Published on: November 21, 2025 5:22 pm
The Indian film industry has once again found itself at the center of a heated controversy—this time involving two of Telugu cinema’s most influential filmmakers: S. S. Rajamouli and Ram Gopal Varma (RGV). The debate began after Rajamouli allegedly stated that he “does not believe in God Hanuman” during a glitch-filled event related to his upcoming project Varanasi. The remark ignited outrage among certain groups, leading to police complaints, social media storms, and intense public scrutiny. As criticism escalated, filmmaker Ram Gopal Varma stepped forward to defend Rajamouli, arguing that atheism is a constitutional right and accusing detractors of baseless, jealousy-driven attacks.
What Triggered the “Varanasi” Controversy?
The problem began when Rajamouli reportedly made a light comment about not believing in Lord Hanuman during a promotional segment linked to Varanasi, his upcoming action-drama starring Mahesh Babu. According to reports, a minor technical issue occurred on stage, prompting Rajamouli to jokingly say that such glitches always happen at his events because “I don’t believe in Hanuman.”
While intended as humour, the comment quickly escalated into a massive controversy.
Public Reaction: Outrage and Complaints
- Several individuals in Varanasi filed police complaints alleging hurt religious sentiments.
- Certain local groups argued that Rajamouli, as a public figure, must be sensitive about religious matters.
- Social media polarized instantly—some condemned him, while others defended his right to express personal beliefs.
The situation intensified when clips of the comment went viral, often stripped of context, amplifying misunderstandings and anger.
Ram Gopal Varma Enters the Debate
Known for his outspoken nature, Ram Gopal Varma took to social media to defend Rajamouli. His posts instantly went viral, adding fuel to the debate.
RGV’s Core Argument: Atheism Is Not a Crime
Varma pointed out that India’s Constitution protects freedom of belief, including the right to not follow any religion. According to him, Rajamouli’s personal views cannot be treated as an offense.
RGV wrote that being an atheist does not disqualify someone from creating films with mythological themes. He compared filmmaking to storytelling—where creators can build worlds and characters regardless of their personal beliefs.
RGV Slams Critics
Varma criticized those attacking Rajamouli, calling their outrage:
- “Jealousy disguised as devotion”
- “Baseless emotional drama”
- “An attempt to exploit religious sentiments for attention”
Varma argued that people are upset not because Rajamouli is an atheist but because he is a successful atheist, which challenges certain narratives in society.
The Larger Debate: Faith vs. Creativity in Cinema
Rajamouli’s filmography includes movies deeply rooted in Indian mythology, symbolism and spirituality—Baahubali, RRR, Eega, and more. For many viewers, his perceived atheism seems contradictory to the films he makes.
Can an atheist make mythological cinema?
RGV addressed this by giving bold analogies:
- “Does a director need to be a gangster to make a gangster film?”
- “Should a filmmaker become a ghost to make a horror movie?”
- “Should the creator of Jurassic Park believe dinosaurs still exist?”
His point: creative expression is independent of personal belief.
Cinema is fiction, imagination, and interpretation—not a moral certificate.
Rajamouli’s Silence and Its Impact
Interestingly, Rajamouli has not issued any lengthy clarification. His silence has become a subject of discussion too. Some interpret it as:
- A sign of dignity, avoiding unnecessary drama
- A strategic move to prevent the controversy from growing
- Trust in the legal system and audience understanding
In contrast, critics view his silence as evasive. Regardless, his minimalistic response has kept the spotlight on RGV instead of himself—intentionally or not.
The Role of Media in Multiplying the Controversy
Clips spread on social media often do not show what happened before or after Rajamouli’s comment. Many users shared:
- Edited versions
- Misleading captions
- Out-of-context interpretations
This transformed the issue from a light remark into a nationwide debate. News channels amplified it further through panel discussions and dramatic headlines.
Cultural Sensitivity vs. Free Expression
India is a culturally diverse country with deep emotional ties to faith. When a respected filmmaker speaks about religious beliefs—even casually—it becomes a topic of public interest.
Supporters say:
- Personal faith is private.
- A humorous remark should not be criminalized.
- Freedom of speech includes freedom from religion.
Opponents say:
- Public figures influence society and should be careful with statements.
- Remarks about revered deities can upset communities.
- Popular icons must avoid comments that could spark disharmony.
This clash represents a long-standing debate in Indian society—between protecting sentiments and safeguarding expression.
Legal Angle: Are Comments Like These Punishable?
Police complaints were filed under sections related to:
- Insulting religious beliefs
- Promoting enmity
- Hurt sentiments
However, legal experts say:
- Casual or humorous expressions without malicious intent rarely meet the threshold for prosecution.
- Courts have repeatedly emphasized the need to distinguish offense from offence.
- A statement made in mixed company at a public event often does not prove deliberate intent.
Thus, legally, Rajamouli’s position remains strong.
Impact on “Varanasi” Film and Its Promotions
The controversy comes at a sensitive time because Varanasi is already one of the most hyped Indian films in development. It has:
- A massive budget
- International collaborations
- High expectations due to Rajamouli–Mahesh Babu combination
- A global storyline inspired by ancient civilizations
Any controversy around the director can influence:
- Public reactions
- Media coverage
- Promotional strategies
The filmmakers may now adapt their promotional approach to avoid religious misunderstandings.
Title Clash: Another Issue Surrounding “Varanasi”
Even before this atheism row, Varanasi faced a title dispute with reports indicating that another producer had already registered the name. This gave the controversy additional visibility.
It also shows how high-stakes filmmaking becomes vulnerable to multiple pressures—legal, creative, cultural and commercial.
Historical Context: This Isn’t New
This incident highlights a recurring trend where:
- Actors
- Directors
- Writers
- Artists
get criticized for religious or cultural comments.
Similar controversies in India include:
- Kamal Haasan’s remarks on extremism
- Aamir Khan’s comments on intolerance
- Deepika Padukone’s temple photo controversy
- Various statements related to films like PK, Padmaavat, The Kashmir Files
Indian cinema often finds itself trapped between art and sentiment.
Why Ram Gopal Varma’s Voice Matters
RGV remains one of the most outspoken filmmakers in India. Over decades, he has:
- Challenged social norms
- Defended free speech
- Criticized hypocrisy in public discourse
His support for Rajamouli is significant because:
- He is senior and influential
- He is fearless about backlash
- He has a large following with strong opinions
- He understands the pressures filmmakers face
His intervention may have helped reduce the intensity of the controversy by shifting attention.
Industry Reaction
Many film personalities have subtly expressed support for Rajamouli without taking names. Industry insiders say:
- Rajamouli is widely respected
- Few want to directly challenge religious groups
- No one wants to jeopardize film promotions
Therefore, RGV’s entry into the conversation gives the industry some relief—he says what others can’t.
Audience Reaction: Split Down the Middle
Social media comments reflect a divided public.
Supporters argue:
- Rajamouli has the right to his beliefs.
- His films celebrate Indian culture regardless.
- The controversy is exaggerated for political or online attention.
Critics argue:
- Public icons must be careful.
- Comments about deities cannot be taken casually.
- Artistic freedom should not offend religious sentiments.
The debate continues to trend across platforms.
Broader Implications for Indian Cinema
This incident raises key questions:
- Should filmmakers hide their personal beliefs to avoid backlash?
- Can casual remarks be criminalized?
- Should freedom of expression depend on public mood?
- Do artists owe explanations for personal philosophies?
The answers remain complex and evolving.
Conclusion
The Varanasi controversy reflects the delicate balance between personal beliefs, public expectations, religious sentiment and creative freedom in India. Rajamouli’s alleged atheist remark, though made casually, sparked national discussion, highlighting how emotionally intertwined faith and public figures are in Indian society.
Ram Gopal Varma’s sharp defense brought a much-needed counterpoint, reminding people that India protects the right to believe and the right not to believe. His arguments force us to re-evaluate whether outrage is justified—or merely performative.
As Varanasi progresses toward release, the focus may shift back to its cinematic ambition. But this incident will stay as a reminder of the evolving relationship between creators, beliefs and public perception in modern Indian cinema.
