When reflecting on the public life of Baba Ramdev, one encounters a figure whose spiritual and therapeutic teachings are interwoven with a series of significant controversies. A central area of contention concerns his claims about the power of yoga and Ayurveda to cure serious illnesses, including conditions such as cancer, HIV/AIDS, diabetes, and COVID‑19. His promotion of products like Coronil as a cure for COVID‑19, later framed as an immunity booster after regulatory pushback, has been criticized by medical bodies as lacking sufficient scientific substantiation. These episodes have led to accusations of medical quackery, legal notices from professional associations, and concerns about practicing or influencing medical treatment without conventional medical qualifications. For many observers, this raises a deeper spiritual question about the ethical boundaries of healing claims and the responsibility that comes with spiritual authority.

Closely linked to these medical controversies are questions surrounding the business practices of Patanjali, the commercial enterprise with which he is closely associated. Patanjali products have faced allegations of misleading or deceptive advertising, especially where health benefits are asserted without robust evidence, and some items have reportedly failed quality tests or faced regulatory scrutiny and temporary bans. Critics have also raised concerns about land acquisition for Patanjali’s ventures, suggesting irregularities and environmental issues, and have questioned the scale, transparency, and governance of the broader business empire. This perceived tension between the ideal of renunciation and the reality of large‑scale commercial activity has led some to see a dissonance between spiritual image and worldly engagement.

Another strand of controversy arises from his political involvement and public interventions in social debates. Baba Ramdev has been an active supporter of particular political parties and movements, including anti‑corruption agitations, and has used his platform to speak on issues such as black money and governance. The police action and turmoil surrounding his high‑profile fast at Ramlila Maidan, including his much‑discussed attempt to leave the venue in disguise, became a focal point for criticism of his methods and judgment. More broadly, his perceived closeness to political power and association with specific ideological currents have led many to question whether spiritual influence is being used to advance partisan agendas, thereby blurring the line between sannyasa, commerce, and politics.

Finally, his public statements on allopathic medicine and social questions have generated considerable debate. He has made disparaging remarks about modern medical practice and doctors, especially in the context of the pandemic, provoking strong responses from the medical community and regulatory bodies. At the same time, his broader comments on social and cultural issues have been viewed by some as divisive or insufficiently aligned with a universalist spiritual ethos. Taken together, these controversies invite a sober contemplation of how spiritual charisma, economic power, and political influence can become entangled, and how seekers and society alike might discern the difference between authentic service and the pitfalls of fame and authority.