Founder of JeevaMadhu Foundation Faces Scrutiny for his Stance on Regional and Religious Matters:
Jeevan Sagar, a well-known social activist and the founder of the JeevaMadhu Foundation, has recently found himself at the center of controversy due to a series of statements made during a live session on Instagram. While Sagar is recognized for his commendable work in various social causes and his relentless pursuit of justice through RTI cases on behalf of the public, his recent remarks have raised questions about the scope and limits of his activism.
In a candid and impassioned address, Jeevan Sagar spoke out about the ongoing Cauvery water issue, stating his unwavering commitment to the betterment of society without any bias towards caste, community, religion, or geographical situation. However, he went on to make a striking declaration: “When it comes to Water, Language, and Livelihood of the people of Karnataka, I will stand by them and offer any support needed.”
This statement, which appears to prioritize the interests of Karnataka residents in the Cauvery water dispute, has drawn sharp criticism and sparked a heated debate among citizens and activists alike. Some argue that Jeevan Sagar’s dedication to regional concerns may undermine his broader commitment to social justice and inclusivity.
Jeevan Sagar did not stop at addressing the Cauvery water issue; he also waded into the realm of religious discourse by commenting on Udhayanidhi Stalin’s recent remarks regarding ‘Sanatana Dharma.’ He suggested that Mr. Stalin should learn the importance of “Sanatana Dharma” and recognize the equal significance of all religions in India. Jeevan Sagar urged him to focus on people’s development rather than making potentially divisive comments.
Furthermore, Jeevan Sagar made an indirect reference to certain ministers from Karnataka, questioning their stance on the Cauvery water issue. He pointed out that while these ministers are part of an ‘I.N.D.I.A alliance’ with other political parties, they have not made substantial efforts to resolve the water dispute. Sagar’s pointed question was, “When people in Karnataka do not have enough water to drink, why do we allocate water to other states? Is this a political game? Will you address these issues only when you are in opposition?”
Jeevan’s remarks have ignited a lively debate in society, with some praising his dedication to Karnataka’s cause and others questioning whether his service should be limited to a single state. Critics argue that his focus on regional and religious matters might compromise the broader ethos of his activism, which has historically been characterized by a commitment to social justice without any biases.
As the controversy surrounding Jeevan Sagar’s statements continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how his supporters, critics, and the public at large will react to his evolving stance on issues of regional importance and religious harmony.