Temple Politics

It is the duty of the Hindus to preserve the statue of Periyar (E.V. Ramaswamy Nayakar)

The statements under the statue of Periyar are against Muslims and Christians and Hindus.

1 ‘There is no God’ (by Periyar)—When a Hindu reads he is outraged because but not for

others (Muslims and Christians).  Because what we (Hindu) worship alone God.

2 ‘Those who taught God are fools’(by Periyar)–  Mohammad came as the Prophet and

taught God. Jesus Christ came as song of God and taught God.  But there is no one in

Hinduism who taught God. Therefore Periyar only calls both Mohammad and Christ as fools.

3 ‘Those who propagated (God) is a scoundrel’—Only other religions (Islam and Christianity

) alone were propagated.  So Periyar only talks about those who propagated those religions.

Our religion was never propagated by any one.

4 Why they keep Periyar statue only before (Hindu) temples alone?

EVR is the enemy of God.  Therefore he can oppose only where there is God.  As God is only

in the (Hindu) temple.

5 As God is not either in the Mosque or Church.  How one can oppose (God) where there is

no God?

Thanks to Shri Sukumar Ramachandra Sir healthy Bharath.

Thanks

Kumbha Kameshbabu.

This is my response:

Temple politics

The above posting is what is called as putting same side goal (or doing sorcery on oneself at personal cost)

Mocking other faiths using Periyar only demonstrates only our ignorance.  In general a sincere Hindu

won’t mock other Faiths.  Similarly when others talk ill about her faith, she will ignore it.

Though Christians call their church as temple (in Tamilnadu) actually it is not a temple.  In

fact according to their Bible God never dwells in any man made structure.  The Bible says

that ‘where two or three believers (bhaktas) gather together God dwells among them’.

Actually their gathering is called ‘congregation’ (sabai in Tamil).  To gather they construct

some structure.  In several places they gather even in open space.  So when the Christians

gather to worship and go way, and then God won’t dwell in that place.  Their church is not

constructed as we construct our temple following the rules of the rules of Agamas for god to dwell there

permanently.

When they consecrate their church it is not done as we are doing our temples.  It is called

‘Holy Unto God’, separating a place or things for the service of god. Even the ‘statues’

those are kept in the Catholic churches are only called ‘icons’.  They are not worshiped but

only shown respect or venerated.  Even if we Hindus consider them as ‘murthy’ (Image),

still they are not what called as ‘archavaratara’ (in Vaishnavism).  That is why unlike as we

do in our temples they need to do puja three times in a day to them.

So when their structure called church remain closed they never think that the ‘icons’ in them

lose their ‘power’ unless proper pujas are done as per some ritual rules (Agamas).  For

example in this corona pandemic when their church remains closed they never both about it.

Whereas even devotees are not allowed inside our temples, proper pujas need to be done in

our temple as per the agamic rules.  This we can understand from a different perspective.  Some

deities in some temples become famous as they are considered as powerful (Saktivaida

daivam in Tamil).  Because more the pujas were done as per the agamic rules, that particular

deity gains more power.  To  say in other words our pujas can enhance the power in a

particular deity. ¹ But no such concept exists among the Christians towards their ‘icons’ in

side their churches or in the road side shrines that to ‘energise’ them proper pujas needs to be done.

Similarly claiming that only people of other faiths are propagating their religion and we

Hindus are not doing it is a lie. Each sampradaya is propagating its faith and converting

people of other faiths to their sampradayas.  Saivites becoming Vaishnavites and

Vaishnavites becoming Saivites is quite common.   There are ample evidence in

Periyapuranam by Sekizhar how both Jains and Buddhists were won in debate and

reconverted to Saivism or palled in a sharp pole known as ‘kazhavetrudual in Tamil when they

refuse to convert.  Periyapuranam clearly states that the Thiru Jnana Sambandar took avatara

only to eradicate Jains and Buddhist from Tamilnadu and restore back Saivism.

We need not think that this happened back in history and not now.  Though Hindus never

convert people of other faiths to Hinduism except ISCON and few other sects, we often hear

about one Hindu promoting her  personal guru to another Hindu and recommend others to

come and worship in a particular temple to get special favour.  Of course this never comes

under the orbit of conversion but one Hindu promoting her particular faith to another is not

unknown even today.

Not only in India, almost everywhere in the world temples (also church or mosque)

is constructed neither for spirituality nor for god but only for political and economic

reasons² or for personal fame. There are ample historical and epigraphic evidence.

Particularly in the historical period kings constructed temples to expand their

political power and economic reasons. Both Michael Willis³ (The Archaeology of

Hindu Ritual: Temples and the establishment of the Gods, Cambridge, 2009) and

Vijay Nath, (Puraanas and Acculturation: A Historico-Anthropological Perspective,

Munshirma Manoharlal, New Delhi, 2001) demonstrate this clearly.

Champakalakshmi gives details records about this in South India in her book:

Religion, Tradition, and Ideology: Pre-colonial South India, Oxford, New Delhi

(2011), 2012. And the Bible Background Commentary (John H. Walton; Victor H.

Matthews & Mark W. Chavalas, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, Old

Testament,  Downers Grove, Illinois, 2000) speaks about the temple was the center of culture, economy

and society in Syria, Mesopotamia and Israel (2 CHRONICLES, p.445).

Even the National poet Subramanya Bharatiyar⁴ says that:

Creating tree garden of sweet fruits

Digging fountains of sweet water

Arranging charitable homes for free meals

Constructing thousands of temples

And all other such charities are

Only to glorify one’s own name

But helping a poor child to get education

Is the best charity which will earn better merit! (a free translation by me)

Therefore keeping Periyar as a pretext criticizing sarcastically criticising other faiths

Is not demonstrating our maturity or knowledge about their religion.

Dayanand Bharati

4-08-2020

1 Energising deities in order to receive more benefit from them is not limited only with Hinduism.  For

example in Shinto sect in Japan every year a particular ritual is performed to energize the deity of that sect.

(I watched this program in BBC Earth on 8-08-202)

2….gifting to the temple and its functionaries was an act of merit that was inevitably recorded and eulogized

in the inscriptions.  However, the underlying motive was to gain the greatest possible access to the temple

and be a part of the ceremonial framework that included other social groups over which the rayas and chiefs

wanted to assert control. The temple and its functionaries were instrumental in legitimizing their benefactors

’ political authority….— Ranjeeta Dutta, From Hagiographies to Biographies: Ramanuja in Tradition and

 History, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 2014,p. 102

…the temple was also a statement of political authority when built by a ruler.— Romila Thapar, Syndicated

 Hinduism Critical Quest, New Delhi, 2010. [Originally published in Gunther-Dietz Sontheimer & Herman

Kulke edited Hinduism Revisted, Delhi, Manohar (2005). p. 14

…Unlike the setting up of inscriptions, the building of temple commanded greater respect and was

symbolically better privileged in the race for vertical political mobility. The catalytic role it played in

marshalling popular support and gaining greater access to resources through the new temple-centered

redistributive machinery can hardly be overstated.— Manu V. Devadevan, A Prehistory of Hinduism,

Berlin, De Gruyter Open Ltd, 2016, p. 39

3 Note the following reference given by Wills to substantiate this point: “Throne and

Temple: Political Power and Religious Prestige in Vidarbha.” In  The Sacred Centre

as a Focus of Political Interest.  Edited by Hans T. Bakker, Gronlingen, 1992

படித்ததில் மிகப் பிடித்தது:

ஈவெராவின் சிலையைப் பாதுகாப்பது இந்துவின் கடமை!

ஈவெராவின் சிலைக்குக் கீழ் இருக்கும் வாசகம் முஸ்லிம், கிறிஸ்தவர்களுக்கு

எதிரானது. இந்துவுக்கு அல்ல.

கடவுள் இல்லை. இல்லவே இல்லை–அர்த்தம்: இதனைப் படித்தால்

இந்துவுக்குக் கோபம் வருகிறது. மற்ற மதத்தவர்களுக்கு வருவதில்லை.

காரணம் நாம் வணங்குவதுதான் கடவுள்.

2. கடவுளைக் கற்பித்தவன் முட்டாள்–இறை தூதராக வந்து நபி கடவுளைக்

கற்பித்தார். தேவகுமாரனாக வந்து ஏசு கற்பித்தார். அவர்கள் இருவரையும்தான்

ஈவெரா முட்டாள் என்று சிலையின் கீழ் சொல்லியுள்ளார். இந்து மதத்தில்

கற்பித்தவர் இல்லை.

3. பரப்பியவன் அயோக்கியன்–மாற்று மதங்கள்தான் பரப்பப்பட்டது. நம் நாட்டிற்கு

இஸ்லாமிய கிறிஸ்தவ மதங்களைக் கொண்டு வந்து பரப்பியவர்களைத்தான்

அந்த சிலைக்கு கீழ் ஈவெரா சொல்லியுள்ளார். நம் மதம் யாராலும்

பரப்பப்பட்டது இல்லை.

4. கோயில்களுக்கு முன்பு மட்டும் ஈவெரா சிலை வைப்பது ஏன்?

ஈவெரா கடவுளின் எதிரி. அவர் கடவுள் இருக்கும் இடத்தில்தான் சென்று

எதிர்க்க முடியும். கோயிலில் கடவுள் இருப்பதால் அங்கு சிலை வைத்து

எதிர்க்கிறார்கள்.

மசூதியிலோ, சர்ச்சிலோ கடவுள் இல்லை. இல்லாத இடத்தில் எப்படி எதிர்ப்பது?

அதனால்தான் அங்கு அவர் சிலையை வைப்பதில்லை.

அறிவாலயத்தில் இவரை மதிப்பவர் எவரும் இல்லை.

Thanks to Shri Sukumar Ramachandran Sir and  Healthy Bharath.

நன்றி : Kumbha Rameshbabu.