As dominant castes confront diminishing clout with the new enumeration, identity battles resurface to reshape religion, politics, and reservation claims
The ‘fear of small numbers’ has seized hold of the hearts of community leaders, mathadhipathis (religious institution heads), and sundry others in Karnataka. The new ‘caste survey’, which began on September 22, so long and loudly demanded by the dominant castes, Vokkaligas and Lingayats, in the interests of greater ‘scientificity’, might be torpedoed by unexpected, and definitely non-scientific, forces within.
Of course, we all know that the Big Two were worried about losing their social, educational, economic and therefore political hold on the state, should their numbers really have been reduced to around 11 per cent each, instead of the fantasy of being 14-15 per cent and 17 per cent, respectively.
The ‘science’ of numbers makes sense only as long as it tallies with visions of continued dominance.
Are Veerashaiva-Lingayats Hindus at all?
But that was before they came up against the other discipline that is routinely invoked to make claims and counterclaims in Naya Bharat, namely history. Veerashaivas are rubbing their eyes in disbelief, as the historically difficult question of bringing the Lingayats into their fold has emerged once more.
Also read: Karnataka caste survey: HC declines to stay; says it should be voluntary
First of all, are Veerashaiva-Lingayats Hindus at all? The Veerashaivas, [followers of the Panchacharyas, founders of the Rambhapuri and Ujjaini Peethas (both in Karnataka), Kedar (Uttarakhand), Shrishailam Peetha (Andhra Pradesh), and Kashi Peetha (Uttar Pradesh)] have never acknowledged the 12th century Basava as the founder of a new religion, but as just one of many (Shaivite) reformers.
Do the Veerashaivas accept Basava as a revolutionary, and believe in and follow Basava Tattva? No, says the leading ideologue of the ‘Lingayat as separate religion’ movement, SM Jamadar, a former IAS officer.
They have, of late, been claiming ‘unity’ – and since 2018, have even unofficially hyphenated the Akhil Bharatiya Veerashaiva Mahasabha, founded way back in 1904 – to ‘Veerashaiva-Lingayat’, as a concession to that ‘unity’. Other attempts at suturing the ‘divide’ between Lingayats and Veerashaivas have been the call to celebrate both Basava Jayanthi and Renukacharya Jayanthi (the ancestor of the Veerashaivas) simultaneously.
Dual purpose unity call
The ‘unity’ call serves two purposes. One, it is to push back against the Jagatika Lingayat Mahasabha, who, with the Rashtriya Basavadal, and Lingayat Dharma Mahasabha, has instructed adherents to fill the ‘religion’ column in both the state caste survey and in the 2027 census, as just ‘Lingayat’ and mention the name of the 97 subcastes in the caste column.
In its small booklet, which has sold in thousands, it has exhaustively listed the contrast between the beliefs and practices of the Lingayat and the Hindu/Vedic orders. Two, by claiming that Veerashaivas and Lingayats are one, namely Hindus, Veerashaivas can begin the process of muscling their way onto the Central OBC list, which will enable them to a far greater share in reservations than the 5 per cent of the state share they currently enjoy.
The battle cries on both sides have been colourful, webbed with allusions to history, dharmic practice, characters from the epics, and of course, desperate political calculations.
Sanehalli Panditaradhya Swami has opposed the galloping increase in the worship of Ganesha, the frenzied performance of havans and homas in the homes, and fervent worship in temples etc as the antithesis of everything Basava stood for.
Do the Veerashaivas accept Basava as a revolutionary, and believe in and follow Basava Tattva? No, says the leading ideologue of the ‘Lingayat as separate religion’ movement, SM Jamadar, a former IAS officer. MM Kalaburgi, who was murdered for his insurgent scholarship, was an ardent advocate of the separate religion argument.
Opposition to ‘Hinduisation’
These ideologues have been joined in their opposition to the growing ‘Hinduisation’ of the Lingayats, by one of the most radical and influential protectors of the fundamentals of the faith, Sanehalli Panditaradhya Swami. The Swami has opposed the galloping increase in the worship of Ganesha, the frenzied performance of havans and homas in the homes, and fervent worship in temples, etc, as the antithesis of everything Basava stood for.
Nor has he feared swimming against the tide, as when mathadhipathis railed against the introduction of eggs in the midday meal, which violated the Lingayat principle of vegetarianism. But adaptation to the contemporary world, and redressing nutritional inequality is as far from a willing embrace of the Sanatani way as you can get.
Also read: Karnataka to officially count atheists in caste census
On the other side is the formidable weight of not only the long-time (and nonagenarian) President of the Akhil Bharatiya Veershaiva Mahasabha, but the Dingaleshwara Swami, who, along with the Lingayat members of the BJP, have raised their voices against what they see as a ‘conspiracy’ to break the Veerashaiva/Lingayat religion. They formed a solid phalanx, ironically, ‘against the government’ at a massive meeting in Hubli on September 19. No unified voice emerged from that mega event.
More cries for unity
But the waters have been further muddied by the hypervisible swamiji of the Panchamasali Lingayats, Basava Jayamrutyunjaya Swamiji, head of the Bagalkot matha, who has campaigned for several years for shifting Lingayats from 3B (5 per cent) to 2A (15 per cent) category of state reservation.
Claiming that Panchamasali Lingayats (largely agriculturists and labourers) account for 80 per cent of the Lingayat population, without receiving their due share of reservations (or indeed political recognition), he has, without success so far, negotiated with both the Congress and the BJP for this privilege.
Now he has spiked the cries for unity by asking his followers not to attend the unity show at Hubballi, but use only the term ‘Lingayat Hindu’ in the religion column – until, that is, Lingayat is recognised as a separate religion. For straying from the Lingayat goal of separate religion status, he has been turfed out of the Panchamasali Mahasabha.
All eyes on survey
Thus does the career of the Veerashaiva-Lingayat antagonism quit its theological firmament and find itself firmly grounded in the earthly material that can make defensible reservation claims. The anxious churning has afflicted other castes as well. Kurubas, Idigas, Bhovis, Valmikis, Vokkaligas (in full page advertisements) Brahmins – every caste group is now instructing its adherents on how to report themselves in the survey, and consolidate their numbers.
Meanwhile, most of that vast population who are symbolically, materially and politically effaced in all the bitter feuds – women – continue to worship in temples, perform pujas, and promote myriad Hindu-Vedic practices.
Unwittingly perhaps, they too may be asserting the impossibility of any unity, whether of Veerashaiva Lingayats or of Hindus in Karnataka today.
(The Federal seeks to present views and opinions from all sides of the spectrum. The information, ideas or opinions in the articles are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Federal.)
