A Civil Service tutor named Shubhra Ranjan has found herself at the center of a controversy following a viral video where she compared Mughal emperor Akbar to Hindu deity Rama. In the video, Ranjan stated that Ram “does not show unlimited power,” sparking outrage among netizens. The controversy has raised questions about the portrayal of historical and religious figures in educational content.
On Saturday, Ranjan issued an apology, stating that her intention was not to hurt anyone’s feelings. She emphasized that the video circulating on social media was only a small portion of a broader classroom discussion. Ranjan clarified that the video in question was part of a comparative study on the evolution of monarchy in India. She explained that the discussion aimed to highlight how the institution of monarchy has evolved across different time periods. She stressed that the video was a brief segment of a longer lecture, and that the full context was missing from the viral clip.
The controversy stemmed from Ranjan’s analysis of Akbar and Rama. She claimed that Akbar was aiming to establish his own religion and morality, highlighting his syncretic religion, ‘Dīn-i Ilāhī.’ In contrast, she argued that Ram “exercises morality” instead of defining it. She further elaborated on the concept of monarchy, asserting that the Indian monarchy was not absolute and that the king was bound by Dharma.
Ranjan’s comparison sparked a heated debate on social media. Several users expressed their displeasure, accusing Ranjan of blasphemy and hurting Hindu sentiments. Some even demanded strong action against her, claiming that she was corrupting the minds of UPSC aspirants. However, a section of users defended Ranjan, arguing that her analysis was valid and that she was simply trying to understand the historical context. They highlighted that her comments were taken out of context and that the video clip did not represent the entirety of her lecture.
The controversy serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between historical analysis and religious sensitivities. It highlights the complexities of discussing historical and religious figures in educational settings and the potential for misunderstanding when such discussions are taken out of context. It remains to be seen how the controversy will unfold and whether Ranjan’s explanation will appease her critics.
