Prime Minister Narendra Modi has acted as an astute politician by presiding over the Cabinet decision to grant 10 per cent reservation in government jobs and educational institutions for the economically deprived in the general category and then ensuring the passage of the bill in the Lok Sabha (lower House of Parliament) on Tuesday (January 8, 2018).

The passage of The Constitution (124th Amendment) Bill, 2019 in Lok Sabha, after a marathon debate, proved to be a tame affair. With 323 members voting in its favour and only three voting against. In this way, the Bill was passed by the requisite majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting as prescribed under Article 368 of the Constitution.

The 124th Constitution Amendment Bill provides for special provision for a maximum of 10 per cent reservation to all economically weaker sections of citizens from the general category for the reservation of appointments or posts and also for admission to educational institutions, including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the state, excluding the minority educational institutions.

Prime Minister Modi's move ahead of parliamentary elections, to go for 10 per cent reservation for the economically weaker sections cutting across religious lines in government jobs and educational institutions is being described as a game changer. The debate on this Bill in Parliament showed that all the opposition party's that are pitching for a 'grand alliance' against the BJP for the coming parliamentary election have been caught flat-footed and had no choice but to support the Bill. All they had to say against it was its "timing". Modi was targetted in Parliament and the charge levelled against him was that ahead of Lok Sabha polls, he was trying to regain lost ground among the "Savarnas" (the so-called upper castes) who have been excluded from the quota system and were demanding reservation on an economic basis and not on caste lines.&nbsp;

The demand for reservation on economic basis was raised in a big way in Madhya Pradesh by SAPAKS Samaj, a people’s organisation founded in November 2016. During electioneering for the just-concluded Madhya Pradesh Assembly election, a large section of those wedded to the SAPAKS ideology were in favour of NOTA and they had circulated this message through the social media across constituencies among the die-hard SAPAKS activists who had &nbsp;been galvanised by the massive support to the call for Bharat Bandh against the amendment to the SC/ST Atrocities Act by the Union Government and this had led to what could be described as a “tectonic shift” of votes away from the BJP at a time when there was neither a wave against the BJP nor an over-riding support for the Congress party in Madhya Pradesh.

When both parties were fighting neck to neck and chasing every vote, when the victory margin for dozens of candidates got reduced to just a few hundred votes, the half a million plus NOTA votes have played a decisive role in shaping the outcome of the Madhya Pradesh Assembly elections.&nbsp;

The implementation of 10 per cent reservation for economically weaker sections, will increase the reserved quota to 59.5 per cent from the existing 49.5 per cent.

There is a need for a national debate to evaluate and analyse the overall impact of the existing reservation regime when it comes to the advancement and progress of the "socially and educationally" backward SC/ST communities. We also need to prepare state-wise comprehensive human development reports (HDRs) covering a whole gamut of indices to pin-point backwardness and to identify sections that still require the benefit of reservation.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has acted as an astute politician by presiding over the Cabinet decision to grant 10 per cent reservation in government jobs and educational institutions for the economically deprived in the general category and then ensuring the passage of the bill in the Lok Sabha (lower House of Parliament) on Tuesday (January 8, 2018).

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has acted as an astute politician by presiding over the Cabinet decision to grant 10 per cent reservation in government jobs and educational institutions for the economically deprived in the general category and then ensuring the passage of the bill in the Lok Sabha (lower House of Parliament) on Tuesday (January 8, 2018). The passage of The Constitution (124th Amendment) Bill, 2019 in Lok Sabha, after a marathon debate, proved to be a tame affair. With 323 members voting in its favour and only three voting against. In this way, the Bill was passed by the requisite majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting as prescribed under Article 368 of the Constitution. The 124th Constitution Amendment Bill provides for special provision for a maximum of 10 per cent reservation to all economically weaker sections of citizens from the general category for the reservation of appointments or posts and also for admission to educational institutions, including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the state, excluding the minority educational institutions. Prime Minister Modi's move ahead of parliamentary elections, to go for 10 per cent reservation for the economically weaker sections cutting across religious lines in government jobs and educational institutions is being described as a game changer. The debate on this Bill in Parliament showed that all the opposition party's that are pitching for a 'grand alliance' against the BJP for the coming parliamentary election have been caught flat-footed and had no choice but to support the Bill. All they had to say against it was its "timing". Modi was targetted in Parliament and the charge levelled against him was that ahead of Lok Sabha polls, he was trying to regain lost ground among the "Savarnas" (the so-called upper castes) who have been excluded from the quota system and were demanding reservation on an economic basis and not on caste lines. The demand for reservation on economic basis was raised in a big way in Madhya Pradesh by SAPAKS Samaj, a people’s organisation founded in November 2016. During electioneering for the just-concluded Madhya Pradesh Assembly election, a large section of those wedded to the SAPAKS ideology were in favour of NOTA and they had circulated this message through the social media across constituencies among the die-hard SAPAKS activists who had been galvanised by the massive support to the call for Bharat Bandh against the amendment to the SC/ST Atrocities Act by the Union Government and this had led to what could be described as a “tectonic shift” of votes away from the BJP at a time when there was neither a wave against the BJP nor an over-riding support for the Congress party in Madhya Pradesh. When both parties were fighting neck to neck and chasing every vote, when the victory margin for dozens of candidates got reduced to just a few hundred votes, the half a million plus NOTA votes have played a decisive role in shaping the outcome of the Madhya Pradesh Assembly elections. The implementation of 10 per cent reservation for economically weaker sections, will increase the reserved quota to 59.5 per cent from the existing 49.5 per cent. There is a need for a national debate to evaluate and analyse the overall impact of the existing reservation regime when it comes to the advancement and progress of the "socially and educationally" backward SC/ST communities. We also need to prepare state-wise comprehensive human development reports (HDRs) covering a whole gamut of indices to pin-point backwardness and to identify sections that still require the benefit of reservation. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opposition parties fall in line and support quota for economically weaker sections

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/obc-outfit-to-challenge-maratha-reservation-in-court-180304">The Bombay High Court </a>Wednesday sought to know if the Maharashtra government had conducted any study or survey before issuing a notification in 1967 inducting several castes in the OBC category for reservation.

A division bench of Chief Justice N H Patil and Justice N M Jamdar was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by activist B A Sarate challenging the inclusion of several castes in the Other Backward Class (OBC) group.

Sarate's counsel V M Thorat told the HC that out of the 96 castes included in the OBC category, nearly 40 per cent were not even eligible for reservation.

"Inclusion of these castes is unconstitutional. There is a procedure laid down while deciding which caste should be included in a particular category for reservation. The government is not following this procedure," Thorat said.

The bench then sought to know if the government had carried out any study or survey before issuing the Government Resolution (GR) in 1967 inducting a particular caste in the OBC category.

The petitioner has challenged the GR enlisting 180 castes and sub-castes for inclusion in the OBC category, and also another GR, dated March 1994, which increased the OBC quota percentage from 14 per cent to 32 per cent.

The petition claimed that various castes or communities were included in the OBC category without any survey, quantifiable data, investigation to determine the social, educational and economic backwardness.

"There has to be a comprehensive commission to carry out study and collect data. This is what the petition also seeks," Chief Justice Patil said.

The bench then directed that the petition be placed for hearing before an appropriate bench next week.

B A Sarate's counsel V M Thorat told the HC that out of the 96 castes included in the OBC category, nearly 40 per cent were not even eligible for reservation.

The Bombay High Court Wednesday sought to know if the Maharashtra government had conducted any study or survey before issuing a notification in 1967 inducting several castes in the OBC category for reservation. A division bench of Chief Justice N H Patil and Justice N M Jamdar was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by activist B A Sarate challenging the inclusion of several castes in the Other Backward Class (OBC) group. Sarate's counsel V M Thorat told the HC that out of the 96 castes included in the OBC category, nearly 40 per cent were not even eligible for reservation. "Inclusion of these castes is unconstitutional. There is a procedure laid down while deciding which caste should be included in a particular category for reservation. The government is not following this procedure," Thorat said. The bench then sought to know if the government had carried out any study or survey before issuing the Government Resolution (GR) in 1967 inducting a particular caste in the OBC category. The petitioner has challenged the GR enlisting 180 castes and sub-castes for inclusion in the OBC category, and also another GR, dated March 1994, which increased the OBC quota percentage from 14 per cent to 32 per cent. The petition claimed that various castes or communities were included in the OBC category without any survey, quantifiable data, investigation to determine the social, educational and economic backwardness. "There has to be a comprehensive commission to carry out study and collect data. This is what the petition also seeks," Chief Justice Patil said. The bench then directed that the petition be placed for hearing before an appropriate bench next week.

Inclusion of castes in OBC group: Bombay HC seeks Maharashtra response on PIL

Electoral commitment reigns supreme in Indian politics but the desperation that politicians in Karnataka have shown for electoral benefits is as good as playing with fire. Now the Karnataka government has accepted the proposal of Justice Nagamohan Das Committee and decided to forward it to the Centre to make the final call on the issue, the outcome is anyone's guess.

The ramification will be felt nationally as the debate mutates from a sect's right to secede and acquire a separate identity to question of division of Hinduism into lesser denominations. On top of it, the larger Veer Shaiva community is opposed to this idea though Lingayats say that they are different from them. 

After the unceremonious sacking of Karnataka CM Virendra Patil by the Congress government, the Lingayat community never voted for the Congress in-block since then. Today the community stands behind the BJP but with this move, political blocks in Karnataka will no doubt be rearranged. The decision might suit the BJP nationally but in the state it will have to redefine its position.
 
Lingayats have a substantial presence in Karnataka and can play a make-or-break role in assembly elections. Even former BJP chief minister Yeddyurappa belongs to the Lingayat community. The birth of religions has never been an easy process in any part of the world as it involves the process of differentiation and codification which is always marked with social upheaval and violence. 

New religious ecosystems are always linked to an idea of God, society and salvation which stands in opposition to the existing practice. 

But in Karnataka, the Lingayat churning has acquired an overt electoral colour. Caste reservations or linguistic reorganisation of states in the past too have been products of powerful agitations, but the demand for a separate religious status through a political agitation and mass rallies is a first in post-independent India. 

Hinduism or as it is sometimes referred - Sanatan Dharma - is one of the five acknowledged religions in the Constitution of India. The Constitution provides freedom to practice and propagate religion in the country and this is enshrined as a fundamental right. In this context, the movement and protest in Karnataka is neither illegal nor outside the civilizational ethos of the subcontinent. 

The difference this time is that politicians in Karnataka have decided to play with a social movement within Hinduism whose attempt was to establish an egalitarian society opposed to the prevalent caste structure and upper caste practices.
 
Hinduism over time has seen the rise and fall of various sects which are primarily described as sampradayas. In this context, Lingayats say that they have been different from 12th century AD and also want to be differentiated from Veershaivas, who they feel are using the word "Lingayats" far too loosely. 

Broadly, reform movements through centuries have made an impact on Hinduism, but eventually become part of the larger Hindu family. The ability to absorb and live peacefully with differences is one of the strengths of Hinduism.
 
With political manoeuvring, it opens up a Pandora's box whose impact can be constitutional, civilizational and political. It will be constitutional because any addition will have to be legislated and the matter will undergo legal scrutiny. It is civilizational because after Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism, Lingayats will become the fourth religion to be born in India out of a legal and political process and not through social negotiation with other religious cosmologies. 

For example, the birth of Sikhism was bloody and led to sacrifices by the Gurus who led the faith and subsequently codified it. In the Lingayat’s context, the issue was examined a legal luminary and will be followed up by political luminaries at Centre.

The political impact of the Lingayat demand being accepted would be far more pervasive. It will reduce the demographic and numerical strength of Hinduism in Karnataka and secession will open the door to other sects to be recognised as a separate religion.

It can be argued that the strength of Hinduism has been its ability to absorb dissent by creating subspaces like sects which can be independent organizationally and socially, but still share common cultural codes of worship and life in general with Hinduism.

Though the context was different the "Communal Award" announced by the British for a separate electorate touched the same nerve against which Mahatma Gandhi fasted. The time and subject is different but the context remains the same. The party which would pander to this may win Karnataka but will lose India hands down for the polarisation it will create. 

Politicians should remember that only the Goddess rides the tiger.

Lingayats have a substantial presence in Karnataka and can play a make-or-break role in assembly elections

Electoral commitment reigns supreme in Indian politics but the desperation that politicians in Karnataka have shown for electoral benefits is as good as playing with fire. Now the Karnataka government has accepted the proposal of Justice Nagamohan Das Committee and decided to forward it to the Centre to make the final call on the issue, the outcome is anyone's guess. The ramification will be felt nationally as the debate mutates from a sect's right to secede and acquire a separate identity to question of division of Hinduism into lesser denominations. On top of it, the larger Veer Shaiva community is opposed to this idea though Lingayats say that they are different from them. After the unceremonious sacking of Karnataka CM Virendra Patil by the Congress government, the Lingayat community never voted for the Congress in-block since then. Today the community stands behind the BJP but with this move, political blocks in Karnataka will no doubt be rearranged. The decision might suit the BJP nationally but in the state it will have to redefine its position. Lingayats have a substantial presence in Karnataka and can play a make-or-break role in assembly elections. Even former BJP chief minister Yeddyurappa belongs to the Lingayat community. The birth of religions has never been an easy process in any part of the world as it involves the process of differentiation and codification which is always marked with social upheaval and violence. New religious ecosystems are always linked to an idea of God, society and salvation which stands in opposition to the existing practice. But in Karnataka, the Lingayat churning has acquired an overt electoral colour. Caste reservations or linguistic reorganisation of states in the past too have been products of powerful agitations, but the demand for a separate religious status through a political agitation and mass rallies is a first in post-independent India. Hinduism or as it is sometimes referred - Sanatan Dharma - is one of the five acknowledged religions in the Constitution of India. The Constitution provides freedom to practice and propagate religion in the country and this is enshrined as a fundamental right. In this context, the movement and protest in Karnataka is neither illegal nor outside the civilizational ethos of the subcontinent. The difference this time is that politicians in Karnataka have decided to play with a social movement within Hinduism whose attempt was to establish an egalitarian society opposed to the prevalent caste structure and upper caste practices. Hinduism over time has seen the rise and fall of various sects which are primarily described as sampradayas. In this context, Lingayats say that they have been different from 12th century AD and also want to be differentiated from Veershaivas, who they feel are using the word "Lingayats" far too loosely. Broadly, reform movements through centuries have made an impact on Hinduism, but eventually become part of the larger Hindu family. The ability to absorb and live peacefully with differences is one of the strengths of Hinduism. With political manoeuvring, it opens up a Pandora's box whose impact can be constitutional, civilizational and political. It will be constitutional because any addition will have to be legislated and the matter will undergo legal scrutiny. It is civilizational because after Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism, Lingayats will become the fourth religion to be born in India out of a legal and political process and not through social negotiation with other religious cosmologies. For example, the birth of Sikhism was bloody and led to sacrifices by the Gurus who led the faith and subsequently codified it. In the Lingayat’s context, the issue was examined a legal luminary and will be followed up by political luminaries at Centre. The political impact of the Lingayat demand being accepted would be far more pervasive. It will reduce the demographic and numerical strength of Hinduism in Karnataka and secession will open the door to other sects to be recognised as a separate religion. It can be argued that the strength of Hinduism has been its ability to absorb dissent by creating subspaces like sects which can be independent organizationally and socially, but still share common cultural codes of worship and life in general with Hinduism. Though the context was different the "Communal Award" announced by the British for a separate electorate touched the same nerve against which Mahatma Gandhi fasted. The time and subject is different but the context remains the same. The party which would pander to this may win Karnataka but will lose India hands down for the polarisation it will create. Politicians should remember that only the Goddess rides the tiger.

Opinion: Lingayat row - Only Goddess rides the Tiger

Electoral commitment reigns supreme in Indian politics but the desperation that politicians in Karnataka have shown for electoral benefits is as good as playing with fire. Now the Karnataka government has accepted the proposal of Justice Nagamohan Das Committee and decided to forward it to the Centre to make the final call on the issue, the outcome is anyone's guess.

The ramification will be felt nationally as the debate mutates from a sect's right to secede and acquire a separate identity to question of division of Hinduism into lesser denominations. On top of it, the larger Veer Shaiva community is opposed to this idea though Lingayats say that they are different from them.

After the unceremonious sacking of Karnataka CM Virendra Patil by the Congress government, the Lingayat community never voted for the Congress in-block since then. Today the community stands behind the BJP but with this move, political blocks in Karnataka will no doubt be rearranged. The decision might suit the BJP nationally but in the state it will have to redefine its position. 
&nbsp 
Lingayats have a substantial presence in Karnataka and can play a make-or-break role in assembly elections. Even former BJP chief minister Yeddyurappa belongs to the Lingayat community. The birth of religions has never been an easy process in any part of the world as it involves the process of differentiation and codification which is always marked with social upheaval and violence.

New religious ecosystems are always linked to an idea of God, society and salvation which stands in opposition to the existing practice.

But in Karnataka, the Lingayat churning has acquired an overt electoral colour. Caste reservations or linguistic reorganisation of states in the past too have been products of powerful agitations, but the demand for a separate religious status through a political agitation and mass rallies is a first in post-independent India.

Hinduism or as it is sometimes referred - Sanatan Dharma - is one of the five acknowledged religions in the Constitution of India. The Constitution provides freedom to practice and propagate religion in the country and this is enshrined as a fundamental right. In this context, the movement and protest in Karnataka is neither illegal nor outside the civilizational ethos of the subcontinent.

The difference this time is that politicians in Karnataka have decided to play with a social movement within Hinduism whose attempt was to establish an egalitarian society opposed to the prevalent caste structure and upper caste practices. 
&nbsp 
Hinduism over time has seen the rise and fall of various sects which are primarily described as sampradayas. In this context, Lingayats say that they have been different from 12th century AD and also want to be differentiated from Veershaivas, who they feel are using the word "Lingayats" far too loosely.

Broadly, reform movements through centuries have made an impact on Hinduism, but eventually become part of the larger Hindu family. The ability to absorb and live peacefully with differences is one of the strengths of Hinduism. 
&nbsp 
With political manoeuvring, it opens up a Pandora's box whose impact can be constitutional, civilizational and political. It will be constitutional because any addition will have to be legislated and the matter will undergo legal scrutiny. It is civilizational because after Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism, Lingayats will become the fourth religion to be born in India out of a legal and political process and not through social negotiation with other religious cosmologies.

For example, the birth of Sikhism was bloody and led to sacrifices by the Gurus who led the faith and subsequently codified it. In the Lingayat’s context, the issue was examined a legal luminary and will be followed up by political luminaries at Centre.

The political impact of the Lingayat demand being accepted would be far more pervasive. It will reduce the demographic and numerical strength of Hinduism in Karnataka and secession will open the door to other sects to be recognised as a separate religion.

It can be argued that the strength of Hinduism has been its ability to absorb dissent by creating subspaces like sects which can be independent organizationally and socially, but still share common cultural codes of worship and life in general with Hinduism.

Though the context was different but the "Communal Award" announced by the British for a separate electorate touched the same nerve against which Mahatma Gandhi fasted. The time and subject is different but the context remains the same. The party which would pander to this may win Karnataka, but will lose India hands down for the polarisation it will create.

Politicians should remember that only the Goddess rides the tiger.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the authors and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Lingayats have a substantial presence in Karnataka and can play a make-or-break role in assembly elections.

Electoral commitment reigns supreme in Indian politics but the desperation that politicians in Karnataka have shown for electoral benefits is as good as playing with fire. Now the Karnataka government has accepted the proposal of Justice Nagamohan Das Committee and decided to forward it to the Centre to make the final call on the issue, the outcome is anyone's guess. The ramification will be felt nationally as the debate mutates from a sect's right to secede and acquire a separate identity to question of division of Hinduism into lesser denominations. On top of it, the larger Veer Shaiva community is opposed to this idea though Lingayats say that they are different from them. After the unceremonious sacking of Karnataka CM Virendra Patil by the Congress government, the Lingayat community never voted for the Congress in-block since then. Today the community stands behind the BJP but with this move, political blocks in Karnataka will no doubt be rearranged. The decision might suit the BJP nationally but in the state it will have to redefine its position. Lingayats have a substantial presence in Karnataka and can play a make-or-break role in assembly elections. Even former BJP chief minister Yeddyurappa belongs to the Lingayat community. The birth of religions has never been an easy process in any part of the world as it involves the process of differentiation and codification which is always marked with social upheaval and violence. New religious ecosystems are always linked to an idea of God, society and salvation which stands in opposition to the existing practice. But in Karnataka, the Lingayat churning has acquired an overt electoral colour. Caste reservations or linguistic reorganisation of states in the past too have been products of powerful agitations, but the demand for a separate religious status through a political agitation and mass rallies is a first in post-independent India. Hinduism or as it is sometimes referred - Sanatan Dharma - is one of the five acknowledged religions in the Constitution of India. The Constitution provides freedom to practice and propagate religion in the country and this is enshrined as a fundamental right. In this context, the movement and protest in Karnataka is neither illegal nor outside the civilizational ethos of the subcontinent. The difference this time is that politicians in Karnataka have decided to play with a social movement within Hinduism whose attempt was to establish an egalitarian society opposed to the prevalent caste structure and upper caste practices. Hinduism over time has seen the rise and fall of various sects which are primarily described as sampradayas. In this context, Lingayats say that they have been different from 12th century AD and also want to be differentiated from Veershaivas, who they feel are using the word "Lingayats" far too loosely. Broadly, reform movements through centuries have made an impact on Hinduism, but eventually become part of the larger Hindu family. The ability to absorb and live peacefully with differences is one of the strengths of Hinduism. With political manoeuvring, it opens up a Pandora's box whose impact can be constitutional, civilizational and political. It will be constitutional because any addition will have to be legislated and the matter will undergo legal scrutiny. It is civilizational because after Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism, Lingayats will become the fourth religion to be born in India out of a legal and political process and not through social negotiation with other religious cosmologies. For example, the birth of Sikhism was bloody and led to sacrifices by the Gurus who led the faith and subsequently codified it. In the Lingayat’s context, the issue was examined a legal luminary and will be followed up by political luminaries at Centre. The political impact of the Lingayat demand being accepted would be far more pervasive. It will reduce the demographic and numerical strength of Hinduism in Karnataka and secession will open the door to other sects to be recognised as a separate religion. It can be argued that the strength of Hinduism has been its ability to absorb dissent by creating subspaces like sects which can be independent organizationally and socially, but still share common cultural codes of worship and life in general with Hinduism. Though the context was different but the "Communal Award" announced by the British for a separate electorate touched the same nerve against which Mahatma Gandhi fasted. The time and subject is different but the context remains the same. The party which would pander to this may win Karnataka, but will lose India hands down for the polarisation it will create. Politicians should remember that only the Goddess rides the tiger. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the authors and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Electoral commitment reigns supreme in Indian politics but the desperation that politicians in Karnataka have shown for electoral benefits is as good as playing with fire.&nbsp;Now the Karnataka government has accepted the proposal of Justice Nagamohan Das Committee and decided to forward it to the Centre to make the final call on the issue, the outcome is anyone&#39;s guess.

The ramification will be felt nationally as the debate mutates from a sect&#39;s right to secede and acquire a separate identity to question of division of Hinduism into lesser denominations.&nbsp;On top of it, the larger Veer Shaiva community is opposed to this idea though Lingayats say that they are different from them.&nbsp;

After the unceremonious sacking of Karnataka CM Virendra Patil by the Congress government, the Lingayat community never voted for the Congress in-block since then.&nbsp;Today the community stands behind the BJP but with this move, political blocks in Karnataka will no doubt be rearranged. The decision might suit the BJP nationally but in the state it will have to redefine its position. 
&nbsp; 
Lingayats have a substantial presence in Karnataka and can play a make-or-break role in assembly elections. Even former BJP chief minister Yeddyurappa belongs to the Lingayat community.&nbsp;The birth of religions has never been an easy process in any part of the world as it involves the process of differentiation and codification which is always marked with social upheaval and violence.&nbsp;

New religious ecosystems are always linked to an idea of God, society and salvation which stands in opposition to the existing practice.&nbsp;

But in Karnataka, the Lingayat churning has acquired an overt electoral colour. Caste reservations or linguistic reorganisation of states in the past too have been products of powerful agitations, but the demand for a separate religious status through a political agitation and mass rallies is a first in post-independent India.&nbsp;

Hinduism or as it is sometimes referred - Sanatan Dharma - is one of the five acknowledged religions in the Constitution of India. The Constitution provides freedom to practice and propagate religion in the country and this is enshrined as a fundamental right. In this context, the movement and protest in Karnataka is neither illegal nor outside the civilizational ethos of the subcontinent.&nbsp;

The difference this time is that politicians in Karnataka have decided to play with a social movement within Hinduism whose attempt was to establish an egalitarian society opposed to the prevalent caste structure and upper caste practices. 
&nbsp; 
Hinduism over time has seen the rise and fall of various sects which are primarily described as sampradayas. In this context, Lingayats say that they have been different from 12th century AD and also want to be differentiated from Veershaivas, who they feel are using the word &quot;Lingayats&quot; far too loosely.&nbsp;

Broadly, reform movements through centuries have made an impact on Hinduism, but eventually become part of the larger Hindu family. The ability to absorb and live peacefully with differences is one of the strengths of Hinduism. 
&nbsp; 
With political manoeuvring, it opens up a Pandora&#39;s box whose impact can be constitutional, civilizational and political. It will be constitutional because any addition will have to be legislated and the matter will undergo legal scrutiny. It is civilizational&nbsp;because after Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism, Lingayats will become the fourth religion to be born in India out of a legal and political process and not through social negotiation with other religious cosmologies.&nbsp;

For example, the birth of Sikhism was bloody and led to sacrifices by the Gurus who led the faith and subsequently codified it. In the Lingayat&rsquo;s context, the issue was examined a legal luminary and will be followed up by political luminaries at Centre.

The political impact of the Lingayat demand being accepted would be far more pervasive. It will reduce the demographic and numerical strength of Hinduism in Karnataka and secession will open the door to other sects to be recognised as a separate religion.

It can be argued that the strength of Hinduism has been its ability to absorb dissent by creating subspaces like sects which can be independent organizationally and socially, but still share common cultural codes of worship and life in general with Hinduism.

Though the context was different but the &quot;Communal Award&quot;&nbsp;announced by the British for a separate electorate touched the same nerve against which Mahatma Gandhi fasted. The time and subject is different but the context remains the same. The party which would pander to this may win Karnataka, but will lose India hands down for the polarisation it will create.&nbsp;

Politicians should remember that only the Goddess rides the tiger.

Electoral commitment reigns supreme in Indian politics but the desperation that politicians in Karnataka have shown for electoral benefits is as good as playing with fire. Now the Karnataka government has accepted the proposal of Justice Nagamohan Das Committee and decided to forward it to the Centre to make the final call on the issue, the outcome is anyone's guess. The ramification will be felt nationally as the debate mutates from a sect's right to secede and acquire a separate identity to question of division of Hinduism into lesser denominations. On top of it, the larger Veer Shaiva community is opposed to this idea though Lingayats say that they are different from them. After the unceremonious sacking of Karnataka CM Virendra Patil by the Congress government, the Lingayat community never voted for the Congress in-block since then. Today the community stands behind the BJP but with this move, political blocks in Karnataka will no doubt be rearranged. The decision might suit the BJP nationally but in the state it will have to redefine its position. Lingayats have a substantial presence in Karnataka and can play a make-or-break role in assembly elections. Even former BJP chief minister Yeddyurappa belongs to the Lingayat community. The birth of religions has never been an easy process in any part of the world as it involves the process of differentiation and codification which is always marked with social upheaval and violence. New religious ecosystems are always linked to an idea of God, society and salvation which stands in opposition to the existing practice. But in Karnataka, the Lingayat churning has acquired an overt electoral colour. Caste reservations or linguistic reorganisation of states in the past too have been products of powerful agitations, but the demand for a separate religious status through a political agitation and mass rallies is a first in post-independent India. Hinduism or as it is sometimes referred - Sanatan Dharma - is one of the five acknowledged religions in the Constitution of India. The Constitution provides freedom to practice and propagate religion in the country and this is enshrined as a fundamental right. In this context, the movement and protest in Karnataka is neither illegal nor outside the civilizational ethos of the subcontinent. The difference this time is that politicians in Karnataka have decided to play with a social movement within Hinduism whose attempt was to establish an egalitarian society opposed to the prevalent caste structure and upper caste practices. Hinduism over time has seen the rise and fall of various sects which are primarily described as sampradayas. In this context, Lingayats say that they have been different from 12th century AD and also want to be differentiated from Veershaivas, who they feel are using the word "Lingayats" far too loosely. Broadly, reform movements through centuries have made an impact on Hinduism, but eventually become part of the larger Hindu family. The ability to absorb and live peacefully with differences is one of the strengths of Hinduism. With political manoeuvring, it opens up a Pandora's box whose impact can be constitutional, civilizational and political. It will be constitutional because any addition will have to be legislated and the matter will undergo legal scrutiny. It is civilizational because after Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism, Lingayats will become the fourth religion to be born in India out of a legal and political process and not through social negotiation with other religious cosmologies. For example, the birth of Sikhism was bloody and led to sacrifices by the Gurus who led the faith and subsequently codified it. In the Lingayat’s context, the issue was examined a legal luminary and will be followed up by political luminaries at Centre. The political impact of the Lingayat demand being accepted would be far more pervasive. It will reduce the demographic and numerical strength of Hinduism in Karnataka and secession will open the door to other sects to be recognised as a separate religion. It can be argued that the strength of Hinduism has been its ability to absorb dissent by creating subspaces like sects which can be independent organizationally and socially, but still share common cultural codes of worship and life in general with Hinduism. Though the context was different but the "Communal Award" announced by the British for a separate electorate touched the same nerve against which Mahatma Gandhi fasted. The time and subject is different but the context remains the same. The party which would pander to this may win Karnataka, but will lose India hands down for the polarisation it will create. Politicians should remember that only the Goddess rides the tiger.