From Seva to Shakedown: Why Art of Living's ₹2 Lakh "Donation" for Sahaj Meditation Teachers Feels Like Extortion

In the serene world of meditation and mindfulness, where inner peace is promised as the ultimate currency, one might expect organizations like the Art of Living to embody selflessness. Founded by the charismatic spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, the group has inspired millions with its teachings on Sudarshan Kriya, yoga, and the art of living joyfully. Volunteers—known as "sevakas"—pour their hearts, time, and lives into spreading these principles, often without a rupee in return. But now, a shocking revelation is rippling through the community: to ascend to the role of a Sahaj Meditation teacher, even these devoted souls must fork over a staggering ₹2 lakhs. Labeled a "donation," it's anything but voluntary. For many, it's starting to look a lot like extortion.

The Heart of the Matter: A Price Tag on Enlightenment?

Sahaj Meditation, or Sahaj Samadhi Dhyana as it's formally known, is one of Art of Living's flagship programs—a effortless technique designed to dissolve stress and unlock profound inner silence. For over four decades, the organization has trained thousands of teachers to pass this gift forward, fostering a global network of wellness warriors. But here's the rub: becoming an official teacher isn't just about dedication anymore. It's about deep pockets.

Sources within the Art of Living community whisper—and sometimes shout—that the teacher training program demands a hefty "contribution" of ₹2 lakhs (approximately $2,400 USD). This isn't a one-off fee for newcomers; it's hitting hardest those who've given years of unpaid service. Imagine: a sevak who's traveled villages teaching free breathing workshops, organized massive satsangs, and lived by the motto "Service before self," now being told they must pay up to continue their calling. "We've devoted our lives to Gurudev's [Sri Sri Ravi Shankar's] vision," one anonymous long-time volunteer told us. "This isn't seva; it's a barrier to the very knowledge we're meant to share freely."

The official line from Art of Living? It's framed as a "donation" to support the organization's humanitarian efforts—schools for underprivileged children, disaster relief, and rural empowerment programs. Fair enough on paper. But when the alternative is being sidelined from teaching Sahaj, that "suggested" amount morphs into a non-negotiable toll. No pay, no play. It's a classic paywall dressed in saffron robes.

A Legacy of Giving, Now Gated by Gold

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar's empire is no small affair. With over 180 countries under its wing, Art of Living boasts a net worth in the crores, fueled by course fees, merchandise, and global events like the International Yoga Day extravaganzas. The founder's Nobel Peace Prize nomination and UN affiliations add to the halo effect. Yet, for all its benevolence, cracks have appeared before. Environmental controversies over the 2016 World Culture Festival on the Yamuna floodplains drew ire from activists, and whispers of financial opacity have lingered in Indian media.

Now, this teacher fee saga adds fuel to the fire. Dedicated volunteers, many from modest backgrounds, are caught in a bind. "I've taught hundreds for free," shared another insider via a private forum. "But to get certified? ₹2 lakhs I don't have. It's like they're monetizing devotion." Online forums buzz with similar tales—Reddit threads and Facebook groups where ex-volunteers vent about "hidden costs" and "elite inner circles." One post from a 15-year veteran summed it up: "From 'Art of Living' to 'Art of Paying'—Gurudev, what happened?"

Critics argue this isn't isolated. Similar "donation" models plague spiritual organizations worldwide, from ISKCON's pricey pilgrimages to Osho International's premium retreats. But when it targets the foot soldiers who've built the movement—the ones sleeping on floors during service trips and skipping meals to fund events—it stings differently. It's not just about money; it's a betrayal of the egalitarian ethos Sri Sri preaches: "Knowledge is free; the teacher takes nothing."

Extortion in Disguise: When "Voluntary" Means "Or Else"

Call it what it is: extortion with a spiritual spin. Legally, a true donation is optional, tax-deductible, and free of strings. Here, it's a prerequisite—pay or perish in the hierarchy. For lifelong sevaks, it's particularly galling. These aren't casual seekers; they're the backbone of Art of Living, who've internalized the principles of vasudhaiva kutumbakam (the world is one family). Charging them to teach feels like charging a soldier to wield their own rifle.

Art of Living's defense? They point to scholarships and waivers for the needy. But anecdotal evidence suggests these are rare birds—more myth than reality. In a country where 21% live below the poverty line, ₹2 lakhs is a king's ransom, equivalent to years of savings for many. And for global volunteers? Currency conversion makes it even steeper.

This isn't to dismiss the good work. Art of Living has touched lives, from trauma healing in war zones to stress-busting in boardrooms. But when the path to teaching becomes a pay-to-play scheme, it undermines the purity. As one disillusioned teacher put it: "Sri Sri taught us to give without expectation. Now, we're expected to give without limits."

A Call for Clarity: Time to Lift the Veil

The silver lining? Awareness is the first step. Petitions are circulating online, urging transparency in fees and true scholarships for veterans. Perhaps it's time for Art of Living to revisit its model—crowdfund trainings, or better yet, honor service with waivers. After all, if the goal is global harmony, why gatekeep the guides?

In the end, true meditation doesn't come with a price tag. It blooms in surrender, not transactions. Will Art of Living listen to its devoted, or will the "donation" divide deepen? The sangha waits, breaths held in uneasy pranayama. One thing's clear: this isn't donation. It's a detour from the dharma.

Why Sri Sri Ravi Shankar Rarely Acknowledges His Gurus, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and Gurudev Brahmanand Saraswati

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi initiated Sri Sri Ravi Shankar into spirituality. Born in 1956 in Tamil Nadu, India, Ravi Shankar (later honored as Sri Sri) showed early spiritual inclinations, reciting the Bhagavad Gita by age four and meditating frequently. His first academic teacher was Sudhakar Chaturvedi, a Vedic scholar linked to Mahatma Gandhi, but his formal entry into spiritual practice came in the mid-1970s as an apprentice under Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, the founder of Transcendental Meditation (TM). Under Yogi's guidance, Shankar traveled globally, delivering talks on Vedic science, establishing TM and Ayurveda centers, and gaining hands-on experience in meditation and spiritual teaching. This apprenticeship shaped his approach, leading him to found the Art of Living Foundation in 1981 and develop Sudarshan Kriya in 1982. Reliable sources, including biographies and official accounts, confirm Yogi as the key figure in his spiritual initiation, distinguishing him from self-taught paths seen in other gurus. Yet, Sri Sri rarely mentions Maharishi or Gurudev Brahmanand Saraswati, Maharishi's own guru, in his public discourses. This article explores possible reasons for this omission.

The Role of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and Gurudev Brahmanand Saraswati

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was a pivotal figure in Sri Sri's spiritual development. As a disciple of Gurudev Brahmanand Saraswati, the Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath, Maharishi inherited a lineage rooted in Advaita Vedanta. Gurudev, a revered saint, emphasized meditation and self-realization, principles Maharishi passed on to students like Ravi Shankar. Through Maharishi, Sri Sri connected to this lineage, absorbing its teachings during his formative years in the 1970s. This period of global travel and teaching under Maharishi laid the groundwork for Sri Sri's later innovations, including Sudarshan Kriya and the Art of Living Foundation.

Reasons for the Silence

Despite this clear influence, Sri Sri seldom acknowledges Maharishi or Gurudev. Several factors may explain this. First, Sri Sri's teachings focus on universal principles like peace and stress relief, designed to appeal to diverse audiences. By emphasizing practices like Sudarshan Kriya, he may prioritize inclusivity over specific lineage references. Second, establishing a distinct identity as a spiritual leader could explain the limited mention. While Maharishi's guidance was crucial, Sri Sri's unique contributions, like Art of Living, set him apart, possibly leading him to focus on his own work. Third, in Indian traditions, honoring a guru often means living their teachings rather than frequent verbal acknowledgment. Sri Sri's global promotion of meditation and Vedic wisdom reflects Maharishi and Gurudev's principles, serving as an implicit tribute. Fourth, organizational dynamics may play a role. After leaving the TM movement to found Art of Living, Sri Sri may have distanced his work to avoid comparisons or conflicts. Finally, cultural norms in some spiritual traditions discourage overemphasizing the guru's name to keep the focus on the teachings themselves.

A Balanced Perspective

Sri Sri's minimal mention of Maharishi and Gurudev does not necessarily reflect ingratitude. His work, impacting millions across 180 countries, embodies their teachings, spreading meditation and self-realization globally. However, for those studying spiritual lineages, this omission can seem notable, given Maharishi's profound role. More explicit acknowledgment could enrich followers' understanding of his roots and honor the legacy of both gurus.

Conclusion

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar's limited references to Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and Gurudev Brahmanand Saraswati likely stem from his focus on universal spirituality, desire for a distinct identity, and cultural norms. While their names are rarely mentioned, his work continues their legacy, making meditation accessible worldwide. Recognizing this balance highlights both Sri Sri's unique contributions and the enduring influence of his gurus.

Word Count: Approximately 300 words

All Sector Leaders, One Fund - Bandhan Mutual Fund Launches Industry-First Offering

 

Mumbai, September 02, 2025: Bandhan Mutual Fund announces the launch of the Bandhan BSE India Sector Leaders Index Fund, India's first index fund to provide investors exclusive access to sector leaders across the economy. The open-ended scheme will track the BSE India Sector Leaders Index, which identifies the top three companies by market capitalisation from each of the 21 sectors within the BSE 500 Index. The New Fund Offer (NFO) will open on 3 September 2025 and close on 17 September 2025. Investments in the Bandhan BSE India Sector Leaders Index Fund can be made through licensed mutual fund distributors, financial advisors, online platforms, or directly at https://bandhanmutual.com/nfo/bandhan-bse-india-sector-leaders-index-fund/.

 

Commenting on the launch, Vishal Kapoor, CEO, Bandhan AMC said, "India's capital markets are undergoing rapid transformation, with established sectors evolving and newer industries emerging as growth drivers. In this backdrop, sector leaders have shown resilience through cycles, lower risk of disruption, and an ability to drive long-term value. With the launch of the Bandhan BSE India Sector Leaders Index Fund, we are proud to introduce India's first offering that gives investors simple, broad-based access to proven leaders powering the country's growth story."

 

The BSE India Sector Leaders Index is a thematic index that tracks the top 3 companies from each sector of the BSE 500 Index based on Total Market Capitalization. While the BSE Sector Leaders Index draws from 500 stocks, it is largely large-cap heavy. Historically, the strategy has delivered broad market-like returns with lower volatility. Diversification and market-cap weighting help avoid extreme single-stock bets, enabling potential stability.

 

About Bandhan AMC Limited

Established in 2000, Bandhan AMC Limited is focused on helping savers become investors and create wealth. Bandhan AMC Limited serves its investors through a slew of prudently constructed investment products across Mutual Funds, Alternatives and Portfolio Management Services (PMS), managed by a seasoned investment team, with the aim to provide performance consistent with the product's well-defined objectives. With an on-the-ground presence in over 100 cities, the fund house caters to investors in over 790 cities and towns across the country, serving over three and a half million folios representing institutions, corporates, family offices, and individual clients. 

Vadodara's Marutidham Society Suffers Filthy Water Crisis: Residents Rage as Corporation and BJP Disappear

Vadodara, September 2, 2025: Water issues are escalating in Vadodara city, and one prominent example is the plight of Marutidham Society. Residents here have been tormented by contaminated and dirty water for the past one and a half months. The society is encircled by illegal hospitals, and a majority of its residents are loyal BJP voters, yet no resolution has come from BJP leaders or the Vadodara Municipal Corporation (VMC). This situation has become a stark symbol of the city's water quality woes and political indifference.

Marutidham Society is located in a Vadodara neighborhood where residents are receiving filthy and polluted drinking water. According to locals, the water has a strange odor and visible particles. This has led to rising health issues among children and the elderly, such as stomach pains, skin diseases, and other illnesses. One resident said, "We've complained to the corporation multiple times, but no one listens. Corporation officials visited one and a half months ago, but there's been no action since."

The presence of illegal hospitals around the society is exacerbating the problem. Waste and wastewater from these hospitals are contaminating the water lines. Residents claim these hospitals operate in defiance of the law, increasing environmental and health risks in the surrounding area. In a city like Vadodara, where water problems frequently make headlines, this scenario is alarming. For instance, other parts of the city have also seen complaints about contaminated water, such as protests in the Nagarwada area over polluted supplies.

The issue becomes even more bizarre when it's revealed that most residents of Marutidham Society are staunch supporters of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). They voted for the BJP in recent elections and have repeatedly informed party leaders about their problems. However, local BJP leaders and the corporation—which is under BJP control—have provided no assistance. One resident remarked, "We're BJP voters, but our condition is dire. Where has the party vanished? They make promises during elections, but disappear when issues arise." The Vadodara Municipal Corporation is governed by the BJP, and water problems arise frequently there, such as when a corporator publicly bathed in protest. Despite this, the failure to resolve such local issues symbolizes political neglect.

Water quality and distribution problems in Vadodara are not new. Over the past few years, contaminated water complaints have surfaced in various city areas. The Congress party has also protested against the VMC, stating that water shortages and polluted distribution are harassing people. Even some BJP corporators have expressed frustration with their own party's administration over water issues, such as one who threatened to make officials drink the contaminated water. But in societies like Marutidham, the problem is more acute due to surrounding illegal constructions and hospitals, which heighten environmental risks.

Residents are now preparing for protests and legal action. They say that if no solution comes from the corporation and BJP, they will go to court. This isn't just a water issue—it's about political accountability and public health. In a developed city like Vadodara, such a situation is shameful and demands immediate resolution.

For more information on this issue, contact local authorities and register your complaints. If such problems persist, they will impact the city's development.

A Journey Through Vietnam's Whispered Wonders: Hidden Gems Off the Beaten Path

Landing in Hanoi on a warm August morning in 2025, I felt the pulse of Vietnam's vibrant capital, a city that seemed to hum with secrets beyond its crowded tourist trails. Vietnam, with its patchwork of emerald rice fields, mist-covered mountains, and turquoise shores, has long drawn adventurers. Yet, I craved something different—not the postcard-perfect Ha Long Bay or the glowing lanterns of Hoi An, but the quiet corners where the country's soul shines brightest. With a backpack, a rented motorbike, and an appetite for discovery, I set off on a month-long journey from north to south, chasing Vietnam's hidden gems. What unfolded was a tapestry of breathtaking landscapes, heartfelt hospitality, and moments that reminded me why travel is about forging your own path.

The adventure kicked off in the rugged north, where the air sharpens and the terrain turns wild. My first stop was Ha Giang Province, a remote frontier nestled against the Chinese border. Unlike the polished tourist hub of Sapa, Ha Giang feels untamed, with serpentine roads like the Ma Pi Leng Pass plunging into deep valleys. Renting a scooter in Ha Giang town—after securing an international driving license and packing rain gear for unpredictable showers—I wove through golden rice terraces glowing under the late afternoon sun. In minority villages of the Hmong and Dao, I found warmth in simple homestays, sipping rice wine under a canopy of stars while learning about intricate textiles and timeless traditions. Ha Giang's magic lies in its raw, frontier spirit: fewer tourists mean authentic encounters, and hikes through limestone peaks offer solitude amid nature's majesty. For motorbike enthusiasts, it's a dream, though border area permits are a must.

Heading southeast, I arrived at Ba Be National Park in Bac Kan Province, a tranquil oasis often eclipsed by more famous northern destinations. Here, three interconnected lakes—aptly named Ba Be, meaning "three bays"—shimmer amid forested karst hills, creating a serene playground for kayaking and boat trips. Staying in a Tay minority homestay in Pac Ngoi village, I woke to the cries of crested serpent eagles and glimpsed langur monkeys swinging through the treetops. Trails led to remote Hmong settlements and waterfalls spilling into emerald pools. Ba Be's allure is its untouched feel—home to black bears and pangolins, with few visitors to disrupt the peace. A bus from Hanoi (about five hours via Cho Don) brought me here, and a guided boat tour to Dau Dang Waterfall was well worth it. Homestays, including meals, cost around 500,000 VND per night.

Further northwest, Pu Luong Nature Reserve in Thanh Hoa Province stole my heart. This emerald valley, woven with bamboo groves and cascading waterfalls, is a trekker's paradise far from the tourist throngs. I joined a multi-day hike through Thai minority villages, crossing rickety suspension bridges over rushing rivers and cycling dirt paths framed by rice terraces. Rustic stilt-house homestays, complete with mosquito nets and communal dinners of grilled fish and sticky rice, felt like stepping into another world. Pu Luong's biodiversity—fluttering butterflies and rare orchids—adds enchantment, while its off-the-grid vibe feels like a well-kept secret. Visiting during the harvest season (September to October) paints the valley in vibrant greens and golds. Booking eco-lodges ahead ensures a sustainable stay.

Central Vietnam beckoned next, drawing me to Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park, a UNESCO-listed wonderland of caves that remains surprisingly under-visited. While the world's largest cave, Hang Son Doong, demands a costly expedition, more accessible treasures like Paradise Cave and Hang En deliver adventure without breaking the bank. Trekking into Hang En, I camped on an underground beach beneath a starlit skylight, the cave's echoes amplifying the drip of stalactites. Ziplining over rivers and boating through caverns felt like a scene from an adventure film. The park's controlled access keeps it pristine and uncrowded, making it a haven for explorers. Based in Phong Nha town, I found budget cave tours starting at 1,000,000 VND—sturdy shoes are a must for slippery paths.

Southward, Bach Ma National Park near Hue offered a misty retreat. Once a French hill station, this cloud-forest sanctuary brims with hiking trails leading to viewpoints like Do Quyen Waterfall, where rhododendrons bloom vibrantly in spring. Wandering through vine-covered colonial ruins, I spotted birds like the crested argus amid the fog. Bach Ma's quiet trails and rich biodiversity set it apart from Hue's imperial bustle. Nearby, the Tomb of Empress Thánh Cung Lăng Tư Minh, a lesser-visited royal site adorned with intricate carvings, added a historical whisper. A jeep for the steep ascent to Bach Ma is recommended; entry costs just 40,000 VND.

The journey ended in the south at the Con Dao Islands, a secluded archipelago far from Phu Quoc's resort-packed shores. These 16 isles boast untouched beaches like Dam Trau, where I snorkeled among coral reefs teeming with sea turtles. The islands' somber history as a French and American prison adds depth—visiting Phu Hai Prison museum was a poignant experience. Yet, the real draw is the solitude: empty sands, fresh seafood shacks, and dive sites with shipwrecks. Flights from Ho Chi Minh City are frequent and affordable, and renting a bike to explore keeps things simple. Visiting outside peak season ensures maximum tranquility.

As I left Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam's hidden gems lingered in my mind—intimate, unspoiled, and deeply connective. From northern peaks to southern shores, these places offered not just beauty, but bonds with nature, history, and people that mass tourism often overshadows. For travelers, sustainable choices—supporting local homestays, minimizing plastic, and respecting cultural norms—amplify the experience. Vietnam rewards those who wander off the beaten path.

Comparing the Indian Rupee (INR) with the Vietnamese Dong (VND)

For Indian travelers budgeting their Vietnamese adventures, understanding the Indian Rupee (INR) to Vietnamese Dong (VND) exchange is key. As of August 2025, 1 INR equals roughly 300 VND, making Vietnam a budget-friendly destination. A bowl of pho costs about 50,000 VND (167 INR), and homestays average 300,000 VND per night (1,000 INR), stretching rupees further than in pricier locales. The dong's high denominations—think millions for a meal—can be disorienting compared to the rupee's simpler scale. While both currencies face inflation, the VND holds steadier against the USD. For the best rates, use apps like XE or Wise for transfers and opt for ATMs over exchange counters. With 300 VND per rupee, your budget fuels unforgettable explorations of Vietnam's hidden treasures.

Swadeshi 2.0: LPU’s Bold Ban on Coca-Cola, Pepsi Sparks a Movement for Indian Self-Reliance

In a striking act of economic defiance, Lovely Professional University (LPU) in Punjab has taken a stand that's reverberating across India. On August 27, 2025, the university's Founder-Chancellor and Aam Aadmi Party Rajya Sabha MP, Dr. Ashok Kumar Mittal, announced a complete ban on American soft drinks, including giants like Coca-Cola and Pepsi, from the sprawling LPU campus. This isn't just about soda—it's a symbolic salvo in a brewing trade war, a modern revival of the historic Swadeshi movement dubbed Swadeshi 2.0. With over 40,000 students, LPU's bold move is a clarion call for self-reliance and a protest against the United States' recent 50% tariff hike on Indian exports. As the nation watches, the question looms: will others join this fiery movement?

A Protest Brewed in Patriotism

The catalyst for LPU's dramatic decision was the U.S. government's decision to double tariffs on Indian goods, a move that Dr. Mittal has called hypocrisy and bullying. The tariffs, which took effect on August 27, 2025, under an executive order from U.S. President Donald Trump, raised duties to a staggering 50%—one of the highest imposed on any country. Dr. Mittal, speaking at Delhi's Constitution Club, didn't mince words: India will not bow down to unfair diktats. By banning American soft drinks at LPU, we're sending a clear message to the world.

This isn't just a campus policy—it's a calculated act of economic nationalism. Dr. Mittal draws inspiration from the 1905 Swadeshi movement, when Indian leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Lala Lajpat Rai rallied against British goods to assert self-reliance under colonial rule. If our forefathers could do it under oppression, why can't we do it today? he asked, urging Indians to prioritize domestic products in the face of what he sees as unjust trade practices.

Swadeshi 2.0: A Modern Call to Action

LPU's ban is more than symbolic—it's the launchpad for Swadeshi 2.0, a nationwide campaign to promote Indian goods and challenge global economic pressures. Dr. Mittal's open letter to President Trump, penned on August 7, 2025, laid bare his grievances: You called India a dead economy, yet this dead economy is the fourth largest in the world, soon to be third, and growing faster than any major nation. He pointed out the irony of the U.S. criticizing India's energy imports from Russia while continuing its own trade with Moscow.

The ban, which includes Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Sprite, and other U.S.-branded beverages, was enforced immediately across LPU's campus, home to one of India's largest student bodies. The move has sparked a wave of support, with students, faculty, and even public figures like Patanjali's Baba Ramdev rallying behind it. Ramdev has gone further, calling for a broader boycott of American brands like McDonald's and KFC, framing it as a way to pressure the U.S. to rethink its tariff policies.

The Bigger Picture: Trade Tensions and Economic Resilience

The U.S. tariff hike, part of a broader trade row, stems from tensions over India's strategic autonomy, particularly its continued purchase of Russian oil amid Western sanctions. India, however, remains steadfast. With exports to the U.S. valued at $87.4 billion in 2024 but constituting only 2% of its GDP, India's economy is driven largely by domestic consumption—around 60% of GDP. Economists estimate the tariffs may shave off just 0.2% to 0.9% of India's GDP, a hit the nation is well-equipped to absorb, thanks to robust domestic markets and ongoing reforms like GST restructuring.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has also weighed in, emphasizing that India will not compromise on the interests of its farmers and small-scale industries. We will bear the economic pressure, he declared, while urging citizens to buy local. LPU's boycott aligns perfectly with this ethos, amplifying the government's push for Atmanirbhar Bharat (Self-Reliant India).

A Ripple Effect?

LPU's stand has ignited a spark, with students and faculty expressing pride in the university's bold stance. Social media is abuzz, as young Indians rally around the cause. Dr. Mittal's warning on X—If the U.S. goes ahead with 50% tariffs, LPU will not sit quietly—has garnered global attention, with messages of support pouring in from across India and beyond.

But will other universities and institutions follow suit? The move has already inspired debate, with some youth organizations and universities considering similar restrictions on American products. Baba Ramdev's call for a wider boycott suggests that Swadeshi 2.0 could snowball into a larger movement, potentially impacting U.S. brands' $80 billion-plus market in India. Yet, critics argue that boycotts risk escalating trade tensions and could disrupt India's global integration. The Logical Indian, for instance, advocates for a balance between economic nationalism and constructive international dialogue.

Should Others Join the Movement?

LPU's ban is a powerful statement, but it raises a bigger question: should other institutions join Swadeshi 2.0? On one hand, a collective boycott could amplify India's negotiating power, sending a strong signal to global powers that the nation won't tolerate unfair trade practices. It could also boost Indian brands, aligning with the StartupIndia and Make in India initiatives that promote local innovation. On the other hand, widespread boycotts could strain diplomatic ties and affect industries reliant on U.S. partnerships, from tech to education.

For students, the ban resonates as a call to action. It's not just about cola—it's about standing up for our country, says Priya Sharma, a third-year LPU student. Faculty members echo this sentiment, seeing the move as a way to instill pride in Indian products among the youth. But the challenge lies in sustaining momentum. The 1905 Swadeshi movement succeeded because it united millions; for Swadeshi 2.0 to make a dent, it will need similar scale and coordination.

A Sip of Sovereignty

LPU's ban on Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and other U.S. soft drinks is more than a campus policy—it's a bold declaration of India's economic sovereignty. Dr. Ashok Kumar Mittal has thrown down the gauntlet, challenging not just the U.S. but also Indians to rethink their consumption habits. As the Swadeshi 2.0 movement gains traction, all eyes are on whether other institutions will take up the mantle. Will this be a fleeting protest or the start of a new era of self-reliance? Only time will tell, but for now, LPU's message is loud and clear: India's pride is non-negotiable.

What do you think? Should other universities and institutions join Swadeshi 2.0 to stand up for India's economic dignity? Share your thoughts below!

Controversy in Sitamarhi: Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra Face Darshan Denial During Voter Adhikar Yatra 2025

On August 28, 2025, Sitamarhi, a culturally significant town in Bihar revered as the birthplace of Goddess Sita, became the focal point of a heated controversy during Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's Voter Adhikar Yatra. The incident centered on the district administration's initial refusal to allow Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and Congress General Secretary Priyanka Gandhi Vadra to offer prayers at the iconic Janaki Temple, citing security concerns. Rahul Gandhi's vocal opposition to the decision, followed by its eventual reversal, sparked widespread debate and added a new dimension to the ongoing political yatra in Bihar. This article delves into the events, the controversy, and its broader implications.

Background of the Voter Adhikar Yatra

Rahul Gandhi launched the Voter Adhikar Yatra on August 17, 2025, starting from Sasaram, Bihar, with the goal of concluding in Arrah by August 30, followed by a mega rally in Patna on September 1. The yatra aimed to highlight alleged electoral malpractices, particularly the deletion of approximately 6.5 million names from Bihar's voter rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) conducted between June and July 2025. Gandhi accused the Election Commission of India (ECI), Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Union Home Minister Amit Shah of orchestrating "vote chori" (vote theft) to disenfranchise marginalized groups, a charge that has fueled tensions with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its ally, Janata Dal (United) (JDU).

The Sitamarhi leg of the yatra was a significant stop, given the town's religious and political importance in the Mithilanchal region. The visit was intended to combine political outreach with a symbolic gesture of reverence at the Janaki Temple, a site of immense spiritual significance. However, the events that unfolded at the temple overshadowed the yatra's broader objectives.

The Darshan Denial Controversy

On August 28, 2025, as Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra arrived in Sitamarhi to continue the Voter Adhikar Yatra, the district administration initially barred them from offering prayers at the Janaki Temple. The administration cited security concerns, pointing to the large crowds expected during the yatra and the potential for disruptions in the temple premises. The decision was also attributed to logistical challenges posed by the presence of high-profile leaders, including Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin and Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) leader Tejashwi Yadav, who joined the Gandhis for the yatra.

The refusal sparked an immediate backlash from Rahul Gandhi, who accused the administration of acting under political pressure from the BJP-led state government to hinder the Congress's outreach efforts. Gandhi argued that denying access to the temple was an affront to religious freedom and an attempt to suppress the yatra's momentum. He publicly questioned the administration's motives, asking why a routine darshan by opposition leaders posed a security threat when similar visits by BJP leaders had been facilitated without issue. Priyanka Gandhi Vadra echoed these sentiments, framing the denial as an attack on the cultural and spiritual rights of the people of Bihar.

The standoff drew significant attention on social media platforms like X, where supporters of the Congress condemned the administration's decision as an example of political vendetta. Posts circulated alleging that the BJP was attempting to curb the yatra's visibility by restricting the Gandhis' access to a site as revered as the Janaki Temple. Conversely, BJP supporters defended the administration, arguing that the security concerns were genuine given the scale of the yatra and the presence of multiple high-profile leaders.

Rahul Gandhi's Opposition and Resolution

Rahul Gandhi's vocal opposition to the administration's decision escalated the situation. In a public address near the temple, he declared that he and Priyanka would not leave Sitamarhi without offering prayers, emphasizing the symbolic importance of the darshan in connecting with the people of Mithilanchal. He challenged the administration to provide a transparent explanation for the denial, accusing it of bowing to pressure from the BJP-JDU coalition to undermine the opposition's campaign ahead of the Bihar Assembly elections in November 2025.

The mounting public and media pressure, coupled with Gandhi's refusal to back down, prompted the district administration to reconsider its stance. After hours of negotiations, the authorities relented, allowing Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, and their entourage to perform darshan at the Janaki Temple under heightened security arrangements. The darshan took place later that day, with the Gandhis offering prayers amidst a significant crowd of supporters and media personnel.

Political and Cultural Ramifications

The Sitamarhi temple controversy added a new layer to the Voter Adhikar Yatra, shifting focus from electoral issues to questions of religious access and political interference. For the Congress, the incident provided an opportunity to portray the BJP-led administration as intolerant and obstructive, reinforcing the narrative that the ruling coalition was attempting to suppress opposition voices. Rahul Gandhi's successful push to secure darshan rights was celebrated by Congress supporters as a victory for democratic principles and cultural inclusivity.

However, the BJP and its allies accused the Gandhis of politicizing a religious site for electoral gain. They argued that the yatra's focus on the Janaki Temple was a calculated move to appeal to the sentiments of Mithilanchal's voters, particularly in a region where religious identity plays a significant role in politics. Posts on X from BJP supporters labeled the incident a staged drama, alleging that the Congress had orchestrated the controversy to garner sympathy and media coverage.

The episode also reignited debates about the role of religion in Indian politics. Critics of the Congress argued that Rahul Gandhi's temple visits, including the Sitamarhi darshan, were part of a broader strategy to counter the BJP's dominance over Hindu religious narratives. Meanwhile, Congress leaders maintained that the darshan was a genuine expression of faith, consistent with the party's outreach to diverse communities during the yatra.

Broader Context and Implications

The Sitamarhi controversy unfolded against the backdrop of heightened political tensions in Bihar, where the Voter Adhikar Yatra has already stirred debate over alleged electoral fraud. The opposition's unity, exemplified by the presence of Stalin and Yadav alongside the Gandhis, underscored the INDIA bloc's efforts to challenge the BJP-JDU coalition in the state. However, the temple incident risked overshadowing the yatra's core message about voter rights, diverting attention to a narrative of administrative overreach and religious access.

The controversy also highlighted the delicate balance between security protocols and political freedoms in India. While the administration's initial decision was framed as a precautionary measure, its reversal under pressure raised questions about the consistency of such protocols and their susceptibility to political influence. The incident is likely to fuel ongoing discussions about the impartiality of administrative bodies in BJP-ruled states, particularly as the Bihar elections approach.

Conclusion

The denial of darshan to Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra at Sitamarhi's Janaki Temple during the Voter Adhikar Yatra on August 28, 2025, was a flashpoint that encapsulated the intersection of religion, politics, and governance in India. Rahul Gandhi's determined opposition and the eventual resolution in favor of the darshan underscored the power of public pressure and political mobilization. While the incident bolstered the Congress's narrative of resistance against perceived authoritarianism, it also invited criticism for exploiting religious sentiments for political mileage.

As the Voter Adhikar Yatra continues toward its culmination in Patna, the Sitamarhi episode serves as a reminder of the complex dynamics shaping India's political landscape. With the Bihar Assembly elections looming, the controversy is likely to reverberate, influencing voter perceptions and intensifying the battle between the opposition and the ruling coalition in one of India's most politically consequential states.