The Emperor Raja Raja Chola the
Great constructed the Big Temple at Thanjavur utilizing the revenue of
his government. He did not hand them over to any independent body of Saivites or Hindus to manage it. The temples
remained under the management of the government and proved to be an important source of revenue
to their governments. The same was the case with all the kings. When the country passed from one conqueror to another the
control of the temples also changed hands. Even the Muslim rulers kept them
under their control.
In a Tirumala Tirupati
Devastanam case, the then Madras High Court had observed as follows: “Up to
1843, when the defendant’s predecessor was appointed trustee of the temple, all
surplus revenues of the temples, after defraying the cost of the temple
service, were approrpriated by the sovereign power. This practice, the British
government inherited from its Muhammadan and Hindu predecesssors, and it has
prevailed from time immemorial. The surplus thus appropriated (by the
government) amounted, at the beginning of the last (18th)century, to
something like two lakhs of rupees annually”(Page 41- Right of temple entry- P
Chidambaram Pillai).
‘Asareeri’ said it
In 1803, when the British took
possession of Orissa, the oracle of the Puri Jagannath temple is said to have
proclaimed that it was the desire of the deity that the temple too should be
controlled by the Company, and the latter undertook to maintain the temple in
all respects. . When the East India Company stepped into the spheres of the
previous rulers the Brahmins welcomed it, as their own position became more
secure and acquired added dignity and power by the patronage of the new
government. Until 1863, during the British rule, the revenue boards continued
to be in charge of the temples in their respective jurisdictions and it was by
an Act of 1863 that the government transferred the control of the temples into
the hands of the trustees.
Thus, for centuries, the
governments had the right not only of the administration of the temples but
also to make use of the surplus revenue for various other purposes in running
the State.
They covet
‘all’
The All India Brahmins
Federation which met at Chennai on 25th June 2000 has demanded the
government to get out of the temples and also asked for appointment of Brahmins
in the Board of Trustees of the temples. But, Manu had prohibited temple
priest-hood to the Brahmins. He had, in his own style, classified
temple-priests along with liquor vendors. The Brahmins had rarely founded any
temples. Most of the temples were built and endowed by non-Brahmin princes and
Chiefs and flourished with the help of contributions from non-Brahmin devotees.
They were built not in accordance with the non-idolatrous Brahmanical sastras
but in accordance with the Agamas of the idolatrous Dravidians. The Dravidian
Saivism had been followed in pure and
pristine form and glory until the Brahmins started poking their nose into it.
It was the Brahmins who had eternal animosity towards Saivism, started reducing
the importance of Siva and Uma worship in the temples and introduced the alien
concept of Vinayak into the Saivite fold. The very fact that the
Thiruvilaiyadal Puranam does not make any reference of the Lord Pillaiyar would
prove that the Vinayaka worship was an artificial later introduction by the
north Indian Brahmins to undermine the importance of Siva worship.
Experience
has taught us that the temples have not been managed any better by the trustees
than by the governments. The episodes of Subramania Pillai at Tiruchendur and
Venkatachalam at Srirangam prove that the government control over the temples
is a boon, especially when the officials entrusted with the task happen to be
honest in discharging their duties. The fact that corrupt find their way into
the administration is conceded. But asking the government to keep off the
temples for that purpose amounts to jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
Chidambaram
and Vaishnodevi temples
That the Chidambaram temple
under the management of the Dikshidars is stinking with corruption and many
other malpractices is well known. On the other hand the Vaishnodevi temple
affairs came to be administered properly only after it was brought under the
control of the government by the then Governor of Jammu and Kashmir Mr. Jagmohan. The government should not be
kept away from the administration of temples, if the interest of the
worshipping public is taken into account.
Neo- Nazis
If the government is kept
away, it would give free hand to the trustees
in the ‘control’ of the temples. If the trustees or the so-called
autonomous bodies are thus given a free hand it would result only in the
emergence of thousands of Krishna Warriers. M.V.Krishna Warrier, the secretary of the managing
committee of the Palazhi Sastha temple, has successfully denied the rights
of the Harijan and other backward class
people to offer Vazhipad articles
to the God. He said, “I use the Vazhipad articles like rice, milk, etc.,
brought only by upper class people.
Otherwise, it won’t have any sanctity. The milk brought by a Harijan will not
be accepted but if the Harijan sends it through a Nair or any other high caste
person, it is alright.”(Indian Express August 31, 1986) “According to legal experts, Krishna Warrier
has committed cognizable offence under the central Protection of civil Rights Act,
1955 and the Hindu Places of Public
Worship (Authorisation of entry) Act, 1965 of the State Government for which
the police could arrest him without a warrant. Though the issue was raised in
the assembly, Chief Minister Karunakaran, who is in charge of Harijan Welfare, did not take it seriously. He simply directed the
Trichur District Collector to “somehow patch up the issue” (Indian Express Aug.31,1986)
“The case of Palazhi temple is , however, not an isolated one.
More of the tip of that iceberg
The Kurumbilavu Bhagawathi
temple, also in Trichur district, is still practicing “untouchability” in a
different manner. The temple won’t accept “paras”(an offering of paddy)
during the para ezhunnellippu from the harijans during the annual
festival. However, they can offier paras through upper class devotees or at the
temple by paying money for it” (ibid.) .
In these circumstances, if the government gives up its control over
the affairs of the temples , it would
result in the re-emergence of so many Neo-Nazis like the Krishna Warrier.
So, the government must continue to enforce its right over the
maintenance of the temples but must appoint honest persons for their
administration. It must activate its audit and vigilance machinery and give
protection to the life of the people like the Subraminia Pillai of Tiruchendur
episode and Venkatachalam of Srirangam episode.
The original liberal character of the South Indian
temples, which were maintained until 1863, and the values they stood for were
completely destroyed only after the temples fell under the influence of trustees.
Agamas - Ours
The temples had been built in
accordance with the rules contained in the Agamas (the Dravidian set of rules
on idolatry, later translated into Sanskrit) and not the Vedas (which denounced
idolatry). “The Agamic literature is characterized as pseudo-scripture, a
conspiracy of the grace of Siva and Vishnu directed against the Vedic path” as
recorded in Brahma Sutra II 2.38 and Abhinava Sankara . “These commentaries and
views embodied in the later works speak of the cultural antagonism and the
resentment of orthodoxy against the Agamic religions existing in the earlier
times”( Page 34- Brahmanas in Ancient India , A study in the role of the
Brahman class from c.200 BC to c.500AD. - Govind Prasad Upadyay – Published by Musnshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt.Ltd –First Edition
1979) “The Agamas did not recognize the four castes…The Agamas on the contrary,
were open to all men, so much so, that even today, a Pariah who has received Sivadiksha
can give this Diksha (initiation) to the Brahman and thus become the
guru of the latter.” (History of the Tamils – P.T. Srinivasa Iyengar ) But,
these rules were completely ignored by the trustees after they took over
the temples. So, the right of the other people to officiate as priests was lost
in most places.
Linguistic apartheid ended, when?
The people who cry hoarse
against the government administration of the temple do not have any concern for
the suppressed caste people becoming priests. Their concern is neither religion
nor humanism but materialistic welfare of the people of their own denomination
and that too at the cost , labour and
self-respect of the subjucated classes. Let us not lose sight of the fact that
the performance of Tamil Vazhibaadu became possible only because of the
government’s administration of the temples.
No comments:
Post a Comment