On Monday, a shocking act unraveled in the Supreme Court when advocate Rakesh Kishore, 72, hurled his shoe at Chief Justice of India BR Gavai. What followed was worse–justification of criminality in the name of God, and its online celebration as a defiant act of courage.First, Kishore justified this blatant breach of judicial decorum as retribution for an alleged insult to “Sanatan Dharma,” claiming divine instruction for his act of aggression. Instead of being ashamed of his crass behaviour at the ripe age of 72, he was unapologetic. Soon after, this violent act was lauded by a section of the Hindu right-wing as a courageous defense of their faith–Santan Dharma– against perceived judicial blasphemy.What this spectacle exposes, beyond the immediate breach of court protocol, is a profound ignorance — ignorance about the very concept of Sanatan Dharma and a caricatured understanding of justice, faith, and civic responsibility.Kishore’s outrage stems from remarks made by CJI Gavai in a case about the restoration of a damaged Lord Vishnu idol in Khajuraho. Dismissing a petition, the CJI had advised that one should “go and ask the deity itself” because the courts could not order archaeological restoration. He also advised the petitioner to introspect and meditate. This was twisted into a narrative of insult and disdain toward Hindu faith, sparking a wave of online vitriol that culminated in Kishore’s shocking attack.But here lies the irrefutable irony: Kishore and his supporters do not comprehend either “Sanatan” or “Dharma” in their truest senses. To insult the Chief Justice—who himself is a Buddhist yet outspoken in his respect for all religions—is to betray the eternal law that the phrase “Sanatan Dharma” embodies.The phrase “Sanatan Dharma” is often brandished today as a rallying cry for Hindu identity, but its roots run far deeper and remain universally foundational. Sanatan means “eternal,” and Dharma means “law” or “duty.”Intriguingly, the compound term ‘Sanatan Dharma’ first emerges not in Hindu scriptures but in the early Buddhist text Subhashita Sutta of the Suttanipata, literally a collection of teachings. The verse states: Sacca ve amata vaca asa dhammo sanantano, Saveca atthe ca dhamme ca ahu santo patihita.” This translates as, “Truth is the undying word; this is the eternal law. In truth, the good say, the goal and the doctrine are grounded.”In this context, “Sanatana Dharma” refers to an unchanging, eternal moral and cosmic order: the universal principle of truth. Buddhists equated it with timeless totality, not sectarian identity. The term’s exclusive association with Hindu traditions is a comparatively modern construct, popularised largely during the colonial period to consolidate Hindu identity against imposed Western and Christian frameworks.By attempting violence against the CJI, the highest seat of justice, Kishore violated the very essence of ‘Sanatan Dharma’ – the eternal duty to uphold truth, righteousness, and peace.Sanatan Dharma commands moral duty without the sting of fanaticism. It demands behaviour rooted in dharma, truth, respect for all dharmas, and above all, ahimsa — non-violence.To attempt to justify lawlessness by invoking divine sanction is not only an abdication of legal ethics but a fundamental misunderstanding of dharma itself. The attacker’s invocation of “God’s instruction” echoes twisted logic, usurpation of righteousness where it doesn't exist. It is not just a crime, but also blasphemy.Kishore’s act is not an isolated incident of disrespect; it is emblematic of a wider societal ailment — the weaponisation of faith and manufactured outrage. Reactionary forces often stir collective anger against institutions and individuals when decisions and ideas don’t align with their sentiments and beliefs.Like always, social media played a central role in amplifying misconstrued narratives that painted CJI Gavai’s measured courtroom remarks as deliberate insults, and later hailed the attack with divisive comments and memes crafted with religious imagery. One GIF turned the flying footwear into a Trishul. Another video clip, slowed for dramatic effect, overlaid the hurl with devotional chants, hailing it as “divine justice” against “anti-Sanatan forces.”These aren't fringe rants; they're the staple of the misguided trapped in the echo chamber of hate and misinformation. The Bar Council immediately revoked the lawyer’s membership and Prime Minister Narendra Modi expressed regret over the incident, yet Kishore emerged as a folk hero to those nursing farcical grievances.The Chief Justice himself handled the situation with remarkable composure, urging his colleagues to stay focused and not be distracted by provocations. He refused to file a complaint and even asked the cops to return Kishore’s sandal. Further, he clarified publicly that his remarks were not intended to disrespect any religion, asserting clearly, “I respect all religions.” This is a testament to the enlightenment of both the judiciary and faith; it is an example of Dharma, a moral duty.This event reminds us that the true defence of faith begins with understanding and respect, not impulsive spectacle or violence. An eternal dharma cannot coexist with temporary, reactionary indignation that resorts to violence. True adherents of Sanatan Dharma believe in restraint, reason, righteousness and tolerance. Those who violate these codes insult both devotion and duty.
Attack on CJI Gavai and its online celebration is violation of Sanatan Dharma
