View source for Secular Takeover of Temples: Chidambaram Nataraja Temple Case

Part 1 of this series can be found here.

==== Takeover of Temples in Tamil Nadu ====
Ever since the colonial era, the dawn of regimes controlling religious shrines has meant that most temples are under the control of the endowments department. Despite the state’s commitment to non-intervention in religion following independence, the regulation of the temple’s material and symbolic resources has resulted in state interference in Hindu organization, economy and worship (1). The state government of Tamil Nadu, in continuation of the policies of the British colonial administration, consolidated control of temples, on the grounds of inefficiency. A policy was adopted of allowing the intervention of the government, including the appointment of administrators and, in cases of temples with large earnings, of passing any surplus funds on to other temples. Presler, the author of Religion Under Bureaucracy: Policy and Administration for Hindu Temples in South India remarks that the HRCE, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Administration) Department policies encompass three central institutional dimensions of temples: governance, economy, and religion, and when considered in summation, reveal a “systematic attempt to penetrate the temple, to bring it within the orbit of state power and to ensure that it accommodates or furthers public purposes as defined by the state.” Through the decades, HRCE has been able to exert the most influence on religious affairs, while weakly affecting governance and totally mismanaging the economic aspects. This seems ironic, as the state’s authority should ideally be least felt in matters of religion in a self-proclaimed constitutionally secular state (2). 

==== Religious and Denominational freedom ====
The right to administer religious institutions without state interference is a key feature of a secular state, but the modern Indian state has found ways to justify its actions and assert political control over temples. It must be noted that non-Hindu religious institutions are not subject to the same treatment. Government control of temples could perhaps be justified relying on the historical precedent of the interplay between monarchs and temples and the purpose of the liberalization agenda of the modern Indian state. In a way, this justification is in conflict with both the purpose of the state in society and the function of religious institutions. However, despite this, the ineffectiveness, massive corruption and mismanagement, along with an explicit interference in ritual and religious matters are all reasons the state must not be allowed to continue its incursive policy.

The Indian constitution guarantees religious freedom in its articles 25 and 26, but is subject to certain limitations. Article 25 confers broad rights but throws open the doors for the state to interfere, citing reform and social welfare; Article 26 confers the right to establish and maintain religious institutions to denominations. The Shirur Math (3) judgment by the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the HRCE Act on the grounds that temples are “public trusts” for which the state has a direct responsibility.

As a denomination, the Dikṣitārs (hereditary priests of Chidambaram temple) have special religious rights, and have fought hard to defend them. On two separate occasions, the HR&CE Department and Tamil Nadu government attempted to appoint an Executive Officer (EO) to the Chidambaram temple and alienate the land holdings of the Dikṣitārs. Both times, the denominational rights of the Dikṣitārs were upheld — once by the Madras High Court in Sabanayagar Temple, Chidambaram v. State of Tamil Nadu (4) and later by the Supreme Court in Subramanian Swamy v. State of Tamil Nadu (5) — as envisioned by Article 26.

==== Conclusion ====
To many, Chidambaram is truly a safe haven for a community untouched by the madness of the modern world and a repository of unchanged brahmin traditions. Given such a crucial significance to the Śaiva tradition, it is no wonder that the temple is the target of repeated attempts at a takeover. The shrine has been in the headlines lately, for all the wrong reasons (6). Over the years, there have been frequent run-ins on a number of issues between the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR & CE) Department officials and the District administration of the Tamil Nadu government on the one hand and the Dīkṣitars on the other. The Tamil Nadu Government clearly has a long-standing vendetta against one of the only shrines in the state that operates outside of government control. The intention is to take over the temple by any means necessary — not only to commercialize the shrine, break the overtly religious, traditional brahmin stronghold over it, but also to assert the dominance of the political sphere over the religious. The DMK Government in Tamil Nadu has expressed its desire to take over the administration of the temple and dismantle age-old Brahmin traditions that are kept alive there by making frequent statements to the public, in an attempt to galvanize public opinion and justify their aggressions. The DMK as a party evolved out of the anti-Brahmin movement in 20th century Tamil Nadu, and makes no secret of its anti-brahmin sentiment, framing almost every issue, religious or not, in this light. The HR&CE Minister Sekar Babu declared that the Government was examining how it could take over the administration of the temple. This is in spite of the Supreme Court order to the contrary. The fear is that the state government appears undeterred, yet has unlimited resources on its side. The smear campaign of the Dīkṣitars could eventually be weaponized for the fraudulent creation of a law and order situation that could potentially be used to justify the takeover of the shrine. It is crucial that Hindus recognise and oppose these overtly political yet maliciously defamatory narratives that seek to destroy institutions that form the very core of Hinduism.

==== References ====
4. Presler, Franklin A.. Religion Under Bureaucracy: Policy and Administration for Hindu Temples in South India. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

5. Ibid.

6. Commr., Hindu Religious Endowments v. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt, 1954 SCR 1005

7. Sabanayagar Temple, Chidambaram v. State of T.N., 2009 SCC OnLine Mad 381

8. Subramanian Swamy v. State of T.N., (2014) 5 SCC 75

9. The latest fiasco began when the Dīkṣitars put up a notice barring worship from the kanakasabha for the duration of the Aani Thirumanjanam festival citing security concerns and difficulties in managing the crowds. The District administration and the HRCE Dept objected and forcibly removed the Notice board. Thereafter Police and officials marched into the kanakasabha, shoving the objecting Dīkṣitars aside. Some of the priests claimed that they were pushed and one said that his sacred thread was cut. The Government also issued a GO giving devotees permission to worship from the kanakasaba. [https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/tamil-nadu-temple-priests-booked-for-restricting-endowment-department-officials-in-temple-2398977-2023-06-28 This order has been challenged in the Madras High Court.] Other issues include: allegations of authorities violating the dignity of young girls by subjecting them to a gynecological examination. A few months ago, videos surfaced on social media that appeared to show child marriages in the Dikshitar community and an FIR was registered by the local Police and some of the Dikshitars were taken into custody. It was then alleged that deeply insulting and invasive vaginal examinations were conducted on some of the girls, leading to [https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/two-finger-test-team-begins-probe-with-podhu-dikshithars/articleshow/100116788.cms?from=mdr another controversy].

==== Bibliography ====

* Swamy, B. G. L.. Chidambaram and Naṭarāja: Problems and Rationalization. India: Geetha Book House, 1979.
* Natarajan, B.., Venkataraman, Balasubrahmanyam., Ramachandran, Balasubrahmanyan. Tillai and Nataraja. India: Mudgala Trust, 1994.
* Tanaka, Masakazu. “Why are Brahman Temple Priests Highest in the Caste Hierarchy?: A Case of Chidambaram Natarāja Temple, South India.” ''Senri ethnological studies'' 36 (1993): 85-123.
* Peterson, Indira Viswanathan. Poems to Śiva: The Hymns of the Tamil Saints. India: Motilal Banarsidass, 1991.
* The Nataraja Temple - History, Art and Architecture by T.Satyamurti
* Presler, Franklin A.. Religion Under Bureaucracy: Policy and Administration for Hindu Temples in South India. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Authored by Sai Priya Chodavarapu. 
Published by Brhat.[[Category:Philosophy]]