Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah has stirred a fresh political debate after urging citizens to “remain cautious of the RSS and Sangh Parivar” and “avoid the company of Sanatanis,” during his speech at the silver jubilee celebrations of Mysore University on October 18, 2025. The remarks, which referenced historical opposition to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s Constitution, were quickly picked up by political opponents and social media users, prompting widespread criticism and demands for clarification.
Siddaramaiah later clarified that his comments were aimed at “orthodox forces” who continue to oppose constitutional values, social justice, and progressive reforms. He emphasized that his statement was not against any religion or community, but rather against ideologies that seek to undermine Ambedkarite principles. The Chief Minister reiterated his commitment to secularism, equality, and constitutional morality, stating that “Sanatan Dharma, in its rigid form, has historically excluded Dalits, women, and backward classes.”
🧠 Key Highlights of Siddaramaiah’s RSS-Sanatanis Controversy
| Element | Details |
|---|---|
| Date of Remarks | October 18, 2025 |
| Event | Mysore University Silver Jubilee |
| Controversial Statement | “Avoid company of Sanatanis, remain cautious of RSS” |
| Clarification Issued | October 19, 2025 |
| CM’s Justification | Targeting orthodoxy, not religion |
| Political Fallout | BJP demands apology, Congress defends CM |
The remarks have reignited ideological tensions between Congress and BJP, especially in the run-up to the 2026 Karnataka civic polls.
📊 Timeline of Siddaramaiah’s Remarks and Clarification
| Date | Event Description |
|---|---|
| October 18 | Siddaramaiah makes controversial remarks |
| October 19 | Clarifies intent, issues public statement |
| October 20 | BJP protests across Mysuru and Bengaluru |
| October 21 | Congress launches counter-campaign on Ambedkar’s legacy |
The CM’s comments were linked to a recent incident where a shoe was thrown at the Chief Justice of India, which Siddaramaiah cited as evidence of “Sanatani aggression.”
🗣️ Reactions from Political Leaders, Legal Experts, and Citizens
- BJP State President: “This is hate speech disguised as secularism. Siddaramaiah must apologize.”
- Congress Spokesperson: “He spoke against caste orthodoxy, not faith.”
- Legal Scholar: “The Constitution protects freedom of speech, but public figures must exercise caution.”
| Stakeholder Group | Reaction Summary |
|---|---|
| BJP Leaders | Accusing CM of divisive politics |
| Congress Leaders | Defending remarks as pro-Constitution |
| Legal Experts | Calling for balanced discourse |
| Citizens | Mixed reactions across caste and community lines |
The controversy has sparked renewed interest in Ambedkar’s writings on Sanatan Dharma, with scholars and activists citing historical critiques.
🧾 Comparative Snapshot: Political Statements on Sanatan Dharma
| Leader | Statement Context | Year | Public Reaction | Party Response |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Udhayanidhi Stalin | Called Sanatan Dharma “regressive” | 2023 | National outrage | DMK stood by statement |
| Rahul Gandhi | Criticized caste hierarchy | 2024 | Mixed reactions | Congress clarified stance |
| Siddaramaiah | Urged to avoid Sanatanis | 2025 | BJP protests, Congress defense | Ongoing debate |
Siddaramaiah’s remarks are being framed as part of a broader Ambedkarite revival within the Congress’s southern strategy.
🧭 What to Watch in Karnataka’s Political Landscape
- Congress Messaging: Focus on Ambedkar, Constitution, and social justice
- BJP Counter-Narrative: Framing Congress as anti-Hindu
- Legal Scrutiny: Possible PILs or complaints over hate speech
- Electoral Impact: Influence on Dalit, OBC, and minority voter blocs
The CM’s clarification may not fully defuse the controversy, but it has opened space for ideological discourse ahead of key elections.
Disclaimer
This news content is based on verified political statements, media reports, and public records as of October 19, 2025. It is intended for editorial use and public awareness. The information does not constitute legal advice, political endorsement, or religious commentary and adheres to ethical journalism standards.
