Opinion How the Tirupati laddoo became an issue of tradition, identity and faith

The scuffle began when the ruling Telugu Desam Party (TDP)-led government in Andhra Pradesh raised doubts about the “purity” of the ingredients used in the Tirupati laddoo. The government established a special investigative team to examine the claim that the ghee was contaminated. The TDP blamed the previous Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP)-led government for the mess. The YSRCP dismissed the allegations and claimed they were “diversionary” as there were adequate protocols in place to ensure these things did not happen.

The deputy chief minister and Jan Sena party chief announced that he would do 11 days of personal atonement rituals to make good the so-called desecration. For the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), it was the opening it was probably looking for. First, it gave the BJP ammunition to consolidate its monopoly as the saviour of Hindu sentiments. Second, it helped further the party’s demand that Hindu religious places be freed from state control. The issue acquired additional gravitas when the central health minister asked for a report.

Besides political parties, social media gave space to those who felt that faith was under attack. #Tirupatiladdoo trended for a couple of days on X. Priests, as well as personalities who claim to be speaking for Hindus, called for the protection of the sanctity of holy sites. The Tirupati temple conducted “purification” rituals to appease people. Temples in other parts of the country also wanted their prasadam and offerings to be tested.

Film personalities weighed in as if to show solidarity with the deputy chief minister, who is from the film fraternity. Economists crumbled the laddoo to discuss the economics of the ingredients and why adulteration was likely to happen. Food technologists spoke of adulteration and testing mechanisms. Producers of the “culprit” ingredient claimed that these allegations were damaging their business. Police complaints were filed by other producers (but not suppliers) of the ingredient that misinformation was being spread about their company on social media. The laddoo had arrived.

To answer the question of why the laddoo acquired bragging rights, I make a distinction between Hindu conservatives and Hindu nationalists. These two are often conflated to be the same. Conservatives, on the one hand, are concerned about maintaining and preserving Hindu practices and traditions. They believe these have supposedly been beneficial or give meaning to a particular way of religious life.

Nationalists, on the other, are not necessarily anxious about preserving tradition. They are only concerned with tradition or order as long as it serves the pursuit of oneness or sameness. Research says that while conservatism may be a political ideology, it is also a psychological trait. Nationalism is primarily a political project.

Nationalists may, therefore, break traditions and support social change if it aids the pursuit of common goals. Conservatives may adapt to survive but will strive to preserve a particular order of life. More importantly, conservatives may not see other ways of life as a threat as long as each tradition is left to itself. For nationalists, differences are a threat to the project of sameness. It follows that conservatives need not be nationalists. However, Hindu conservatives could ally with Hindu nationalists when they feel that their religious tradition and identities are under threat.

Why is this distinction important? Hindu nationalists have traditionally been strong in the northern and western parts of the country. It is more recently that the party espousing this cause has found space in other parts too. Despite or maybe because of the progressive social movements, Hindu conservatism has more space in parts of the South. This is not to say that conservatives are not found in other parts of the country.

This space and tendencies for conservatism have been exploited and are axes of mobilisation for parties in some southern states. There is a familiar pattern here, when we examine the reactions of political parties after the Supreme Court verdict in 2018 when Sabarimala Temple was open to all genders irrespective of age. The Kerala unit of Congress pushed the conservative line underlining the verdict’s potential to undermine traditional order. The Left Democratic Front-led government’s actions to implement the court verdict were seen as threatening the sanctity of the temple and its order. In Kerala and Tamil Nadu, the lines are pretty straightforward, though one might not be able to demarcate differences sharply in the other states.

Parties could exploit conservative tendencies and frame issues in such a way as to highlight a threat to traditional belief patterns. In Andhra, the YSRCP had made a mark for itself as a welfare benefactor. For the TDP to stand out, it had to do something different. Exploiting the laddoo makes abundant political sense. When the Hindu conservative is concerned about issues like purity and pollution, sin and penance, among others, defilement of sacred food strikes a chord with devotees.

While there are differences between conservatives and nationalists, it is not difficult for the lines to be breached. Nationalists are likely to be more adept at framing this issue as a threat to the traditional order and thereby reap the benefits of this mobilisation. There is also a history. The common thread in the narratives on the Babri Masjid dispute shows that Rajiv Gandhi’s opening of the locks of the Mosque in Ayodhya in 1986 created space for the temple movement to take off. The rest, as they say, is history; the Congress ceased to be a player in Uttar Pradesh politics. The TDP should know that the laddoo can be eaten by someone else.

The writer is with the Department of Political Science, University of Hyderabad. Views are personal