Karnataka’s political landscape has always been intertwined with its powerful religious institutions called mutts or maths. These spiritual centres represent different communities – Lingayats, Vokkaligas, Kurubas, Dalits, Muslims.
The recent public endorsement by Adichunchangiri Math’s head pontiff Nirmalanandantha Swamiji for Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar’s candidature for Karnataka’s Chief Minister post has sparked fresh debate about religious leaders’ involvement in politics. However, this is far from a new phenomenon. In fact, seeking blessings and support from religious institutions has been a consistent practice across all political parties and leaders in Karnataka for decades.
Swamiji’s statement comes at a crucial time when Karnataka Congress is witnessing intense internal power struggle between current Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and his deputy. The pontiff has publicly appealed to the Congress high command to honour what he claims was an earlier commitment to give Shivakumar the top post. While Swamiji clarified that the final decision lies with the Congress leadership, his endorsement carries significant weight as Adichunchangiri Math is the spiritual centre of the influential Vokkaliga community.
But before we judge this development, we must understand that this pattern is not unique to Shivakumar or the Congress party. It is a deeply entrenched practice in Karnataka politics where leaders from all parties have consistently courted religious institutions for political legitimacy and community support.
The Long History of Politics and Mutts in Karnataka
Karnataka’s political landscape has always been intertwined with its powerful religious institutions called mutts or maths. These spiritual centres represent different communities – Lingayat mutts for the Veerashaiva-Lingayat community, Vokkaliga mutts for Vokkaligas, and various other institutions serving different castes and regions. Political analysts note that visits to these mutts have become essential political rituals, with leaders from all parties making regular pilgrimages to seek blessings.
BS Yediyurappa, the BJP’s tallest Lingayat leader, has consistently enjoyed support from influential Lingayat seers and mutts throughout his political career. In July 2021, when there were rumors of his removal as Chief Minister, several influential Lingayat religious leaders publicly backed him, warning of fierce protests if he was replaced. The Lingayat community, which forms about 15-17% of Karnataka’s population, has historically rallied behind Yediyurappa whenever they perceived any threat or insult to their community leader. This was evident in 2008 when Kumaraswamy refused to transfer power, and Lingayat mutts mobilized massive support for Yediyurappa.
Similarly, HD Kumaraswamy and his father HD Deve Gowda have long maintained strong connections with Vokkaliga mutts in the Old Mysuru region. The JD(S) derives its core strength from the Vokkaliga community, and leaders of this party have consistently visited religious institutions to consolidate their community base. Even when Kumaraswamy formed coalition governments with both BJP and Congress at different times, the support of Vokkaliga religious institutions remained crucial for his political standing.
Siddaramaiah himself, though he positions himself as a champion of social justice through his AHINDA coalition (minorities, backward classes, and Dalits), has not shied away from engaging with religious institutions when politically necessary. He has visited temples and mutts, understanding well that in Karnataka’s complex caste arithmetic, maintaining good relations with religious leaders can influence electoral outcomes. Even Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Congress leader Rahul Gandhi have made high-profile visits to Karnataka’s mutts to seek blessings and signal respect to different communities.
Why This Practice Persists
Karnataka’s unique political demography makes religious institutions powerful players. Unlike states where one or two communities dominate, Karnataka has no single caste that can deliver electoral victory alone. Lingayats, Vokkaligas, Kurubas, Dalits, Muslims, coastal communities like Bunts and Billavas – all play crucial roles in different regions. Religious mutts, especially those representing Lingayats and Vokkaligas, command respect and influence among their followers.
Politicians understand this reality. When Yediyurappa visits Siddaganga Mutt or other Lingayat institutions, when DK Shivakumar visits Adichunchangiri Math, or when any leader seeks blessings from these institutions, they are essentially acknowledging the socio-religious power structures that shape electoral outcomes. These visits get extensive media coverage and send strong signals to community members about which leader respects their institutions and values.
The Double-Edged Sword
However, this mixing of religion and politics comes with serious concerns. First, it reinforces caste-based voting patterns rather than encouraging issue-based democracy. When religious leaders endorse specific candidates, they essentially ask their followers to vote based on community identity rather than assessing a leader’s vision, capability, or track record.
Second, such endorsements can divide communities along political lines. Not all Vokkaligas may support Shivakumar, just as not all Lingayats blindly follow Yediyurappa. When religious institutions take political positions, they risk alienating sections of their own community who may support different political parties or leaders.
Third, it compromises the moral and spiritual independence of these institutions. When a mutt or religious leader publicly backs a politician, they become stakeholders in that person’s political fortunes. This makes it difficult for them to criticize that leader’s failures or corruption later. The institution’s moral authority gets entangled with political calculations.
Fourth, it goes against India’s constitutional ideal of secularism, which envisions separation between religious institutions and state affairs. While religious leaders have every right as citizens to express political opinions, using their institutional authority and spiritual influence to direct followers’ political choices is problematic.
The Way Forward
The reality is that Karnataka’s matha politics will not disappear overnight. It is deeply rooted in the state’s social fabric and serves political purposes for all parties. However, we can aspire for a more ethical approach.
Religious institutions could focus on promoting ethical values in governance without endorsing specific candidates. They could speak about issues like corruption, social justice, education, and welfare without becoming partisan players. They could encourage their followers to be informed, independent-minded voters rather than directed vote banks.
Political leaders, regardless of party, should recognize that constantly seeking religious endorsements reduces democratic politics to community bargaining. Leaders should earn votes based on their work, vision, and integrity rather than community equations brokered through religious institutions.
The health of Karnataka’s democracy depends on voters making informed choices based on leaders’ capabilities and policies rather than caste calculations blessed by religious institutions. Until citizens demand issue-based politics over identity politics, and until political parties stop treating communities as vote banks to be mobilized through religious leaders, this practice will continue.
It is unfair to single out Nirmalanandantha Swamiji or DK Shivakumar when this pattern is universal across parties. The question is not about one leader or one institution – it is about whether we want our democracy to be driven by citizen aspirations or community calculations. That choice ultimately lies with voters.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views or stance of the organization. The organization assumes no responsibility for the content shared.