The festival of Raksha Bandhan, deeply rooted in Indian tradition, is a time of celebration, symbolising the bond between brothers and sisters. However, this year, a comment by Sudha Murty, a respected Rajya Sabha member and a prominent figure in Indian society, sparked a wave of controversy.
On social media platform X, Murty linked the origin of Raksha Bandhan to the Mughal emperor Humayun, and the internet quickly became a battleground of opinions.
The Controversial Statement
Sudha Murty, in her post, shared a video where she discussed the historical origins of Raksha Bandhan. According to her, the tradition of tying a thread, or rakhi, began when Rani Karnavati, the regent of Mewar, sent a thread to Emperor Humayun as a symbol of sibling hood, seeking his protection during a crisis.
Murty said, “Raksha Bandhan has a rich history. When Rani Karnavati was in danger, she sent a thread to King Humayun as a symbol of sibling hood, asking for his help. This is where the tradition of the thread began, and it continues to this day.”
While Murty’s intent might have been to highlight a lesser-known historical narrative, the response on social media was swift and unforgiving. Her post, which was meant to celebrate the historical significance of the festival, ended up attracting a barrage of criticism.
Social Media Backlash
The internet, known for its swift reactions, saw a flood of responses, with many users on X (formerly Twitter) expressing their disbelief and anger at the claim. Some called the story “fake history,” while others labelled it as “absolute rubbish.” One particularly vocal user criticised Murty, saying,
“Stop creating JNU inspired fake history,” while another commented, “At this moment I know you know nothing about Indian festivals and culture if you believe in this nonsense story.” These reactions reflect the deep-seated sensitivity around historical narratives and the portrayal of Indian traditions.
The backlash wasn’t just limited to individual comments. The claim also led to a broader discussion on how history is interpreted and presented, particularly by public figures. Many netizens took issue with Murty’s reference to Humayun, arguing that it distorts the traditional understanding of Raksha Bandhan, which is more commonly associated with Hindu mythology, particularly the tale of Draupadi and Lord Krishna.
Memes Flood on Infosys and Sudha Murthy
Humayun was the greatest king of India.
He fought against United Kingdom in 16th century (much before Brits conquered India) to ensure that Son-in-law of Infosys becomes Prime Minister of UK some time in 21st century.
Sudha Murthy ji is thankful to Humayun ji forever! pic.twitter.com/8GToIfaXuy
— Macro Maniac (@Macro_Maniac_) August 19, 2024
Mughal emperor Akbar launching the Infosys website, 1565. pic.twitter.com/AjJGroWp53
— THE SKIN DOCTOR (@theskindoctor13) August 19, 2024
Humayun after doing genocide for 70 hours a week pic.twitter.com/XFGPyHVG3V
— vinit shenoy (@vinit_shenoy) August 19, 2024
Rare picture of Humayun in Board of Directors meeting of Infosys. pic.twitter.com/xbfa951AtY
— rae (@ChillamChilli) August 19, 2024
The Origin of the Humayun-Karnavati Story
The story that Sudha Murty referred to has its roots in a popular myth. Rani Karnavati, the widow of Rana Sanga and the regent of Mewar, is said to have sent a rakhi to Emperor Humayun when her kingdom was under threat from Bahadur Shah of Gujarat.
The story goes that Humayun, touched by the gesture, set out to protect Mewar. However, by the time he reached, the kingdom had already fallen. Despite his late arrival, Humayun eventually helped restore the kingdom to Karnavati’s son, Vikramjit Singh.
While this story is widely circulated, historians have questioned its authenticity. Satish Chandra, in his book Medieval India, mentions that contemporary sources from that era do not provide any evidence to support this narrative.
Chandra notes that a 17th-century Rajasthani text does mention that Humayun received a bracelet from Rani Karnavati, but it does not explicitly connect this to the Raksha Bandhan tradition. This lack of concrete historical evidence has led many to dismiss the story as a later addition to the festival’s mythology.
