Sadhguru is true social reformist

Sanatan Dharma or Hinduism (as it is commonly known) is one of the world's oldest living religion. In the last few centuries, it has gone through major social reforms.

The turning point in the history of Hinduism was in 18th century when Raja Ram Mohan Roy's Brahmo Samaj opposed Sati Pratha system, an ancient practice in which wife used to immolate herself at the funeral pyre of husband.

This wasn't an easy task; violent protests broke out in Bengal against him. Even his own mother threw him out of house. Whether it was Dayanand Saraswati's Arya Samaj or Ambedkar raising voice against untouchability, no social reform has been a cake walk in Hindu history.

Orthodox Hindus have always opposed any major reform and yet Hinduism has survived as a religion where from monotheism to polytheism and even atheism have been beautiful included.

Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev has always been very vocal about almost all contemporary issues and has his way of connecting with millennials. Recently, he has picked up an age-old demand of freeing Hindu temples from government control.

To address the apprehension of castiesm coming back in temples once they are free from government control, he said in a TV interview, "It is very clear today that irrespective of your caste, you can be a teacher, you can be a soldier, you can be anything you want, if you can get the necessary training.

The same goes for the priesthood, whoever irrespective of caste, creed or religion, if you have devotion in your heart and willing to train for what is needed you can become that."

This hasn't gone well with some people who are not ready for this social reform. There are so many videos, pictures and excerpts from his books being circulated on social media to prove he is anti-Hindu.

Let us first look at why he is not just any spiritual leader but a social reformist in a true sense. Temples in Isha yoga centre premises are open to all irrespective of caste, creed and religion.

What's more interesting is their website says, anyone who can devote a certain number of days can volunteer at their temples. "We have never asked anyone their caste or nationalism when they come to volunteer," says Swami Suyagna from Isha Foundation.

Another interesting aspect to observe is, Ling Bhairavi Temple at Isha has set an example by allowing women inside temple during menstruation. Sadhguru has offered spiritual opportunity to everyone equally, that why one gets to see almost equal number of men and women monks at their ashram.

And yet Jaggi has always sided with sticking to traditions wherever they are already established and have a clear explanation about it. One can't forget his stand on Sabarimala and Jallikattu which for sure would not go well with his urban followers.

Now, if he really cared for maintaining his bhakts, he won't be taking such extremely opposite stands in today's polarised world. Also, when he does not intend to disturb the existing traditions, is there really a concern.

When he says whoever is willing to go through "required training" means if a temple requires a priest to study sharstras, he or she should study them. Is this anti-Brahmin? Or is it just that people don't want to part ways with their authority which they have got more because of where they are born and not what they have studied?

Sadhguru is by far the one of the most popular modern guru amongst the Indian youth. He is the one representing Indian culture at international forums.

He starts his session on World Yoga Day at United Nations with a Sanskrit shloka. From his attire to his ideas everything is a true reflection of Indian ethos.

Isha Samskriti, legally registered as a Vedic Pathshala run by his foundation is educating children in classical music, ancient Kalari art and of course "Sanskrit". and the best part is, unlike many religious gurus, who create a fear in masses by saying "Sanatan Dharma is in danger", he says that Sanatan (existential truth) can never be in danger.

Sadhguru's pro or anti Hindu stand maybe debatable, his contribution to reform social evils is not. However, the backlash against him proves that reforms are not easy even in 21st century.

(The views expressed are personal)