Frenklen
Jitendra Awhad’s religion is a topic of significant discussion, primarily because he distinguishes between two concepts. While identifying as a follower of Hindu Dharma, he is a vocal critic of Sanatana Dharma, which he argues is not a religion but a perverted ideology that has historically harmed India.
| Religion: | Hindu Dharma (He explicitly distinguishes this from Sanatana Dharma, which he criticizes) |
| Profession: | Politician (Member of Maharashtra Legislative Assembly) |
| Date of birth: | August 5, 1963 |
| Zodiac sign: | Leo |
| Nationality: | Indian |
Hello, I’m Frenklen, and for the past 15 years, I’ve been deeply immersed in the intricate tapestry of Indian politics and socio-religious movements. Today, we’re delving into a subject that sits at the very intersection of these fields: the complex topic of Jitendra Awhad religion. This isn’t a simple case of identifying a label; it’s about understanding a nuanced, often controversial, and deeply held ideological stance that challenges conventional definitions. Awhad, a prominent leader from Maharashtra, forces us to ask critical questions about faith, history, and identity. In this article, we will unpack his firm belief that Hindu Dharma and Sanatana Dharma are not one and the same. Prepare to explore the historical figures he champions, the traditions he critiques, and how this unique perspective shapes his entire political career. This is more than just a biography; it’s a masterclass in the living, breathing discourse on religion in modern India.
Jitendra Awhad and Early life and religion
Jitendra Satish Awhad was born on August 5, 1963, in Nashik, Maharashtra, to Lilavati and Satish Awhad. His upbringing and education in Thane laid the groundwork for a life that would be deeply intertwined with social and political activism. He attended St. John the Baptist High School and later enrolled at B.N. Bandodkar College in 1981 to pursue a science degree. It was during his college years that his leadership qualities and activist spirit began to shine.
His early foray into public life was not directly political but rooted in student rights. He became the Gymkhana Secretary and later, the secretary of the All-India Students’ Organization. A pivotal moment was his 1982 campaign against tuition fee hikes at Mumbai University, demonstrating an early commitment to challenging established structures for social causes. This period was crucial in shaping his worldview and his approach to public service.
What makes the discussion of Jitendra Awhad religion particularly fascinating is his academic background. He didn’t just form opinions; he studied their origins. After completing his Marine Engineering studies, he pursued a postgraduate degree in personnel management. Most significantly, he holds a Doctorate (PhD) from Mumbai University. His thesis, titled “The History of Socio-Religious Movement in Maharashtra, a Sub-Alternate View,” provides a direct window into his intellectual framework. This academic pursuit suggests that his later, often controversial, statements on religion are not off-the-cuff remarks but are informed by years of dedicated research into the very movements that have shaped Maharashtra’s social fabric.
Several key aspects of his early life provide context for his beliefs:
- Educational Foundation: His PhD thesis on socio-religious movements in Maharashtra is the cornerstone of his public stance. It equipped him with the historical and sociological language to articulate a critique of traditions he views as oppressive.
- Activist Roots: His journey began with student activism, fighting for tangible issues like fee hikes. This grassroots experience likely instilled in him a perspective focused on social justice and the impact of ideology on common people.
- Community Identity: Awhad belongs to the OBC Vanjari community. This identity is significant in Maharashtra’s socio-political landscape. His critique of Sanatana Dharma aligns with the historical narrative of many Bahujan and OBC leaders who see it as a system that perpetuated caste hierarchies, in contrast to the more inclusive ethos of reformers they admire.
This combination of academic rigor, activist experience, and a specific social location provides the essential background for understanding why the topic of Jitendra Awhad religion is so layered. His is not a passive faith but an active, critical engagement with history and its impact on society.
Jitendra Awhad’s views on faith and spirituality
The core of Jitendra Awhad’s public discourse on faith revolves around a stark and uncompromising distinction. For him, the terms ‘Hindu Dharma’ and ‘Sanatana Dharma’ are not interchangeable. In fact, he posits them as opposing forces. This view is central to understanding the man and his political ideology.
Awhad proudly identifies as a follower of Hindu Dharma. However, he is arguably more defined by what he rejects. In a powerful and direct statement to the media, he declared, “Sanatan Dharma has ruined India. There was never a religion called Sanatan Dharma. We are followers of Hindu Dharma.” This single statement encapsulates his entire thesis on the matter. He argues that people should not hesitate to label Sanatana Dharma and its ideology as “perverted.”
His critique is not abstract; it is rooted in specific historical grievances, primarily centered around the icons of Maharashtrian and Indian social reform. He alleges that Sanatana Dharma, as an ideology, was responsible for a series of historical injustices:
- Persecution of Maratha Icons: He claims it was Sanatana Dharma that was responsible for denying the great Maratha king, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, his rightful coronation and for actively defaming his son, Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. This is a potent charge in Maharashtra, where Shivaji is revered as a foundational figure.
- Attacks on Social Reformers: Awhad alleges that followers of this ideology were behind the attempted assassination of the pioneering social reformer Jyotirao Phule. He further highlights the humiliation faced by Savitribai Phule, the mother of Indian feminism, who had cow dung and filth thrown at her for her revolutionary work in educating girls.
- Conspiracy Against Shahu Maharaj: He extends his critique to include Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaj of Kolhapur, another legendary reformer, claiming that Sanatana Dharma conspired to kill him.
- Oppression of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar: Awhad points to the caste-based atrocities faced by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the architect of the Indian Constitution. He states that Sanatana Dharma “did not allow Dr. B.R. Ambedkar to drink water or attend school.” He emphasizes that Ambedkar’s act of burning the Manusmriti was a direct and powerful rejection of these traditions.
By framing his argument this way, Awhad positions himself as an inheritor of the legacy of these anti-caste reformers. His spirituality is not one of quiet contemplation but of active struggle against what he perceives as historical and ongoing oppression. His belief system is fundamentally tied to a vision of social equality and justice. Furthermore, his strong advocacy for maintaining the secular nature of India, as noted on his public profiles, is a direct political extension of this belief. For him, secularism is the constitutional guarantee that protects the nation from the dominance of any single, rigid ideology, especially one he views as historically divisive and harmful.
In essence, the matter of Jitendra Awhad religion is defined by this duality: an embrace of a ‘Hindu Dharma’ that he likely associates with more inclusive, folk, or reformist traditions, and a vehement rejection of ‘Sanatana Dharma,’ which he equates with a rigid, hierarchical, and oppressive Brahmanical system. This perspective is the lens through which he views history, politics, and his own public duty.
Jitendra Awhad’s Life Partner Religion
When examining the personal life of a public figure like Jitendra Awhad, details about their family, including their life partner, naturally draw interest. Jitendra Awhad is married to Ruta Awhad, and they have a daughter named Natasha Awhad. This information is part of his public record.
However, when it comes to the specific topic of his life partner’s religion, there is no information available in the provided context or in the public domain. Ruta Awhad has maintained a private profile, and her personal faith or spiritual beliefs are not a matter of public discourse. This is common for the families of many political leaders, who may choose to keep their personal lives, especially aspects as intimate as faith, separate from the political spotlight.
While the subject of Jitendra Awhad religion is one he has spoken about extensively and publicly, this does not automatically extend to his family members. It is important to respect their privacy. What can be inferred is that his family stands as a pillar of support for his demanding career in politics, which has seen him serve as a minister and a four-time Member of the Legislative Assembly.
The focus of the public conversation remains squarely on Jitendra Awhad’s own articulated views, which are a cornerstone of his political identity. His family life, while a crucial part of his personal identity, remains just that—personal. Any speculation on his wife’s or daughter’s religious beliefs would be inappropriate without their direct statements.
Jitendra Awhad’s Comments in interviews about spirituality and Religion
Jitendra Awhad has never been shy about articulating his views on spirituality and religion in public forums, especially in his interactions with the media. His comments are not vague or diplomatic; they are sharp, specific, and designed to provoke debate. These public statements are the primary source for understanding his stance on the Jitendra Awhad religion question.
His most definitive comments revolve around his central thesis separating Hindu Dharma from Sanatana Dharma. In a widely reported media interaction, he laid out his argument with force:
- A Direct Accusation: “Sanatan Dharma has ruined India.” This is not a nuanced critique but a direct and sweeping condemnation of what he considers a harmful ideology.
- A Definitional Rejection: He follows up by stating, “There was never a religion called Sanatan Dharma.” This is a radical re-framing, aimed at delegitimizing the term itself as a descriptor for a faith system.
- An Affirmation of Identity: He clarifies his own position by saying, “We are followers of Hindu Dharma,” creating a clear boundary between the identity he accepts and the one he rejects.
Awhad encourages others to adopt his critical perspective. He has publicly said that “people should not hesitate to call Sanatan Dharma and its ideology perverted.” This is a call to action, urging his followers and the public to use strong, condemnatory language to describe the tradition he opposes.
His interviews and public statements are rich with historical references, which he uses to substantiate his claims. He consistently links Sanatana Dharma to the oppression of revered historical figures, thereby grounding his ideological critique in the popular consciousness of Maharashtra. By repeatedly invoking the names of Shivaji Maharaj, Sambhaji Maharaj, the Phules, Shahu Maharaj, and Dr. Ambedkar, he transforms a theological argument into a matter of historical justice and regional pride.
Beyond this central theme, Awhad’s public commentary has also led to other controversies. For instance, he was booked for allegedly making insulting remarks about the Sindhi Community during a party function in Ulhasnagar in May 2020. While distinct from his Sanatana Dharma critique, this incident underscores his propensity for making strong, and sometimes controversial, statements about community and identity in public settings. These episodes, taken together, paint a picture of a politician who uses his platform to challenge established norms and narratives, making his comments on religion and spirituality a constant source of news and debate.
Jitendra Awhad’s Comparisons with other celebrities on Religion
Jitendra Awhad’s outspoken views on Sanatana Dharma do not exist in a vacuum. They are part of a broader, often contentious, national conversation. A direct and highly relevant comparison can be made with Udhayanidhi Stalin, the Deputy Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and a prominent leader in the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party.
In 2023, Udhayanidhi Stalin sparked a massive nationwide controversy with his own remarks on Sanatana Dharma. He compared it to diseases like dengue and malaria, suggesting that it should be “eradicated” rather than merely opposed. His reasoning was that Sanatana Dharma is fundamentally based on principles of inequality and social division, particularly the caste system, which goes against the core Dravidian ideology of social justice.
The parallels between Awhad’s and Stalin’s positions are striking:
- Shared Critique: Both leaders identify Sanatana Dharma as a source of social ills, particularly caste-based discrimination and historical oppression. They see it not as a spiritual path for all but as a rigid, hierarchical system.
- Rooted in Regional Reformist History: Awhad’s ideology is deeply influenced by Maharashtrian social reformers like Phule, Shahu, and Ambedkar. Similarly, Stalin’s views are a direct extension of the Dravidian movement founded by Periyar E.V. Ramasamy, which was built on a rationalist, anti-caste, and anti-Brahmanical platform.
- Facing Similar Backlash: Both leaders faced immense criticism from right-wing political parties and religious organizations, who accused them of hate speech and hurting religious sentiments. The India Today article mentions that multiple writ petitions were filed in the Supreme Court seeking criminal action against Udhayanidhi Stalin for his remarks.
However, there is a subtle but important difference in their articulation. While Stalin called for the “eradication” of Sanatana Dharma, Awhad’s primary argument is definitional: he claims “there was never a religion called Sanatan Dharma” and distinguishes it from the Hindu Dharma he follows. Awhad’s approach is to delegitimize Sanatana Dharma as a religious category altogether, while Stalin’s was a more direct call to abolish an existing ideology.
The legal aftermath also provides a point of comparison. The Supreme Court, in Stalin’s case, questioned the maintainability of the petitions under Article 32 and ultimately did not entertain them, leading the petitioners to withdraw their pleas. This legal outcome is relevant to the broader discourse, as it touches upon the limits of free speech and what constitutes hate speech in the context of religious critique. Awhad’s political messaging likely takes note of such precedents.
This comparison highlights that the debate over Jitendra Awhad religion is part of a larger political trend where leaders from non-Brahmin, progressive, and regional movements are increasingly vocal in their critique of what they see as a hegemonic and oppressive religious tradition.
Religion Influence on Jitendra Awhad’s Life
The influence of religion—or more accurately, his specific interpretation and critique of it—is not a peripheral aspect of Jitendra Awhad’s life; it is the very engine of his political and public persona. His views are not just beliefs; they are a strategy, a worldview, and a call to action that has profoundly shaped his career and identity.
Firstly, his academic pursuits laid the intellectual foundation. Earning a PhD with a thesis on “The History of Socio-Religious Movement in Maharashtra” was a formative experience. It allowed him to move beyond rhetoric and build his arguments on a scholarly framework. This academic grounding gives him a unique authority when he speaks on the subject, distinguishing him from politicians who might make similar points without the same depth of research. It allows him to frame the issue of Jitendra Awhad religion not just as a political opinion but as an academic conclusion.
Secondly, his religious views are inextricably linked to his political alignment and messaging. As a senior leader in the Nationalist Congress Party (Sharadchandra Pawar), a party that espouses secular and progressive values, his critique of a perceived orthodox, hierarchical tradition fits perfectly within his party’s ideological framework. It helps him consolidate a specific voter base:
- The Bahujan and OBC Vote: By championing figures like Phule, Shahu, and Ambedkar and positioning himself as their ideological heir, he appeals directly to the OBC, Dalit, and other marginalized communities who see these reformers as their liberators. His identity as a leader from the OBC Vanjari community adds authenticity to this appeal.
- Secular and Progressive Voters: His strong stance against what he calls a “perverted ideology” and his call to uphold the secular nature of India resonate with voters who are wary of rising religious majoritarianism.
Thirdly, his religious stance has directly influenced the threats he has faced and how he has utilized them. The context mentions that in 2018, the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad claimed to have uncovered a plot by extremists to target him. Awhad has since used this claim in his political messaging. This transforms his ideological battle into a real-world struggle where he is a potential martyr for his cause, further solidifying his image as a courageous leader fighting against dangerous, fanatical forces. It adds a layer of personal risk and conviction to his public pronouncements.
Finally, his views have defined his role in Maharashtra’s political landscape. He is not just an MLA for Mumbra-Kalwa or a former minister; he is a prominent voice of the anti-caste, social justice tradition within the state’s politics. His statements ensure he remains in the headlines, driving conversations and forcing other political actors to take a stand. This keeps him relevant and positions him as a key ideological opponent to right-wing and Hindutva-centric parties. His influence, therefore, is not just measured in votes or ministerial portfolios, but in his ability to shape the terms of the political and social debate in Maharashtra.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the topic of Jitendra Awhad religion is far from straightforward. He is a politician who has meticulously crafted a public identity based on a profound and controversial distinction. While he identifies as a follower of Hindu Dharma, his spiritual and political life is more defined by his vehement opposition to what he terms Sanatana Dharma. He does not see it as a religion but as a historically oppressive and “perverted” ideology responsible for the persecution of Maharashtra’s greatest social and political icons, from Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.
This viewpoint is not a mere political slogan; it is deeply rooted in his academic background, specifically his PhD on socio-religious movements, and his identity as a leader from the OBC Vanjari community. His stance aligns him with the legacy of Maharashtra’s anti-caste reformers and serves as a powerful tool for political mobilization within the secular framework of the NCP (Sharadchandra Pawar) party.
By comparing him to figures like Udhayanidhi Stalin, it becomes clear that Awhad is a key participant in a larger, national discourse where regional and progressive leaders are challenging traditional religious hierarchies. His influence lies in his ability to force a public reckoning with the past and its impact on the present, ensuring that the debate over faith, caste, and secularism remains at the forefront of Indian politics. Jitendra Awhad’s legacy will likely be that of a leader who refused to accept conventional definitions and instead, used his platform to redefine the very terms of religious identity in the pursuit of social justice.
Related Queries
What did Jitendra Awhad say about Sanatana Dharma?
Jitendra Awhad made several strong statements, claiming that “Sanatan Dharma has ruined India” and that it was “never a religion.” He accused its followers of historical injustices, such as denying Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj’s coronation and persecuting social reformers like the Phules and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.
Is Jitendra Awhad a Hindu?
Yes, Jitendra Awhad explicitly states, “We are followers of Hindu Dharma.” However, he makes a clear and critical distinction between the Hindu Dharma he follows and Sanatana Dharma, which he rejects as a separate and harmful ideology.
What is Jitendra Awhad’s educational background?
Jitendra Awhad holds a Doctorate (PhD) from Mumbai University. His thesis was titled “The History of Socio-Religious Movement in Maharashtra, a Sub-Alternate View,” which provides an academic basis for his public statements on religion and social history.
Who are the social reformers Jitendra Awhad cites?
He frequently cites a lineage of Maharashtrian and Indian social reformers, including Jyotirao Phule, Savitribai Phule, Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaj, and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, positioning himself as an inheritor of their anti-caste and social justice legacy.
What is the connection between Jitendra Awhad and Udhayanidhi Stalin?
Both Jitendra Awhad and Udhayanidhi Stalin are politicians who have made highly critical and controversial remarks about Sanatana Dharma, linking it to social inequality and the caste system. Their statements are part of a broader political trend of challenging traditional religious hierarchies from a social justice perspective.
FAQs
What is Jitendra Awhad’s specific religion?
Jitendra Awhad identifies his religion as Hindu Dharma. He is very specific about this, as he simultaneously and publicly rejects Sanatana Dharma, which he does not consider to be a valid or positive religious tradition.
Why does Jitendra Awhad differentiate between Hindu Dharma and Sanatana Dharma?
He differentiates between the two to separate a faith he can embrace from an ideology he condemns. For Awhad, Sanatana Dharma represents a rigid, hierarchical system responsible for historical caste-based oppression, while Hindu Dharma represents a more inclusive spiritual path.
What is the political context of Awhad’s statements?
His statements are made within the context of his role as a senior leader of the NCP (Sharadchandra Pawar), a party with a secular and progressive ideology. His critique of Sanatana Dharma helps mobilize support from OBC, Dalit, and other marginalized communities and positions his party as a strong opponent to right-wing Hindutva politics.
Has Jitendra Awhad faced legal challenges for his remarks?
While his remarks are highly controversial, the provided context does not detail specific legal challenges against him for his Sanatana Dharma comments. It does note a separate instance where he was booked for allegedly insulting the Sindhi community.
What is Jitendra Awhad’s caste?
Jitendra Awhad belongs to the OBC Vanjari community in Maharashtra. This identity is significant as it aligns his political and social critiques with the historical Bahujan movement against caste hierarchy.
If you’re interested in learning more about religion, feel free to visit my website: whatreligionisinfo.com.
