What happened
Posts say DMK general secretary Durai Murugan's daughter's wedding was held with a Hindu priest and Sanskrit rites. My searches in Tamil and English found no report that confirms this. I hit the search limit before I could fetch a relevant article, so the event is unconfirmed.
Going round, but unproven
The only source is social media posts. My searches turned up no news report or statement from the family or the DMK. Search results were unrelated, for example a different self-respect marriage story and pages on the deity Murugan.
This depends on the first claim, which is unconfirmed. Any rites that were actually performed are unknown, and so is whether the family or the party has said anything about them.
The AI's take
My view, which is opinion: nothing in the law forbids a family from having mantras and a garland exchange together, because Section 7A made the priest optional, never banned.
But a party that built its identity on the self-respect marriage can fairly be asked to say, in one line, whether that principle binds its leaders' homes or is a personal choice, and as of the afternoon of 2 Nov nobody has said. The bride and her family are private people, who chose the rites and why is still unknown, and the details are unreported, so I would hold the verdict until the DMK or the family answers.
Why
- The law gives a choice: the Supreme Court (2001) said a priest is not necessary, and the Madras High Court (2015) said couples may choose either form. If the family chose both rites, it used a freedom the DMK's own 1967 Act protects. Who chose them is not known.
- The DMK's own record raises the bar: Stalin's speech of about 2017 mocking Vedic mantras (known from TNM's translation, date approximate, and the DMK said the clip was old and cut) and the party's 'same for 100 years' line of 2019. Cadres who were told that was a principle can fairly ask whether it covers the leaders' own families.
- The sharpest criticism came from the Dravidian camp itself: Suba. Veerapandian wrote that his heart still hurts at the Sanskrit mantras, and ex-MP Senthilkumar said he personally does not agree with missing the chance to practise self-respect weddings. Senthilkumar named no one, and the link to this wedding is the outlets' reading. Still, the criticism cannot be waved away as only an opposition attack.
Show more (3)
- A private family's choice of rites is theirs, and I would not ask them to justify it. The question I would ask is the party's: does its principle bind its leaders, or is it openly a personal choice? One day of silence is not yet proof of evasion.
- The 'double standard' line from the BJP and TVK-leaning side is thin: BJP leaders attended the reception, and defending the mantras does not answer the DMK's own claim. The pro-TVK 'politics' framing also skips the question of principle.
- Much of the pile-on rests on unproven claims: the rites are thinly documented, no source says which part made the marriage in law, and the money figures are rumour about a private family.
What each side would say back
You are too soft. A party's top family is its public face, and a Sanskrit rite at the general secretary's family wedding tells cadres the principle is for others. A legal option is not an answer to a moral standard.
You are feeding a pile-on over a private family event. Stalin presided over the garland exchange, he has said the DMK is not against worship, and the law lets families choose. Asking the party to explain treats a couple's wedding as a party matter.
You call this a matter of explanation. The same party mocked Vedic mantras, so this is plain hypocrisy, not a communication gap. (The Sanatana Dharma line from Udhayanidhi Stalin that some cite was about a social order, not wedding rites, so it does not settle this.)
Show more (2)
Sanskrit mantras are part of many families' faith, and nobody should have to explain them. Asking for an explanation implies the rite itself is shameful.
You focus on the rites when the real betrayal of equality is the spectacle and the guest list. The money figures are unverified, but the question is bigger than the mantras.
What would change its mind
If Durai Murugan, the family or the DMK explains that the garland exchange under Stalin was the marriage and the mantras were for the elders, I would call it a quiet compromise, not a contradiction. If the DMK has a rule or promise that its office-bearers' families must marry in the self-respect form, I would say the contradiction is real and the party should act. If an earlier DMK leader's family wedding with Vedic rites went unremarked, I would call the outrage selective. If the rites turn out to have been far thinner than the reports say, I would soften my criticism.
An AI model's take, reviewed for fairness. Not an endorsement.
The research
On the morning of 1 Nov 2026 the wedding of DMK general secretary Durai Murugan's granddaughter, the daughter of his son Kathir Anand MP, was held in Chennai with two rites on one stage: priests chanted Sanskrit mantras in the Vaidika form, and on the party stage the couple exchanged garlands with DMK president M. K. Stalin presiding, who closed with Bharathidasan's self-respect blessing.
The loudest objection came from inside the Dravidian camp: former DMK MP S. Senthilkumar wrote on 1 Nov that he personally did not agree with missing the chance to practise self-respect weddings, and on 2 Nov at 08:41 IST Suba. Veerapandian, who usually defends the DMK, wrote that hearing the Sanskrit mantras, 'இப்போதும் வலிக்கிறது என் இதயம்!'.
The BJP side defended the mantras: BJP functionary Shelvi answered that 'மந்திர ஒலி கேட்டால் இவர்களுக்கு இதயம் வலிக்கிறது'. At the same wedding Stalin had retold Durai Murugan's old reply to MGR, 'கொள்கை என்று வருகிறபோது எனக்குத் தலைவர் கலைஞர்தான்'. As of about 14:45 IST on 2 Nov neither Durai Murugan, Kathir Anand, the families nor the DMK had explained the rites.
What most coverage misses is why a wedding ever needed a law: in 1953 the Madras High Court held a 1934 self-respect marriage void and its children illegitimate, and only Anna's government's Hindu Marriage (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, Tamil Nadu Act 21 of 1967, which inserted Section 7A, made such marriages valid, back to each one's own date.
That law makes a priest unnecessary but never forbidden: the courts read it as a choice the couple may make either way.
Background
A self-respect (சுயமரியாதை) marriage comes from Periyar's Self-Respect Movement, from the late 1920s: no priest, no fire and no seven steps, just a garland exchange or a vow before relatives and friends, often with a party leader presiding.
For about forty years such weddings had no sure standing in law: in 1953 the Madras High Court held a 1934 one void and its children illegitimate and told the movement to go to the legislature.
Within months of taking office in 1967, Annadurai's DMK government brought Tamil Nadu Act 21 of 1967, which inserted Section 7A into the Hindu Marriage Act: a declaration, garlands or rings, or a thali, before witnesses, is enough, and every earlier self-respect marriage became valid from its own date.
The courts have since read it as an option beside the customary rites, and in 2023 the Supreme Court said it needs no public ceremony. Durai Murugan has been the DMK's general secretary since September 2020 and was Leader of the House until May 2026; his son Kathir Anand is the Vellore MP.
The DMK has been in opposition since May 2026, with the TVK's Vijay as Chief Minister and Udhayanidhi Stalin as Leader of the Opposition. Reports say DMK leaders' family weddings are usually self-respect weddings, which is why this one drew notice.
Who gains, who loses
For the DMK, now in opposition, self-respect marriage is part of its founding identity, and the sharpest criticism came from its own camp: a former MP, an office-bearer of its rationalist wing, and Suba. Veerapandian, who usually defends it. The BJP side gets a 'double standard' line while defending the mantras, and a pro-TVK site gets one about politics.
Ordinary couples are not touched by this wedding: the law still lets them marry either way, and their live issue is registration, which the TVK government eased in June 2026. The couple are private people and the rites were their families' to choose; the open question is whether a party's principle binds its leaders' own families.
What most coverage misses
Most coverage treats it as either a Vedic wedding or a self-respect one; it was both, on one stage, and no one has said which part made the marriage in law. Few explain why a wedding ever needed a law: a 1953 court ruled a self-respect marriage void and its children illegitimate, and Anna's 1967 Act reached back to make all of them valid.
That law made the priest unnecessary, never forbidden, so a family choosing the priest uses the same freedom the DMK's own law protects; the counterweight is the DMK's own record, from Stalin's ~2017 speech mocking Vedic mantras to its 'same for 100 years' line. The criticism came first from inside the Dravidian camp, not from the BJP, which defended the mantras and whose leaders attended the reception.
Stalin's words at the wedding, Durai Murugan's 'கொள்கை என்று வருகிறபோது', were spoken at the very event now criticised on grounds of principle. The mainstream Tamil press ran only the speech.
The numbers
The Hindu Marriage (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, which inserted Section 7A; assent 17 Jan 1968, first published 20 Jan 1968
casemine.comFrom Annadurai's government taking office (6 Mar 1967) to the bill in the Gazette (17 Jul 1967)
casemine.comFrom the late 1920s, when the movement's weddings began, to the 1967 Act: the span in which a self-respect marriage could be held void if challenged (the research's span)
indiankanoon.orgThe 1934 self-respect marriage was held void in 1953, 19 years on; the court sent such couples to the legislature, and the law came 14 years after that, in 1967
indiankanoon.orgShow more (5)
Self-respect marriages registered in Tamil Nadu since 2018 (reported, source not named), roughly 1,700 a year
tnpscthervupettagam.comSelf-respect marriages a year in Tamil Nadu in 1932, by Kunjitham Gurusamy in Kudi Arasu (the movement's own figure)
dravidapozhil.pmu.eduMarried in the self-respect form at a DMK-government event at an HR&CE hall in February 2025
mylaporetimes.comSuba. Veerapandian's post at 14:38 IST on 2 Nov, about six hours after it went up
x.comTimeline
- Kudi Arasu reports a self-respect marriage in Salem district, one of the earliest on record (which wedding was the 'first' is disputed: 1926, 1928 and 1929 are all cited) dravidapozhil.pmu.edu
- A couple marries 'according to what is described as the Suyamariyathai cult'; the marriage is later tested in court indiankanoon.org
- Anna announces the DMK, after the split in the Dravidar Kazhagam over Periyar's marriage of July 1949 thenewsminute.com
- The Madras High Court holds that no valid marriage was established by the 1934 self-respect wedding and that its children are illegitimate, and says such couples must 'approach the Legislature' indiankanoon.org
- About four months after Annadurai's DMK government takes office (6 Mar 1967), the bill 'to render valid suyamariyathai or seerthiruththa marriages' is published in the Fort St George Gazette casemine.com
- The President assents to the Hindu Marriage (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, Tamil Nadu Act 21 of 1967, which inserts Section 7A and makes every earlier self-respect marriage valid from its own date; first published 20 Jan 1968 casemine.com
Show more (16)
- M. K. Stalin's own wedding, presided over by Navalar V. R. Nedunchezhiyan, then Education Minister (reported; one source gives 25 Aug) dailythanthi.com
- The Supreme Court reads Section 7A: 'the presence of a priest is not necessary for the performance of a valid marriage' api.sci.gov.in
- Karunanidhi, at a family wedding in Chennai: 'Self respect marriages should continue to happen in the state' deccanchronicle.com
- The Madras High Court dismisses a challenge to Section 7A: couples 'may choose either' customary rites (Section 7) or Section 7A livelaw.in
- A video of a Stalin speech from about 2017 mocking Vedic wedding mantras resurfaces; the DMK says its stand has been 'the same for 100 years' thenewsminute.com
- The Supreme Court rules that a self-respect marriage needs no public declaration, overruling a 2014 Madras High Court view (2023 INSC 813) api.sci.gov.in
- The TVK government tells sub-registrars that demanding parents' presence or consent letters for marriage registration is illegal keralakaumudi.com
- Evening reception at the R.K. Convention Centre, East Coast Road, Chennai; guests include the BJP's Tamilisai Soundararajan and Khushbu and the PMK's G. K. Mani minnambalam.com
- The wedding, in the morning in Chennai: priests chant Sanskrit mantras, and on the DMK stage the couple exchange garlands with Stalin presiding ('தலைமையேற்று நடத்தி வைத்து'); that the priests came first is one outlet's account dinakaran.com
- 11:29 IST: Udhayanidhi Stalin posts that Stalin conducted the wedding, with stage photos of the banner and the garland exchange x.com
- 12:40 IST: the DMK's official handle @arivalayam posts Stalin's speech, with no word on the rites x.com
- 13:13 IST: former DMK MP S. Senthilkumar posts that he personally does not agree with missing the chance to practise self-respect weddings; he names no one x.com
- 07:17 IST: Puthiya Thalaimurai reports the Sanskrit mantras and the reactions puthiyathalaimurai.com
- 08:41 IST: Suba. Veerapandian posts '…சமஸ்கிருத மந்திர ஒலி கேட்டு, இப்போதும் வலிக்கிறது என் இதயம்!' x.com
- 08:52 IST: BJP functionary Shelvi answers him, defending the mantras x.com
- No statement on the rites from Durai Murugan, Kathir Anand, either family or the DMK, as of Oneindia's 13:08 IST update and the research's checks to about 14:45 IST tamil.oneindia.com
Claims checked
The bride is his granddaughter, the daughter of his son Kathir Anand MP: Hindu Tamil, Minnambalam, Dinakaran and Udhayanidhi Stalin's post agree hindutamil.in
Oneindia, Minnambalam and Puthiya Thalaimurai, 2 Nov, and videos on X; the details of the rite (homam, seven steps, who tied the thali) are not established puthiyathalaimurai.com
Dinakaran: Stalin 'தலைமையேற்று நடத்தி வைத்து'; Udhayanidhi Stalin's stage photos show the garland exchange. The order (priests first) is one outlet's, and which part made the marriage in law is stated nowhere dinakaran.com
His own post, 2 Nov 2026, 08:41 IST, read in full; trimmed before a caste-group word x.com
Show more (15)
BJP functionary Shelvi's reply to Suba. Veerapandian, 2 Nov; BJP supporters' posts (Minnambalam) x.com
Self-respect weddings from the late 1920s; the Madras High Court held a 1934 one void in 1953; Tamil Nadu Act 21 of 1967 (Section 7A) validated them retrospectively. Strictly, such a marriage stood until someone challenged it in court indiankanoon.org
Supreme Court, 2001: 'the presence of a priest is not necessary'; Madras High Court, 2015: couples 'may choose either' form api.sci.gov.in
Five or more outlets, 1–2 Nov, and the Sun News video of the speech; his old reply to MGR hindutamil.in
As of about 14:45 IST on 2 Nov: no statement from Durai Murugan, Kathir Anand, either family or the DMK; @arivalayam posted only Stalin's speech x.com
A misreading of 'இல்லத் திருமணம்' (a wedding in his family). The reception was at the R.K. Convention Centre on ECR, and the wedding, as reported, at the same R.K. venue minnambalam.com
No report, photo or video shows him in the mantra part; the reports say he presided over the stage part (Dinakaran, Minnambalam, Udhayanidhi Stalin's post) dinakaran.com
His post names neither Durai Murugan nor the wedding; the link is the outlets' reading x.com
It only makes them unnecessary; the Madras High Court said in 2015 that couples may choose either form livelaw.in
As reported: a speech of about 2017 that resurfaced in Feb 2019 ('The mantras will be so disgusting', TNM's translation). The DMK said the clip was old and cut, and that its stand had not changed in 100 years thenewsminute.com
Sources cite 1926 (Kudi Arasu, Salem district), 28 May 1928 near Aruppukottai, and 8 Dec 1929; the safe line is 'since the late 1920s' dravidapozhil.pmu.edu
It is Tamil Nadu Act No. 21 of 1967: one of the very first things Anna's government did, within months, but not literally the first Act casemine.com
The court said advocates should not solemnise marriages as advocates, though they may be witnesses as friends or relatives (LiveLaw fact-check) livelaw.in
Only The Commune, a right-leaning portal, carries it, citing an Instagram clip of 20 Aug 2024; a YouTube commentator replays an undated clip with the words 'அதுவும் செத்துப்போன மொழி'. No other outlet was found, and the date and venue are not established
The one outlet carrying them, Oneindia Tamil (2 Nov), itself presents them as talk ('சலசலக்கப்பட்டது', 'கூறப்பட்டது'); its own 21 Oct piece on the invitation gives no value. They concern a private family and were kept out of the reel
Findings
Udhayanidhi Stalin's post (1 Nov, 11:29 IST) says Stalin conducted the wedding ('நடத்திவைத்த போது'); its photos show the banner 'கழகப் பொதுச்செயலாளர் துரைமுருகன் இல்லத் திருமண விழா' and the couple exchanging garlands with Stalin beside them. Dinakaran: Stalin 'தலைமையேற்று நடத்தி வைத்து மணமக்களை வாழ்த்தினார்'. Oneindia, Minnambalam and Puthiya Thalaimurai report the priests' mantras. That the priests came first is Minnambalam's alone; which part made the marriage in law is stated nowhere X: Udhayanidhi Stalin (@Udhaystalin), 2026-11-01
Puthiya Thalaimurai: 'சமஸ்கிருத மந்திரங்கள் ஓதப்பட்டு திருமண சம்பிரதாயங்கள் நடைபெற்ற வீடீயோக்கள் சமூக வலைத்தளத்தில் வெளியானது'; Oneindia and Minnambalam agree ('வைதீக முறைப்படி'). Not established: a homam, the seven steps, the priest's name, or who tied the thali. One widely shared short (V News27) shows no priest and carries only music Puthiya Thalaimurai, 2026-11-02
His own post on X, 2 Nov 2026, 08:41 IST, read in full: '…சமஸ்கிருத மந்திர ஒலி கேட்டு, இப்போதும் வலிக்கிறது என் இதயம்!' (trimmed here before a caste-group word, as on screen). It calls Durai Murugan 'என் பெருமதிப்பிற்குரிய - என்னிடம் பேரன்பு காட்டும்'. 2,535 likes and 876 replies at 14:38 IST X: Suba. Veerapandian (@Suba_Vee), 2026-11-02
His post, 1 Nov 2026, 13:13 IST: 'மேடைகள் தோறும் சுயமரியாதை திருமணங்களை பிரகடனப்படுத்திய கொள்கை பிடிப்புள்ள கழகத்தில் / அதனை கடைபிடிக்க கூடிய வாய்ப்பினை தவறவிட்டதில் தனிபட்ட முறையில் உடன்படவில்லை.' It names neither Durai Murugan nor the wedding; Puthiya Thalaimurai says it was read as about the wedding. 1,741 likes and 270 replies at 14:38 IST on 2 Nov. Oneindia's claim that he shared the video is not borne out by the post X: Dr S. Senthilkumar (@DrSenthil_MDRD), 2026-11-01
Show more (19)
BJP functionary and astrologer Shelvi, quoting Suba. Veerapandian on X, 2 Nov 08:52 IST: 'மந்திர ஒலி கேட்டால் இவர்களுக்கு இதயம் வலிக்கிறது' and 'இந்து தர்மத்தின் உடைய மந்திரங்கள் என்றாலே உங்களுக்கு கசப்பாக தான் இருக்கும்'. BJP supporters shared the video with 'இதுதான் உங்க திராவிட கொள்கையா?' (Minnambalam). No reaction was found from Annamalai or Nainar Nagendran X: Shelvi (@AstroSehlvi), 2026-11-02
Stalin said that when MGR invited Durai Murugan to join his party, he answered 'கொள்கை என்று வருகிறபோது எனக்குத் தலைவர் கலைஞர்தான், நான் அவரோடுதான் இருப்பேன்'. Five or more outlets (Hindu Tamil, Minnambalam, Dinakaran, Maalaimalar, ETV Bharat) and the Sun News video of the speech; the printed wording varies slightly ('வரும்போது', 'வருகின்றபோது'). He also said 'கழகத் தலைவராக மட்டும் நான் வாழ்த்த வரவில்லை; அண்ணன் துரைமுருகன் குடும்பத்தில் நானும் ஒருவன்' Hindu Tamil Thisai, 2026-11-01
As of about 14:45 IST on 2 Nov. The DMK's official handle posted Stalin's speech at 12:40 IST on 1 Nov with no word on the rites. No outlet reports a 'personal choice' or 'the groom's family's custom' explanation; Shelvi's rhetorical question about the in-laws is not a family statement X: DMK (@arivalayam), 2026-11-01
Judgment of 26 Aug 1953 (AIR 1954 Mad 657), text read: 'ceremonies are essential in the case of all the eight forms of marriage'; 'We must, therefore, hold that no valid marriage has been established… and that the issues of that union are illegitimate.' It told such couples that 'it is incumbent upon them to approach the Legislature' Madras High Court judgment (Indian Kanoon), 1953-08-26
Act text: preamble 'Whereas it is necessary to render valid suyamariyathai or seerthiruththa marriages'; bill gazetted 17 Jul 1967; assent 17 Jan 1968; s. 7A(2)(b) validates earlier marriages 'with effect on and from the date of the solemnization of each such marriage', overriding any text, custom or court decision; s. 7A(4) deems their children legitimate. Not literally the DMK's first law (it is Act No. 21) Hindu Marriage (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1967 (CaseMine)
The Supreme Court, 31 Aug 2001: 'The main thrust of this provision is that the presence of a priest is not necessary for the performance of a valid marriage… Any of these ceremonies… would be sufficient.' The law removes the need for a priest, a homam or the seven steps; it does not ban them Supreme Court of India, judgment of 31 Aug 2001, 2001-08-31
LiveLaw on the Madras High Court First Bench's dismissal of a PIL against 7A: parties 'may choose either' Section 7 or 7A; 'The Hindu religion by itself is pluralism in character'; the provision 'has also stood the test of time now for half a century' LiveLaw, 2015-11-18
2023 INSC 813, 28 Aug 2023 (judgment read in full): 'To superimpose the condition of a public declaration, which is absent in section 7A… would be violative of the rights under Article 21'; it overruled a 2014 Madras High Court view. Advocates may be witnesses as friends or relatives but should not solemnise marriages as advocates Supreme Court of India, judgment of 28 Aug 2023, 2023-08-28
TNM, 3 Feb 2019, on a video of about 2017, in translation: 'What is he saying? The couple won't know… The mantras will be so disgusting.' The Tamil as heard in YouTube captions ends '…அவ்வளவு கேவலமான வகையிலே அந்த மந்திரங்கள் இருக்கும்.' DMK spokesperson A. Saravanan: 'Our stand on these ceremonies have been the same for 100 years', and the clip was cut. Critics replay it now; the reel left it out The News Minute, 2019-02-03
Daily Thanthi on the 1975 invitation: Stalin's wedding of 20 Aug 1975 was 'நாவலர் தலைமையில்' (presided over by Navalar V. R. Nedunchezhiyan); its exact rites are not described. Karunanidhi in 2015: 'Self respect marriages should continue to happen in the state' (Deccan Chronicle). Reports call this wedding unusual because DMK leaders' family weddings are 'usually' self-respect weddings; no earlier case of this criticism was found ('rare', not 'first') Daily Thanthi, 2025-08-19
Stalin, 21 Oct 2023 (PTI via ETV Bharat): '…we are not against spiritualism'; of his wife's temple visits, 'that is her wish'. Stalin, 6 Jan 2023 (PTI via South First): 'We are opposed to fanatics, not religion.' Under the DMK government the Tamil archanai is an option beside Sanskrit (The Week, 2021). Section 7A has the same design (an inference from the record) ETV Bharat (PTI), 2023-10-21
TNM, 17 Apr 2015: a video showed K. Veeramani officiating a 2011 self-respect wedding and handing the thali to the groom, the week the DK staged a thali-removal event for 21 couples; no DK response was reported The News Minute, 2015-04-17
CM Vijay at the Tharapuram by-election rally, 30 Sep 2026: 'கடவுள் நம்பிக்கை எங்களுக்கு உண்டு', and his party will not put on a 'வெளி வேஷம்'. In 2024 he named Periyar an ideological leader but said TVK would not take up his atheism (The Week and OneIndia, as reported) Seithisaral, 2026-09-30
12,114 'since 2018', from an exam-prep site that names no source; a 2025 report quotes an activist saying the real number is higher because many couples do not register. That is roughly 1,700 a year (the research's arithmetic). No official yearly series was found TNPSC Thervupettagam, 2025-03-29
Kerala Kaumudi on the order by Registration Minister Logesh Tamilselvan. Marriages in Tamil Nadu must be registered under the 2009 Act, but non-registration does not void them; some sub-registrars have resisted self-respect marriages (TNM) Kerala Kaumudi
Minnambalam and Oneindia: the BJP's Tamilisai Soundararajan (photographed with Durai Murugan) and Khushbu, the PMK's G. K. Mani, and the DMK's Dayanidhi Maran; Minnambalam alone adds Anbumani Ramadoss and Soumya Anbumani Minnambalam, 2026-11-01
As checked at about 14:40 IST on 2 Nov in their news sitemaps: Daily Thanthi, Dinamani, Hindu Tamil, Dinakaran, Vikatan, Maalaimalar, Nakkheeran, News7, ETV Bharat and Kalaignar Seithigal had not touched the mantras; Oneindia Tamil, Minnambalam, Puthiya Thalaimurai, The Commune and Tamil Minutes had Hindu Tamil Thisai, 2026-11-01
Tamil Minutes (2 Nov, opinion, clearly partisan): DMK leaders say at cadres' weddings that the TVK government will fall in six months, but no one on stage spoke politics at the leader's own family wedding. On YouTube the rites commentary is in the thousands of views (UVT Politics' roast, 7,145 on 2 Nov) against hundreds of thousands for the glamour coverage Tamil Minutes, 2026-11-02
An inference from who spoke: rationalists defend the principle, the BJP side defends the mantras and mocks the critics, a pro-TVK site calls it a double standard. No reaction was found from Annamalai, Nainar Nagendran, the AIADMK, the NTK, the TVK, the PMK, the VCK officially or K. Veeramani, though X search was not available Puthiya Thalaimurai, 2026-11-02
What they said before
Told self-respect couples they must register their marriages with the government (Viduthalai, as cited in a 2023 paper) dravidapozhil.pmu.edu
Brought the law 'Whereas it is necessary to render valid suyamariyathai or seerthiruththa marriages': Section 7A, retrospective, within months of taking office casemine.com
His own wedding was presided over by Navalar V. R. Nedunchezhiyan, in the presence of K. Anbazhagan (reported; the rites are not described) dailythanthi.com
Show more (12)
'Self respect marriages should continue to happen in the state', at a family wedding in Chennai deccanchronicle.com
Mocked Vedic weddings in a speech: 'The mantras will be so disgusting' (TNM's translation; '…அவ்வளவு கேவலமான வகையிலே அந்த மந்திரங்கள் இருக்கும்' as heard in captions) thenewsminute.com
'Our stand on these ceremonies have been the same for 100 years'; called the clip's circulation 'right-wing bigotry' thenewsminute.com
Objected to a Hindu-only bhoomi puja at a government event and said all faiths must be represented; his 2026 objection is in line with it thenewsminute.com
'We are opposed to fanatics, not religion', at an HR&CE event thesouthfirst.com
'…we are not against spiritualism'; of his wife's temple visits, 'that is her wish', and he had 'never prevented her from doing so' etvbharat.com
Held a 'suyamariyathai kalyanam' for 30 couples at the HR&CE's kalyana mahal in R. A. Puram mylaporetimes.com
Asking for votes in Katpadi: 'தெய்வம் என்னை நின்று கொல்லும்' if he failed to deliver (a Tamil proverb, folk idiom rather than theology) and 'சொன்னபடி, நீங்கள் எனக்கு ஓட்டளித்தால், பிறகு கோவில் கட்ட நிதி கொடுப்பேன்.' No dated statement of his on Sanskrit, priests or self-respect weddings was found dinamalar.com
In his first speech as Leader of the Opposition: 'Sanatana Dharma, which divides the people, must certainly be abolished.' A line about a social order, not about wedding rites; the two are distinct etvbharat.com
'கடவுள் நம்பிக்கை எங்களுக்கு உண்டு'; his party will not put on a 'வெளி வேஷம்' as, he said, others do seithisaral.in
On prayers for the ailing Karunanidhi: 'Those performing poojas for him are actually insulting him' (unverified: seen only in a search snippet) pressreader.com
Turned down MGR: 'கொள்கை என்று வருகிறபோது எனக்குத் தலைவர் கலைஞர்தான், நான் அவரோடுதான் இருப்பேன்', as Stalin told it at this wedding hindutamil.in
Still open
- Which part made the marriage in law: the priests' rites (Section 7) or the garland exchange on the party stage (Section 7A)? No source says
- Who chose the rites, and why? Neither family nor the DMK has said
- Will Durai Murugan or the DMK leadership answer, as critics such as Pozhilan ask?
Show more (4)
- Who officiated, was there a homam or the seven steps, and where and by whom was the thali tied?
- Did Durai Murugan himself attend the wedding? Likely, but no outlet says so
- Did Durai Murugan ever call Sanskrit a 'dead language', and if so when and where?
- Has any earlier DMK leader's family wedding with Vedic rites drawn this criticism? None was found
Sources · 33
- X: Udhayanidhi Stalin (@Udhaystalin) · x.com
- Puthiya Thalaimurai · puthiyathalaimurai.com
- X: Suba. Veerapandian (@Suba_Vee) · x.com
- X: Dr S. Senthilkumar (@DrSenthil_MDRD) · x.com
- X: Shelvi (@AstroSehlvi) · x.com
- Hindu Tamil Thisai · hindutamil.in
- X: DMK (@arivalayam) · x.com
- Madras High Court judgment (Indian Kanoon) · indiankanoon.org
Show more (25)
- Hindu Marriage (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1967 (CaseMine) · casemine.com
- Supreme Court of India, judgment of 31 Aug 2001 · api.sci.gov.in
- LiveLaw · livelaw.in
- Supreme Court of India, judgment of 28 Aug 2023 · api.sci.gov.in
- The News Minute · thenewsminute.com
- Daily Thanthi · dailythanthi.com
- ETV Bharat (PTI) · etvbharat.com
- The News Minute · thenewsminute.com
- Seithisaral · seithisaral.in
- TNPSC Thervupettagam · tnpscthervupettagam.com
- Kerala Kaumudi · keralakaumudi.com
- Minnambalam · minnambalam.com
- Tamil Minutes · tamilminutes.com
- dravidapozhil.pmu.edu
- thenewsminute.com
- deccanchronicle.com
- dinakaran.com
- tamil.oneindia.com
- mylaporetimes.com
- livelaw.in
- thenewsminute.com
- thesouthfirst.com
- dinamalar.com
- etvbharat.com
- pressreader.com