Statements made by Dravidianist-aligned orator Suki Sivam regarding the Tamil Nadu State Emblem and the Srivilliputhur temple gopuram have come under scrutiny after visual evidence showed the presence of Hindu deities on the gopuram, contrary to his claims.

Speaking at a public forum, DMK-supporting Suki Sivam stated that the Srivilliputhur temple gopuram was adopted as the Tamil Nadu government emblem during the tenure of Omandur Ramasamy Reddiar, who served as Chief Minister around 1947. He said the gopuram was chosen on the suggestion of Rasikamani TKC. and claimed that the selection had initially sparked controversy on the grounds that it represented a Hindu religious symbol.

According to Suki Sivam, the controversy was addressed by emphasising that the Srivilliputhur gopuram did not contain any deity figures. He said Omandur Ramasamy Reddiar, after consulting Rasikamani TKC, explained in the Assembly that the gopuram was unique because “there is not a single deity figure on it.”

“Sir, only if there is a statue will the question arise – whether it is a Vaishnava image, a Shiva image, a Vinayaka image or a Murugan image. But here, there is not even one deity figure,” Suki Sivam said, adding that the gopuram consisted purely of stonework and masonry.

He further claimed that the structure should not be viewed as a Hindu religious symbol but as a representation of Dravidian architectural tradition.

“This is not a symbol of the Hindu religion; it is a symbol of Dravidian architecture,” he said, arguing that such gopurams were found only in South India and not in the northern parts of the country.

திருவில்லிபுத்தூர் கோயில் கோபுரத்தை தமிழ்நாடு அரசின் இலச்சினையாக்கியவர் ஓமந்தூர் ராமசாமி அவர்கள், கோபுரம் இந்து மதத்தின் அடையாளம் என்ற விமர்சனம் எழுந்தபோது, அது ஒரு மதத்தின் அடையாளம் அல்ல அது திராவிடக் கட்டடக் கலையின் அடையாளம், ஏனெனில் அக்கோபுரத்தில் ஒரு சாமி பொம்மை கூட இல்லை. pic.twitter.com/xcDstuqJx0

— ஆதினி (@aathini_twitz) December 17, 2025

However, images of the Srivilliputhur temple gopuram show that Hindu deities are, in fact, part of the structure. Notably, the Lakshmi–Narayana form is prominently depicted in the upper tier of the gopuram, contradicting the assertion that there is not even a single deity figure.

Observers pointed out that the presence of deity figures on one of Tamil Nadu’s most prominent temple towers calls into question the accuracy of the claim that the gopuram is devoid of Hindu iconography. The depiction of Lakshmi-Narayana on the gopuram undermines the argument that the emblem was selected solely as a non-religious or purely architectural symbol.

It is now clear that the person has no understanding of what is present on a prominent gopuram in Tamil Nadu. The claim that there is “oru saami bommai kooda illai” (not a single deity figure) and that there are “no Hindi deities” on the gopuram is factually incorrect. In… https://t.co/lGwHkkbX1X pic.twitter.com/wc8LLQAN9n

— 𑀓𑀺𑀭𑀼𑀱𑁆𑀡𑀷𑁆 (@tskrishnan) December 18, 2025

Suki Sivam – Self-Proclaimed Orator Who Inserts Dravidianist Ideology In Spiritual Talks

Suki Sivam, the self-proclaimed scholar who occasionally uses his eye-opening research on Hindu gods to subtly interweave Dravidianist ideology into his spiritual talks, displays a level of arrogance that seems boundless. In Indian philosophy, Hindu teachings assert that choosing a spiritual path should transcend the inherent arrogance of human nature – a quality considered essential for the human experience, except in Charvaka philosophy. However, Suki Sivam stands as an exception to this notion. Despite presenting himself as a devoted Hindu follower and spiritualist, his arrogance persists, embodied in his unyielding sense of self.

In one YouTube interview, Suki Sivam claimed that religion in India had been “hijacked” by politicians and that matters of faith should not be dictated by elected leaders. He defended Dravidian and DMK-linked criticism of Hindu practices, saying such politicians should be defeated electorally if people disagreed with them. Sivam argued that Hindu scriptures evolved to correct internal flaws and claimed historical Hindu temple practices excluded the downtrodden. He defended EV Ramasamy Naicker (Periyar), saying his attack on God stemmed from social reform. Sivam further asserted that Palani should not be considered one of Murugan’s six abodes, suggesting the deity was originally linked to Siddhars, possibly Bogar, and that Agamas do not apply to the temple.

Once he also claimed that Palani Murugan temple did not have a flagstaff, when it clearly had one.

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post “Not A Single Deity Figure On Srivilliputhur Gopuram”, DMK-Supporting Orator Suki Sivam Says But Visual Evidence Shows Otherwise appeared first on The Commune.

Suki Sivam, a self-styled Tamil orator, writer, and self-proclaimed scholar known for subtly intertwining Dravidianist ideology into his spiritual talks, has once again attempted to revive the Aryan-Dravidian divide theory through misleading religious interpretations in a recent interview on a private channel.

In the interview, he made the baseless claim that Vaidikas (adherents of Vedic traditions) are not respected within the rituals conducted by Sivachariyars (practitioners of Agamic traditions). However, this assertion is clearly contradicted by the reality both traditions have historically coexisted and were present during recent temple consecration ceremonies. But facts seem to be of little concern to Sivam, who went on to claim that the two groups “dis-respect each other.”

In an attempt to validate his claim, he distorted the history bending over backwards to align his explanation with the divisive ideology he subtly promotes.

“What does ‘Kudamuzhaku’ mean? That is, a Sivachariyar performs that ritual in a particular method. If you think even deeper, Vaidikas do not have respect for these Agamas. The Vaidika tradition, which is the Vedic tradition, does not respect the ritualistic tradition of the Sivachariyars. Today, everyone just comes together for a show on the surface. Why is this not respected? Because, for them, God has no form. He can only be invoked in the sacrificial fire (Yagna Agni). Once he appears in the sacrificial fire, offerings and oblations must be given to him, and then he will depart. He does not have a temple or a specific place of his own. They might feel bad if told, but Vaidikas are immigrants from outside, so they do not have land. Those who do not have land do not have temples. Those who do not have temples do not have idols. Those who do not have idols do not have idol worship. Is this the history?” he asks.

Then, Suki Sivam went on to claim that there is an ‘ego’ in some (indirectly brahmins) who assert vegetarianism as superior, and that they look down upon non-vegetarian food, especially in the context of temple worship.

What was even more audacious was that, with the same breath he used to praise the Sivachariyars, Suki Sivam went on to accuse them of being casteist and oppressive. He said, “Shall I tell you something else? Shall I tell you why Sivachariyars are now saying, ‘we don’t want JC and DCs, free all temples? It’s not about some grand Hindu religious principle. It is nothing like that. The JC (Joint Commissioner) and DC (Deputy Commissioner) can come from Scheduled Castes. They can come from the Most Backward Classes. Now, they (Sivachariyars) can’t bear it. Because in the temple, they have to answer to that person, understand? A person from an oppressed community has come and sat as a JC. He will say, ‘call that Sivachariyar’ and say, ‘Come here!’ They have to come. He’ll say, ‘I’ll suspend you, understand? Don’t try these things with me, I’ll ruin you.’ How can they tolerate this, sir? For so long, the very people we were intimidating are now coming and sitting above as boss. So, saving the Hindu religion isn’t important here; prestige is what’s important.”

In the interview, he further alleged that temple pontiffs and heads remain silent out of fear of political leaders, as many of them are entangled in land and property misuse cases. He also claimed that Hinduism is being overshadowed by Vedic dominance, implying that the authentic Tamil spiritual tradition is being systematically erased. His opposition to this so-called ‘Vedic supremacy’ has, unsurprisingly, drawn strong backlash from Hindutva groups.

Toward the end of the interview, when asked about Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi’s remarks portraying Tiruvalluvar and Vallalar as pioneers of Sanatana Dharma, Suki Sivam mocked at the idea and dismissed the Governor’s intent and painted, saying, “It would be better if everything was Sanatana. You’re saying everything in this world is Sanatana. Sanatana means old, what else? So, there’s nothing terribly wrong with that word. They want to make it ‘Vedic culture,’ but they don’t have the courage to say it. They go for the word ‘Sanatana’ because if they say ‘Vedic culture,’ others will come for a fight. If you truly ask what their agenda is, it’s Vedic culture, and within Vedic culture, it’s the supremacy of Vaidika (Brahminical) traditions, and when Vaidika comes, it inherently implies the superiority of one caste based on lineage that is the ultimate aim. Instead of speaking the truth directly, they are touching their nose in various roundabout ways.”

He added, “Calling him a Sanatani is pure stubbornness. It’s a stubborn thing for you to say. I’ll stubbornly put up a picture of Thiruvalluvar with stripes (thiruneetru pattai)! Well, I don’t know if he had sacred ash (Thiruneeru) on his forehead otherwise wouldn’t he have written a chapter on it like Gnanasambandar or someone similar, he would have sung a hymn about sacred ash, right? Not just that, Saivism has so many brand ambassadors like Sambandar, Manikkavasagar, and Thirunavukkarasar. He (Thiruvalluvar) doesn’t need to be added here. He was an independent thinker. The Sangam period, and before that, the Tamil way of life that simply relied on nature, then the mixing with North Aryans, and the resulting change in religious thought – the Thirukkural emerged during this time when all these influences were forming. Therefore, it will have a little bit of everything. The ancient, the intermediate, and then a bit of the thought from the Vedic culture – all will be present in the Thirukkural. Based on that, they now say he was a Muslim. They say he was a Christian. They can say whatever they want. But doesn’t that prove he wasn’t any of those? Anyone can say anything, right?”

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post “Vaidikas (Brahmins) Are Landless Outsiders, Sivachariyars Can’t Bear SC Officers As Temple Authorities”, Says DMK-Supporting Dravidianist Orator Suki Sivam appeared first on The Commune.

Suki Sivam, the self-proclaimed scholar who occasionally uses his eye-opening research on Hindu gods to subtly interweave Dravidianist ideology into his spiritual talks, displays a level of arrogance that seems boundless. In Indian philosophy, Hindu teachings assert that choosing a spiritual path should transcend the inherent arrogance of human nature—a quality considered essential for the human experience, except in Charvaka philosophy. However, Suki Sivam stands as an exception to this notion. Despite presenting himself as a devoted Hindu follower and spiritualist, his arrogance persists, embodied in his unyielding sense of self.

In a recent interview, Suki Sivam expressed his grievances towards Hinduism with a remarkable degree of arrogance, claiming, “A group that should have followed and respected me disregarded me and created unnecessary animosity due to my caste. They were unwilling to accept my leadership.” This statement underscores a troubling contradiction; while he professes to uphold Hindu values, his own behavior reflects the very arrogance that spiritual paths are meant to overcome.

Suki Sivam, didn’t stop there, he went so far as to assert that the Hindu god Murugan at the Palani Temple is not a deity but a Tamil Siddha named Bohar. In Tamil Nadu, there are two distinct types of individuals when it comes to attitudes towards religion: one group rejects the idea of deities altogether, often ridiculing Hindu gods and practices, while another group, disguised as spiritual gurus, claims to be devout followers of Hinduism while covertly disparaging its traditions in the name of historical research. Both groups are dangerous, but the latter—epitomized by figures like Suki Sivam—poses a greater threat. This kind of ideology can be traced back to EV Ramasamy Naicker, who played a pivotal role in shaping such attitudes in Tamil Nadu.

Suki Sivam’s tendency to demand respect for his supposed authority is not new. To illustrate this, we can look at the experiences of Sengottai Shriram, a former editor at Sakthi Vikatan (devotional magazine published by Vikatan group) and later a content writer for the exclusive Sakthi Vikatan. In 2023, Shriram recounted two instances of mistreatment by Suki Sivam, highlighting his arrogance and condescension.

Shriram describes an incident from 2007 when he was the editor of Sakthi Vikatan of Vikatan Publications. At that time, Chennai’s Kamban Kazhagam, Krishna Sweets, and Alwarpet Asthika Samaj organized a program titled “How Many Raman in Kamban’s Raman!” The event aimed to explore eight different aspects of the character Raman from Kampan’s work. Eight scholars, including Suki Sivam, delivered speeches on these topics, which were later compiled into a book entitled “Kambanil Raman Ethanai Raman”.

Shriram, responsible for getting consent from the scholars for a monetary gift as compensation, approached Suki Sivam for approval. Suki Sivam responded with indignation, questioning why a celebrated speaker like himself should be honored in such a manner. He said, “I am a popular speaker; For my stature, is this the kind of petty amount you will pay me? I refuse to give you the rights to publish my speech, and also to give it out in CD format. I can sell my own CDs for a price deserving of my stature” causing Shriram great distress. Despite this insult, Shriram managed to calm himself by focusing on the fact that the work was on behalf of Vikatan Publications, not a personal affront.

However, other respected Tamil scholars such as Sudha Seshayan, Gnanasambandhan, Lakshminarayanan, Gnanasundaram, Sathyaseelan, Arivozhi, and Selvaganapathi, who were held in higher esteem than Suki Sivam, recognized the importance of preserving the legacy of the Tamil poet Kamban and his Ramayanam for future generations. They allowed Vikatan to publish the works with the understanding that the preservation of this cultural heritage was more important than immediate financial gain.

In another instance, while Shriram was overseeing Sakthi Vikatan, he found himself compelled to edit Suki Sivam’s writings due to their problematic content. When he made edits to remove derogatory comments about sages and other issues, Suki Sivam reacted with scorn, asking, “Who is so intelligent enough in the Sakthi Vikatan to edit my writing?.”

Contrary to Suki Sivam’s previous claim that he was not recognized, it is a blatant lie to say that the people of Tamil Nadu do not acknowledge the talent of Tamil scholars, regardless of their class, creed, religion, or gender. In Tamil Nadu, the contributions of spiritual scholars are celebrated and revered almost as if they were prophets. However, Tamil society also has a tendency to shun arrogance, which is considered uncharacteristic of true scholarship. In this case, Suki Sivam, who was once respected and admired for his Tamil expertise, displayed arrogance and mistreated others. As a result, he was eventually expelled from the scholarly community and has now become a mouthpiece of Dravidian ideology. His fall from grace was a consequence of his arrogance, not a reflection of any shortcomings in recognizing talent, as illustrated by these two incidents.

(With Inputs From Tamil Labs 2.0)

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post The Real Face Of Dravidianist Suki Sivam That Very Few People Know appeared first on The Commune.

Suki Sivam, a renowned Tamil orator, writer, and self-proclaimed scholar known for subtly intertwining Dravidianist ideology into his spiritual talks, is once again under fire from netizens. He is facing criticism for allegedly spreading a false narrative during his recent interview on a YouTube channel.

Speaking to a YouTube channel, the focus of the interview was on exploring Suki Sivam’s views on politics and religion.

While Suki Sivam is widely recognized as a spiritual speaker, of late he has been called out for mocking Hindu beliefs in certain discourses, especially on platforms associated with the DMK and Dravidianists. It’s worth noting that Suki Sivam gained popularity through the TV show “Indha Naal Iniya Naal” on Sun TV, which is associated with the DMK family.

The host first queried Suki Sivam about the confusion surrounding his identity in spiritual discourse—whether he is a spiritualist, a rationalist, or both. Suki Sivam described himself simply as Suki Sivam, suggesting that spirituality involves a state of awakening that can sometimes isolate individuals from others. He quoted Osho, stating, “You cannot live in the world without idiocy,” seemingly implying that he adjusts between awakened states, compromise, and occasional folly as he interacts with people.

Unsatisfied with Suki Sivam’s response regarding his spiritual or rational stance, the host directly confronted him. Mentioning spiritual figures like Anandarama Deekshidar, Balakrishna Sashtri, and others did not shift away from spiritual discourse, the host pointed out that Suki Sivam is increasingly criticized for emphasizing rationalist leaning. Suki Sivam acknowledged this criticism and attempted to explain that in the past, superstition prevailed. However, the host countered this assertion even before Suki Sivam uttered the word ‘superstition’, leading Suki Sivam to construct a narrative.

Suki Sivam then argued that in history even though spiritualists and politicians influenced each other but maintained distinct roles. He claimed that politicians have appropriated religion, exclaiming, “The politicians have hijacked religion from me, Suddenly they came running snatched religion from me! No one in this country noticed it; they left their jobs to snatch the religion from my hand, Now, I have to fight to reclaim my child.” He emphasized that politicians’ primary duties are administration, focusing on the nation’s economy, irrigation, employment, health, infrastructure, and culture—not religious affairs. He asserted that he possesses a deeper understanding of religion and firmly believes that politicians should not dictate matters of faith. 

When Suki Sivam concluded that the politicians have no business in dictating the matter of faith, the host then pointed out that in Tamil Nadu particular groups are repeatedly ridiculing the faith and teasing, belittling, and insulting the gods indirectly indicating the DMK and the Dravidar Kazhagam. Immediately to buttress the DMK and the Dravidianists, Suki Sivam said, “Those politicians should be defeated in the elections, only by using the voters, we can send those politicians home. How are they victorious again? In a democracy, the people believe that there is something true in their saying.”

He immediately peddled that, “Why should the Upanishads come after the Vedas, is the Vedas alone not enough? There is something lacking in it; to bring it to maturity and it becomes Upanishad. If you read the Vedas and the Upanishads, the difference is that in the Vedas there are a lot of prayers and quests, but in the Upanishads, there is wisdom. Now why do the Agamas come after the Vedas and Upanishads to improve a temple system? When implementing this in the society, many confusions come up.” As usual, Suki Sivam constructed a narrative where he described how Hindus historically excluded and discriminated against the downtrodden from temples, later the Mughals and Christians embraced them, resulting in the religion falling into the hands of politicians citing leaders like Narayan Guru and Vivekananda fought for it.

The host then challenged Suki Sivam’s assertion by pointing out that he was referring to Hindu social reformers, while Periyar was an atheist. However, Suki Sivam quickly countered by buttressing E.V. Ramasamy Naicker (EVR), stating, “You should thoroughly examine EVR. Initially, he put his hands on the caste system, then identified its proponents behind caste, attacked it, and then attacked god. In a statement, he said, ‘Is it my fate to speak about it, they made me talk without any other option,’ His focus was societal reform rather than religion.”

In response, Suki Sivam suggested that certain individuals used gods as a cover to destabilize society, indirectly implicating Brahmins. The host pressed for specifics on who these individuals were, but Suki Sivam tactfully sidestepped, citing legal constraints on disclosure and pledging caution. Eventually, Suki Sivam remarked, “Some individuals drove communities away by hiding behind idols of gods.”

A heated debate then erupted between the host and the self-styled spiritualist Suki Sivam. The host argued that while criticizing religious superstitions is acceptable, targeting and ridiculing Hinduism in the name of atheism is unfair. Suki Sivam countered by pointing out that EVR did not engage in electoral politics, but the host countered this by noting that EVR’s followers are now active in elections. Suki Sivam defended the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), saying its followers now advocate “one race, one god,” but the host dismissed this as merely a strategy to gain votes, claiming that EVR lost the battle as his followers eventually accepted the concept of one God.

This criticism angered Suki Sivam, who questioned why there is still fear surrounding discussions about EVR even after his passing. The host then questioned why Suki Sivam continues to ridicule the Vedas despite them being ancient texts with some flaws. Now without any points to counter Suki Sivam strategically steered the debate into philosophy evading politics and EVR.

Then, in a passionate flow, Suki Sivam expressed his reasons for harboring resentment towards Hinduism, stating with arrogance that, “A group that should have followed and respected me disregarded me and created unnecessary animosity due to my caste. They were unwilling to accept my leadership.” The host swiftly countered, attributing the reason to Suki Sivam’s rhetoric presumably the arrogance.

Suki Sivam then seized the opportunity to criticize a Hindu belief where revered gurus are carried on shoulders during festivals as per the devotees’ wishes. Ironically, Suki Sivam acknowledged this as legal but chose to ridicule it, despite advocating for freedom of speech himself. He said, “I did not stop it, but its idiocy.”

The buttressing of the DMK and Dravidian ideology had been somewhat tolerable until now, but this time, Suki Sivam’s statement surprised everyone. When the host asked Suki Sivam about the applicability of Agamas to the Palani temple, he immediately responded that they would not apply, citing the deity known as Sithanathar Swamy and asserting that Murugan there should be presumably be Bogar the Saint. He went on to state that Palani should not be considered one of the six abodes of Murugan.

Suki Sivam stated, “Is there anywhere where the name Siddhanathar exists? It is because he is the leader of the Siddhars. It would be even weirder if I said why; my assumption is that it must be Bogar. The Murugan at Maruthamalai is known as Maruthamalai Andavar, adorned with a Kudumi on his head and a Keepatchi (Dhoti style). The idol develops as the saints around collude with the idol according to the philosophy of Muruga worship. Similarly, Bogar must have been worshipped on the hill as the leader of the Siddhas. In essence, Palani is not among the six abodes of Murugan.“

He continued by suggesting that people are not studying history thoroughly and proposed that the Periyanayaki Amman temple located on the outskirts should be considered as one of the abodes. Suki Sivam then addressed the issue of the flagstaff, reiterating that the Palani temple did not originally have one. This claim was challenged by many, prompting him to reinforce that the flagstaff was erected later during the period of SP Balasubramaniam.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post “Palani And Marudhamalai Are Not Lord Murugan’s Abodes, The Deities There Are Not Murugan But Siddhars”, Says Self-Anointed Dravidianist ‘Spiritual Speaker’ Suki Sivam appeared first on The Commune.

Suki Sivam is a popular Tamil orator, writer, and a self-anointed scholar who had become a household name with the TV show “Indha Naal Iniya Naal” on Sun TV. He is known for inserting Dravidianist agenda in his spiritual discourses. He is now facing criticism from netizens for allegedly spreading false information during a speech.

This comes in the wake of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court issuing an order on 30 January 2024, stating that individuals who are not Hindus should be restricted from entering the Palani Murugan Temple. The court further specified that those without Hindu beliefs should not go beyond the ‘kodimaram’ (flagstaff) of the temple, and visible placards conveying these restrictions should be placed at various locations within the temple premises.

சித்தர்கள் கோவிலுக்குள் புகுந்து அவாள் ஆடும் ஆட்டத்தை அம்பலப்படுத்திய சுகி சிவம்.https://t.co/7umewCpN22#narayanaguru #sugisivam #pazhanitemple #judiciary #endowmentlecture #periyar #vallalar #bharathiyar #vivekananda #sankaracharya #castism #untouchability #varnasystem pic.twitter.com/smfvP9c08L

— Kulukkai (@Kulukkai) February 10, 2024

At the discourse hosted by the Narayana Guru Trust at the Periyar venue in Madras University titled “Religion and Society,” he delivered a speech, “In the Palani temple, keep the board that says Hindus (said instead of non-hindus) are not allowed to cross the sacred Kodi Maram (flagstaff) so that it is clearly visible, i.e. write it clearly so that even the blind can see it without wearing glasses, they have given a ruling that no one can come beyond the sacred flagstaff, now I am going to say something interesting. There is no flagpole in Palani hill temple”

“Only the temples built according to the rules of Agama have a flagpole, the temples built by the Siddhas in violation of the rules of Agama do not have the flagpole. Then the Palani temple was built by the Siddhas, so there was no flagpole. For a temple without a flagpole, one files a case, one writes a reply, and a judge writes a verdict. So none of them care about god, only the fight matters.” he said.

“Now came the single judge judgment, but before this there was already a two-judge judgment in the bench. One, we don’t have time to scrutinize the religion of all the people. If there is a temple consecration (kumbabhishekam) ceremony is it possible to question, Who are you? What caste? What religion? It is impossible and hence the plea of the petitioners cannot be accepted.” he further said.

“Number two, they claim that people of other religions should not come in. But they are playing the song sung by Yesudas for Ayyappan (Audience Clapping). If you ask me, Ayyappan likes Yesudas the most. Did Ayyappan care about What religion he is? No right? So we put on Yesudas song, can we question Yesudas devotion?” he added

“Thirdly they said a word and it was a beautiful word. They said that if you come inside to see a diety, it means that he believes in that faith. Do not research this, it will not be good.” he further added.

Later Suki Sivam wryly remarked that the purpose of someone entering the temple is for worship, not to plant a bomb. He criticizes the emphasis on discouraging the worship of family clan gods, suggesting that it may not be a practical solution as long as there is a continuation of cultism and caste-based divisions. He also attributes the creation of castes to figures like Shankaracharya, referencing Vivekananda’s words to highlight the historical roots of the caste system.

The DMK IT wing initiated a video clipping, focusing on the Palani Murugan Temple and the discussion surrounding the sacred flagpole. They disseminated the content on social media, asserting that there was no sacred flagpole in the Palani Murugan Temple. In a swift response, netizens countered and refuted these claims by presenting previous news video of Thanthi TV showcasing ceremonies conducted for the Palani Murugan Temple’s sacred flagpole during the Thaipoosam festival.

சுகி சிவம் என்னும் திராவிட கைக்கூலி பொய் பேசி செருப்பால் அடிவாங்கும் மொமெண்ட்

சில்லறைக்கு விலைபோன சில்லறை பழனி முருகன் கோவில் பற்றி சொல்லிய பொய்யும் உண்மையும்

அவனது பொய் உண்மை pic.twitter.com/dFwlU6294k

— நாட்டாமை (WarRoom Commander ) (@Agmarksanghi) February 11, 2024

Apart from the temple situated on the hillock, there is also a Murugan temple at the Adivaram (foothills of the Palani Murugan Temple hill). In ancient times palani was referred as Thiru Aavinankudi and this temple existed even before Palani Dhandayuthaswamy temple. This is also the third Padai-Vîdu (third of the six abodes of Murugan) celebrated in song, classics, legend and traditions. Usually before going to the main hill temple, devotees visit Tiru Avinankudi. The sacred water body ‘Saravana Poigai’ is located near this temple.

The Kodimaram in this temple is made of single stone. Lord Muruga (as child sitting on the peacock) is the main deity.

This is not the first instance of Suki Sivam entering into controversy. Whenever there is a discourse on Hindu dharma, he consistently aligns himself with a perspective that resonates with the Dravidian ideology, conveying sentiments that seem favorable to the DMK family. It is noteworthy that his career gained prominence through hosting programs on Sun TV, a network associated with the DMK family. There are allegations suggesting that he received the Kalaimamani Award in 2009 under the leadership of CM Karunanidhi.

In the discussion about conducting the Kudamuzhaku ceremony exclusively in Tamil ordered by the DMK government at the temple, Suki Sivam promptly aligned himself with the party, expressing full support for the initiative.

கோவில் குடமுழுக்கு தமிழில் நடத்துவது குறித்து நெல்லை பாளையங்கோட்டையில் நடத்தப்பட்ட கருத்து கேட்புக் கூட்டத்தில் கூச்சல் குழப்பம்.

சுகிசிவம் பேசுவதற்கு எதிர்ப்பு தெரிவித்த பாஜக, இந்து முன்னணி அமைப்பினர் … pic.twitter.com/98zr2s70Bf

— Senthil Kutty (@zendill) March 7, 2023

Previously as an opportunist to create controversy and capitalize on it, he unfounded a theory that Muruga and Subrahmanya are distinct, perpetuating a recycled narrative of Aryan and Dravidian divisions. He relies on Arivumathi’s flawed research book, a work associated with Dravidian Stockism, as evidence for his claims.

I thought Sugi Sivam is someone indic in thoughts. He spoiled everything by subscribing to the propaganda created by fanatic Christian evangelist, John Samuels, who says Lord Muruga and Lord Subramnya are different.

MURUGA AND SUBRAMNHYA ARE ONE AND THE SAME.

— Saiganesh (@im_saiganesh) July 28, 2019

On another occasion, during the consecration of the Palani Murugan temple, several instances of Agama violations were reported. HR&CE Minister P Sekarbabu was observed standing shirtless outside the sanctum sanctorum. In an effort to defend the DMK, Suki Sivam asserted that Palani Dhandayudhapani does not require Agama-prescribed worship as it is a deity installed by Siddhars, and Lord Muruga himself is considered a Siddhar at Palani. Sivam claimed, “The name of Muruga at Palani is Sidhar Nathan. He does not have a Vel (spear) or peacock (Lord Muruga’s vehicle). He is Dhandayuthapani having a dhanda (a lathi). A loincloth-wearing saint. He is a Siddhar.” Contrary to Sivam’s assertions, Hindu Tamil texts, particularly Shaiva agamas, prescribe 17 forms for Muruga, including his Palani Aandi form. Tirumoolar, a Siddhar himself, has also revered Agamas.

In January 2022, CM Stalin appointed him as an advisor to the Tamil Nadu HR&CE department, and immediately in March 2022, he spoke at a DMK function praising the MK Stalin government, emphasizing that no historian, journalist, or political commentator had anticipated the level of governance provided. Taking subtle jabs at the AIADMK, Sivam remarked during the Chief Minister’s swearing-in, “On one side there is corona, and on the other side gaaliyaana gajana (empty treasury),” employing a metaphorical expression to criticize the financial state, thereby indirectly targeting the AIADMK. He concluded with a theatrical reference, stating that Stalin pulled off a “thillana.”

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Self-Anointed Dravidianist ‘Spiritual Discourser’ Suki Sivam Says Palani Murugan Temple Has No Flagstaff, Here’s What He Didn’t Say appeared first on The Commune.