In a thoughtful reflection, a distinguished judge of the Madras High Court raises pertinent questions about the essence and preservation of Sanatana Dharma, the eternal duties inherent in the Hindu way of life. Justice N. Seshasayee’s contemplation arises in response to the ongoing national discourse surrounding Sanatana Dharma.
Justice Seshasayee acknowledges the fervent debates, both pro and anti-Sanatana Dharma, which have resonated across the country. In light of these discussions, he delves into the multifaceted duties embedded within Sanatana Dharma, which encompass responsibilities towards one’s nation, ruler, parents, mentors, and the underprivileged, among others. The judge poses a fundamental question, “Should all these sacred duties be obliterated?”
To those advocating the dismantling of Sanatana Dharma, Justice Seshasayee presents a series of inquiries. He questions whether a citizen should not love their country, whether serving the nation is not an obligation, and whether the care of parents should not be paramount. Furthermore, he expresses his lament over the misconception that Sanatana Dharma is exclusively associated with promoting casteism and untouchability.
Justice Seshasayee firmly asserts that untouchability cannot find a place in a nation where all citizens are considered equal. Even if traces of untouchability linger within the principles of Sanatana Dharma, he emphasizes that it cannot persist since Article 17 of the Constitution has abolished untouchability. He underscores that Article 51A(a) imposes a fundamental duty on every citizen to adhere to the Constitution and uphold its ideals and institutions.
While acknowledging that religious practices evolve over time, allowing for undesirable practices to emerge, Justice Seshasayee suggests that such negative aspects should be rooted out like weeds without destroying the entire crop. He advocates for reflection on the elimination of untouchability by students but commends the withdrawal of the controversial circular that prompted the legal action.
The judge highlights the responsibility that comes with exercising free speech, especially in matters of religion. He calls for free speech to encourage dispassionate and constructive public debates in alignment with the Constitution’s vision.
Justice Seshasayee’s contemplation raises profound questions about the relevance and preservation of Sanatana Dharma in contemporary society, emphasizing the importance of adhering to constitutional values while fostering healthy public discourse.
