In the turbulent political landscape of India, DMK MP A. Raja has propelled the controversy surrounding Sanatana Dharma to newer heights, likening it to severe ailments and social stigmas, causing quite the stir and inciting fiery reactions from numerous quarters.

The statement came at a time when the dust has barely settled from a previous controversial comment made by DMK Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin, who had described Sanatana Dharma with terminologies reminiscent of life-threatening diseases like Dengue, Malaria, and Corona. He even went as far as advocating for its eradication, an utterance that has since sparked a maelstrom of anger and resentment among many citizens who revere the ancient tradition.

However, it seems that DMK MP A. Raja, who also holds a significant position as the Deputy General Secretary of the party, sought to escalate the situation further. In a shocking continuation of the slander against Sanatana Dharma, Raja announced that the comparisons made by Udhayanidhi were mild and proceeded to liken the revered and ancient Hindu philosophical concept to HIV AIDS, a global health crisis that has claimed millions of lives and left countless others grappling with stigma and discrimination.

Speaking out vehemently during a protest against the central government's Vishwakarma Yojana initiative in Chennai, Raja argued that Udhayanidhi's viewpoint was relatively subdued. According to a quote by ANI, he stated, "Sanatana and Vishwakarma schemes are not different. Udhayanidhi gently said that Sanatana Dharma should be eliminated like malaria and dengue."

This blatant and unbridled criticism of Sanatana Dharma, which forms the philosophical bedrock of Hindu traditions and practices, has surely struck a raw nerve with many, as it seemingly disparages a faith held dear by millions. One can't help but wonder about the repercussions of such inflammatory remarks in a nation that is deeply entrenched in its spiritual and religious heritage.

The rhetoric against Sanatana Dharma seems to be escalating, with A. Raja, a prominent DMK MP, intensifying his critique, expressing his vehement disdain for this ancient tradition and likening it to severe social stigmas that have historically plagued humanity. In a scenario that is quickly heating up, his remarks are serving as fuel to a fire that is threatening to engulf the societal harmony in India.

During a recent protest meeting orchestrated by the fervently anti-Hindu group Dravidar Kazhagam, which rallied against the Centre's Viswakarma Scheme, Raja unabashedly voiced his disdain for Sanatana Dharma. "I am oddly surprised that Udhayanidhi Stalin had only spoken about it only softly saying (Sanatana Dharma) has to be eradicated like malaria and dengue. Malaria and dengue doesn't have social stigma. The society won't look at them disgustingly. If we have to call it something disgusting, there was leprosy, there is HIV today. For us, just like leprosy and HIV, we've to see it (Sanathana Dharma) as a social stigma." - These were the words uttered by Raja, resounding with an undeniable tone of contempt.

His speech, not only manifests a shocking level of disregard for the sanctity of a tradition revered by millions but also seeks to instill a sense of aversion and repulsion towards it. He seemingly attempts to equate a philosophical doctrine, cherished by countless individuals, to diseases that have not only claimed countless lives but have also brought upon immense suffering and social ostracization to those affected.

This meeting saw the participation of several notable figures including Tamil Nadu Congress Committee President K. Alagiri. The congregation represented an amalgamation of members from the I.N.D.I. Alliance, encompassing a broad spectrum of individuals such as DMK MLA Ezhilan Naganathan, CPI-M State Secretary K. Balakrishnan, CPI State Secretary Muttharasan, and VCK MP Thol. Thirumavalavan, to name a few. This coming together of diverse political figures indicated a solidified front opposing the Centre's initiative.

Moreover, Raja went on to further criticize the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, accusing him of hypocrisy in regards to adhering to the principles of Sanatana Dharma. According to Raja, a true follower of this tradition should refrain from crossing the oceans and visiting foreign lands, a principle he claims Modi has defied extensively due to his numerous foreign visits. He lambasted, “The Prime Minister is asking us to follow Sanatana Dharma. If he had followed it, he should not have gone to so many foreign countries. A good Hindu should not cross the ocean and go abroad. However, your (Modi) only job is to roam around different places. How dishonest is it for a person who goes around the world defying Sanatana Dharma to say ‘save Sanatana Dharma’?”

As we navigate further through this narrative, it becomes clear that the lines of respectful dialogue and constructive criticism have been blurred, giving way to remarks steeped in hostility and disrespect. Stay tuned as we delve further into the repercussions of this escalating controversy in the final segment of our coverage.

In an even more aggressive turn, DMK MP A. Raja magnifies his defiance and discontent towards Sanatana Dharma, pushing the boundaries of discourse with a fervent challenge aimed directly at the core leaders of the nation. His words reverberated with not only anger but a stark indication of the deepening divide and escalating tension that seems to be encompassing the national conversation surrounding this age-old tradition.

Standing firm in his position, Raja boldly declared, “Yesterday I challenged the Prime Minister and Amit Shah to debate with me on Sanatana Dharma. I am saying this with the permission of my leader. Gather people in Delhi and make all your Shankaracharyas sit on the dais. Bring all your weapons like bow, arrow, knife, and quiver. I will come with only Periyar and Ambedkar books. Conquer me if you can. I am an ordinary Panchama Shudra in your view.” The confrontation in his words almost palpable, Raja exhibits no restraint in expressing his disdain, seemingly prepared to engage in a battle of ideologies, with no holds barred.

Furthermore, A. Raja goes a step further, intensifying his rhetoric by inviting any representative from the opposing side to engage in a heated debate with him in the national capital. He vehemently states, “Udhayanidhi Stalin’s speech on Sanatana Dharma was soft. If you ask me to speak on it, I will speak more harshly. Bring anyone from your side and arrange a debate in Delhi. Myself (A Raja) will come there to debate.” This call for an open confrontation, harbors not only an aura of defiance but showcases a readiness to escalate the conversation to a potentially volatile level.

Not holding back, he further clarifies his stance on the relationship between Hinduism and Sanatana Dharma, lamenting the purported distortion of his words. He emphasizes, “I have said that Sanadana Dharma is different from the Hindu religion. They have translated that speech and spread it in 12 languages saying that A.Raja has divided the Hindus. Today, the entire country is discussing it. The spark that has started here today is the starting point for creating a completely egalitarian secular country in the next ten years.” These lines hint at a vision that seems to steer away from the traditional notions, fostering a vision for a country that embraces secularism in a more intensified manner.

It is important to note that this isn't the first instance where A. Raja has made inflammatory remarks concerning Hinduism. His history of vehement criticism appears to be resurfacing with renewed vigor, painting a grim picture of the prevailing discord in the nation.

As we move towards the conclusion of this coverage, we find ourselves in the midst of an ideological battlefield where the stakes are high and the ramifications could be profound. The nation stands at the crossroads of preserving the sanctity of its ancient traditions and adapting to the evolving perspectives of its diverse populace. Let's delve deeper into the concluding insights in the final segment of this comprehensive coverage, where we will critically analyze these developments and explore the potential paths forward in this ongoing narrative.

In an astonishing display of contempt, Raja went as far as to state, “all Shudras are children of prostitutes and they will remain so until they remain in Hinduism”, a remark that ignites fiery flames of anger, shock, and deep-seated hurt among many. This statement not only vehemently demeans a significant section of the community but dangerously fans the flames of caste-based discrimination, a malevolent aspect of society that countless people have fought to eradicate over the years.

Further stoking the fire, A. Raja did not refrain from launching a scathing attack against Hindu mythology, blatantly ridiculing revered narratives involving deities such as Bhooma Devi and Lord Vishnu. His words seemed to be a stark rejection of the spiritual and cultural ethos that have been cherished by millions, as he heralded Christianity for fostering a scientific temper, thus setting up a divisive narrative that seems to be pulling at the very threads that have held the diverse fabric of Indian society together for centuries.

With sheer disdain, he continued, “There is a reason to wish Christians and Muslims on their festivals. What will you wish for Deepavali? Can the earth be rolled like a carpet? Can someone be born as a pig? Can a pig and Bhuma devi have sex and give birth to an Asura? Since these are all against science and doesn’t align to rational thoughts, I don’t wish for Hindu festivals.” Through this, A. Raja openly discredits the significance of Hindu festivals, posing questions that seem intended to undermine the very foundation of Hindu philosophy and narrative traditions, sowing seeds of discord and disbelief.

As we conclude, it is crucial to pause and reflect on the gravity of these statements, which have surged beyond the realms of a critical discourse, venturing dangerously into a territory where respect and tolerance are clearly being abandoned. The narrative propagated by A. Raja seems to be fostering a climate of division, disdain, and potential unrest, posing a significant threat to the fragile social harmony that holds this nation together.

This moment, thus, calls for a critical analysis and possibly an intervention that can prevent the escalation of such volatile narratives that threaten to tear apart the threads of unity and mutual respect that have been a hallmark of Indian society. One can only hope that reason, respect, and restraint will ultimately prevail in steering the nation towards a path of unity, understanding, and collective prosperity.