Lingayatism first takes shape as a radical devotional movement in twelfth‑century Karnataka, crystallizing around Basava and the sharanas. Its early vision unites intense, personal devotion to Shiva—through the ishtalinga worn and worshipped on the body—with an uncompromising critique of caste hierarchy, Brahmin priesthood, and ritualism. The vachanas, brief Kannada sayings and poems, become the primary vehicle of teaching, making spiritual reflection accessible beyond Sanskrit‑educated elites. Institutions such as the anubhava mantapa embody this spirit of open dialogue, where spiritual experience and ethical life are discussed without regard to birth or status. Ideals such as gender equality, intercaste marriage, and the dignity of labor are not merely theological abstractions but central markers of the community’s self‑understanding.

Over time, however, this radical edge encounters both internal and external pressures. Following the dispersal of the early community, Lingayatism gradually develops mathas and monastic leadership, which help preserve doctrine but also introduce new hierarchies and patterns of authority. While the tradition continues to proclaim an anti‑caste ethos, practices such as caste endogamy and internal status distinctions reappear in many places, revealing a gap between founding ideals and lived social reality. Scriptural consolidation proceeds on two tracks: the collection and systematization of vachanas, and the composition of texts that link Lingayatism more explicitly to broader Shaiva lineages. In this way, a movement born as a protest against orthodox structures becomes, in part, a structured sect negotiating its place within the wider Hindu world.

The colonial period intensifies questions of identity and self‑definition. Under new classificatory regimes, Lingayats are variously described as a Shaiva sect within Hinduism or as a distinct religious community, and this ambiguity prompts sustained reflection among Lingayat intellectuals. Mathas and community leaders invest heavily in education, forming a literate middle stratum that revisits Basava’s teachings in the light of emerging discourses on social reform. Reformers draw upon the vachanas and the memory of the sharanas to challenge practices such as child marriage, dowry, and discrimination against marginalized sub‑groups, presenting the tradition as inherently aligned with equality and social justice. In this period, Lingayatism begins to see its own past as a resource for critiquing both internal conservatism and external domination.

In more recent times, Lingayatism stands as a large, institutionally robust community, especially in regions where its mathas manage extensive educational and welfare networks. Political mobilization has made Lingayats a significant force in regional public life, and religious institutions often function simultaneously as spiritual centers and socio‑political actors. Debates over whether Lingayatism constitutes a distinct religion or a Shaiva stream within Hinduism have become particularly intense, with different groups emphasizing either continuity with or distance from broader Hindu practice. Governmental recognition of a separate religious status has been granted and then contested, mirroring the community’s own internal diversity of views. Amid these tensions, many scholars and leaders seek to retrieve the original egalitarian and reformist impulse, using Basava’s legacy and the vachanas as touchstones for ongoing reflection on caste, gender, and ethical responsibility.