If he was born he could not have been a God. It is being done to manipulate us, hide our history and show another history as bigger,” he added.
The minister further remarked that the Ramayana and Mahabharata don’t have any “life lessons” for people to learn while singing peans on Tirukkural, a collection of couplets written by Tamil saint-poet Thiruvalluvar 2,000 years ago, do so.
The minister’s comments drew sharp reaction from BJP with party’s state president K Annamalai questioning DMK’s “obsession with Lord Ram”.
While sharing the controversial clip of the minister, Annamalai condemned the DMK leader’s comments on X.
DMK’s sudden obsession with Bhagwan Shri Ram is truly a sight to behold—who would’ve thought?Just last week, DMK’s Law Minister Thiru Raghupathy avl declared that Bhagwan Shri Ram was the ultimate champion of social justice, the pioneer of secularism, and the one who proclaimed… pic.twitter.com/z8or4AQQML
— K.Annamalai (@annamalai_k) August 2, 2024
“DMK’s sudden obsession with Bhagwan Shri Ram is truly a sight to behold—who would’ve thought? Just last week, DMK’s Law Minister Thiru Raghupathy avl declared that Bhagwan Shri Ram was the ultimate champion of social justice, the pioneer of secularism, and the one who proclaimed equality for all. Fast forward to today, and we have the scam-tainted DMK Transport Minister, Thiru Shiva Shankar, boldly asserting that Lord Ram never existed, claiming it’s all a ploy to erase the Cholan history,” he said.
He further slammed the DMK for opposing the installation of Sengol in the new Parliament.
“Isn’t it fascinating how quickly DMK leaders’ memories fade? Weren’t they the same folks who opposed our Hon PM Thiru @narendramodiavl for installing the Chola Dynasty Sengol in the new Parliament Complex? It’s almost comical that the DMK, a party that seems to think Tamil Nadu’s history started in 1967, has suddenly discovered a love for the nation’s rich culture and history. Perhaps it’s time for DMK Ministers Thiru Raghupathy and Thiru Shiva Shankar to sit down, debate, and reach a consensus on Lord Ram. We’re confident that Thiru Shiva Shankar could learn a thing or two about Bhagwan Shri Ram from his colleague,” he added.
Earlier last week, another DMK leader S Regupathy called Lord Ram as the forerunner of Dravidian model, claiming that the latter was a protector of social justice. In response to the minister’s statement at the event, the BJP said that it was absurd for him to compare Ram Rajya with the DMK run-Dravidian government.
These comments came almost a year after Sports Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin stoked a row by calling for the “annihilation” of Sanatana Dharma by equating it with dengue and malaria. Udhay’s comments put the DMK and its ally Congress in the line of fire. However, despite pressure, the DMK youth wing chief refused to back down on the remarks and stood by them.
