When Sadhguru met Amit Shah: What critics do not understand about modern spiritualism — and its role in politics

The article’s core argument rests on a problematic premise: Modern spiritual movements should somehow operate outside the realities of contemporary society, adhering strictly to historical models like those of Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. While these figures were undoubtedly transformative, their methods were also perfectly adapted to their times. Today’s spiritual leaders face different challenges and opportunities.

Consider the criticism of spiritual leaders engaging with political figures. Throughout Indian history, from ancient times to the modern era, spiritual leaders have engaged with rulers and politicians — not as endorsement — but as part of their broader mission to effect positive change. Should modern spiritual guides refuse to engage with elected officials? That would mean abandoning their responsibility to influence positive social change. Take Sadhguru’s case — his interactions have spanned leaders across the political spectrum, consistently focusing on national and environmental issues rather than partisan politics.

The characterisation of modern spiritual programmes as offering “instant salvation” or “mind detox in 10 minutes” misses the mark entirely. These structured approaches to inner well-being are designed to help people transcend the very culture of instant gratification that critics accuse them of promoting. The format may be modern, but the essence remains traditional.

Modern spiritual movements face unique challenges. Reaching millions requires organisation, infrastructure, and contemporary communication methods. This isn’t commercialisation, it’s adaptation. When spiritual leaders articulate ancient wisdom in modern language, they’re building bridges between timeless truths and contemporary understanding.

The widespread reach of spiritual organisations today speaks to a genuine societal need. In a world grappling with mental-health crises and existential challenges, the growing interest in spiritual wisdom should be seen as a positive development. Rather than dismissing large spiritual movements as “industrial-scale operations,” we might ask why millions find resonance in these teachings.

Critics often make sweeping claims about the wealth and lifestyle of spiritual leaders without substantial evidence. But the real question isn’t about the scale of operation, it’s about their impact. Are lives being transformed? Are people finding tools for better living? These are the metrics that matter.

Pathak’s critique fundamentally misunderstands a guru’s role. A spiritual guide’s job isn’t to be a political commentator or social critic. Society has enough politicians, activists, and academics. What it needs from spiritual leaders is something entirely different: Guidance for inner transformation that can lead to broader societal change.

The real question isn’t whether spiritual leaders should adapt to modern times — they must — to remain relevant and effective. The question is whether they maintain their integrity and authentic purpose while doing so. Judge them by their impact, not by outdated expectations of what spirituality should look like.

In criticising modern spiritual approaches, critics ironically advocate for a form of spiritual elitism — one where wisdom remains trapped in traditional formats, accessible only to a select few. But if spiritual teachings are truly valuable, shouldn’t we want them to reach as many people as possible, through whatever effective means available?

The transformation of spiritual movements to meet contemporary needs isn’t a sign of degradation, it’s evolution. What needs examination isn’t their modern methods, but our outdated expectations of how spiritual wisdom should be packaged and delivered in the 21st century.

The writer is a communications consultant. She holds a Master’s degree in Public Policy from Columbia University. She has worked in the international development field, focusing on public health, sustainability, and refugee support in the Global South.