கேரள கோவில்களில் சிறப்புகள்.
அங்கே சிவா, விஷ்ணு பேதங்கள் இல்லை சைவம், வைணவம்… அதிலும் வடகலை, தென்கலை இல்லை.. ஏன் திருநீறே இல்லை …மஹா தேவர் என்றழைக்கப்படும் சிவ சன்னிதானங்களில்கூட !! சந்தனம் மட்டுமே பிரசாதம்.. ஒரே கோவிலில் சிவலிங்கம், மஹாவிஷ்ணு, பகவதி, சர்ப்பக்காவுகள் தரிசனம் செய்யலாம்..( பழைமையான கோவில்களிலேயே..!) தெருவுக்கு ஒரு புதிய கோவில் , அதற்கு ஒரு தர்மகர்த்தா குழு என்றெல்லாம் இல்லை..! கோவிலுக்குள் சாதி சண்டைகள், முதல் மரியாதை, பரிவட்டம் கட்டுதல் இல்லை… எந்த கோவிலிலும் கட்டண தரிசனம், விரைவு தரிசனம், “ இலவச” தரிசனம் போர்டுகள், வழிகள் கிடையாது…! தந்திரிகள் , கருவறை பூஜையில் உள்ளோர், இயற்கை உபாதையை கழிக்கவேண்டியிருந்தால்.. மீண்டும் மீண்டும் குளித்தபின்பே கருவறைக்குள் செல்கிறார்கள்( குருவாயூரில் கண்டது )… புஷ்பாஞ்சலி( ்அர்ச்சணை) அவ்வப்போது பெயர், நட்சத்திரம் சொல்லி “ சக குடும்பானாம்..” என்று சப்தமாக சொல்லி , நிமிடத்திற்கு ஒரு ஆரத்தி காண்பித்து தட்டுக்காசு வாங்குவதில்லை… மந்திரங்களை மனதுக்குள் உச்சரித்து, முத்திரைகளுடன் புஷ்பாஞ்சலி மொத்தமாக நடக்கும்… கோவில் பிரசாதம் என்று மெதுவடை, புளியோதரை, அதிரசம் என்று கோவிலுக்குள் மினி ஹோட்டல் கிடையாது கோவில் பிரகாரத்திற்குள், ஏன் வளாகத்திற்குள்ளேயே யாரும் உணவருந்துவதில்லை .. கோவில் வளாகத்திற்குள் அன்னதானக்கூடங்கள் இல்லை… நரேந்திர மோதி வந்தாலும் வேட்டி, மேல் வஸ்திரத்துடன் மட்டுமே அனுமதி…( பத்மநாபசுவாமி ஆலயம்) இந்திரா காந்தியே வந்தாலும் இந்து அல்லாதவர்க்கு அனுமதி இல்லை ( குருவாயூர் ஶ்ரீ கிருஷ்ணன் கோவில்) கம்யூனிஸ்ட் ஆட்சி செய்யும், கிருஸ்துவர்கள் அதிகம் இருக்கும் மாநிலமான கேரளத்தில் தெய்வ பக்தி அதிகமாகவே உள்ளது.. அங்கே கோவிலை இடிப்பவர்கள் இல்லை.. கடவுளை இல்லை என்று சொல்பவர்களும் இல்லை!! கோவிலின் பாரம்பரியத்தை கெடுக்கவும் இல்லை!! கோவில் உள்ளே செல்வதற்கு முன் ஆண்கள் சட்டையை கழட்டிவிட்டுதான் செல்ல வேண்டும்!! இதற்கு அங்கு உள்ள எந்த அரசியல்வாதியும் எதிர்ப்பு தெரிவிப்பது இல்லை!! பெண்கள் சில கோவிலுக்குள் செல்லக்கூடாது என்ற கட்டுபாட்டை பெண்களே மதிக்கிறார்கள்.. எவ்வளவு பெரிய பணக்காரணாக இருந்தாலும், அரசியல்வாதியாக இருந்தாலும்.. வரிசையில்தான் வரவேண்டும்..!! சிறப்பு தரிஸணம் கட்டணம் ஏதும் கிடையாது.. ஏன்?பொதுவாகவே கட்டணமே கிடையாது!! அர்ச்சகர்களை தொட்டு பேசமுடியாது!! அவர்கள் இரண்டு வேளையும் குளித்துவிட்டுதான் கருவறைக்குள் செல்வார்கள்.. பூஜை முடியும் வரை யாருக்காகவும், எதுக்காகவும் பூஜையை பாதியில் நிறுத்துவதில்லை!! அரைத்த சந்தனம்தான் சாற்றுவார்கள்.. அந்த பிரஸாதத்தை அவர்களிடம் பெற வேண்டுமானால் தக்ஷிணை கொடுத்தால் மட்டுமே தருவார்கள். (ஏன் என்றால் சந்தனம் அரைப்பது அவ்வளவு சிரமம்! அதனாலேயே பணம் வாங்குகிறார்கள் இதில் தவறில்லை) ஆனால் இவ்வளவு பணம்தான் தரனும் என்கிற கட்டுபாடு இல்லை!!! பக்தர்கள் யாரும் அவர்கள் இஷ்டத்திற்கு கோவிலை சுற்றி எங்குமே விளக்கு ஏற்ற முடியாது.. கோவிலில் எரியும் பொதுவான விளக்கிலேயே கொண்டுவந்த எண்ணையை விட்டுவிடவேண்டும்.. அதிகாலை நிர்மால்ய தரிஸணம் உண்டு!! பூஜைநேரத்திற்கு பூஜை செய்துவிடுவார்கள்.. யாருக்காகவும் பூஜை நிற்காது.. பூஜைக்கு கட்டணம் செலுத்தியவர்கள் கோவில் நிர்வாகம் சொல்லும் நேரத்திற்கு வந்துவிட வேண்டும்.. இல்லையேல் அவர்களுக்கக காத்திருந்து பூஜை செய்ய மாட்டார்கள்!! கோவில் பிரஸாதத்தை விற்பது இல்லை!! கோவிலின் பிரதான கோபுரத்துக்கு வெளியேதான் கடைகளுக்கு அனுமதி!! வெளியிலிருந்து கொண்டுவரும் பூக்களையோ,மாலைகளைகளையோ, பிரஸாதங்களையோ, கருவறைக்குள் அனுமதிப்பல்லை!! அர்ச்சர்கள் கோவிலை விட்டு வேறு எங்கும், யார் வீட்டுக்கும் பூஜைக்கு கோவில் நேரத்தில் செல்வதில்லை!! கோவில் சாற்றும்வரை சன்னதியிலேயே அர்ச்சர்கள் இருப்பார்கள்!! கோவிலை சுற்றி சுத்தமாக வைத்திருப்பார்கள்!!.. மொத்தத்தில் கோவில் பணத்திற்காக அல்ல. கேரளத்து பாரம்பர்யத்திற்காக!! Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Specialties in Kerala Temples There are no Shiva and Vishnu Vedas Saivism, Vaishnavism... even more so, there is no northern or southern culture.. Why is there no Thiruneereu (vibuthi)..even in Shiva Sannithans called Maha Deva !! Sandalwood is the only offering.. One can have darshan of Shiva Lingam, Maha Vishnu, Bhagwati and Sarpakakas in one temple.. (in old temples only..!) There is no such thing as a new temple on the street and a Dharmakartha group for it..! No caste fights, no first respect, circumambulation inside the temple… No paid darshan, quick darshan, “free” darshan boards, routes in any temple…! Tantris, those in the sanctum sanctorum, if they have to undergo natural ablutions.. they go into the sanctum sanctorum only after bathing again and again (seen in Guruvayur)… Pushpanjali (Orthodox) from time to time says the name, star and loudly says "Saka kuttumbanam.." and performs an aarti per minute and does not take the plate... Chanting the mantras in mind and with mudras, Pushpanjali takes place en masse… There is no mini hotel inside the temple called Meduvadai, Pulyotharai, Athirasam for temple offerings Why no one eats inside the temple premises, inside the premises.. There are no alms-houses inside the temple complex… Even if Narendra Moti comes, he will be allowed to wear a dress and an upper garment only... (Padmanabhaswamy Temple) Even if Indira Gandhi came, non-Hindus were not allowed (Guruvayur Sri Krishnan Temple). In Kerala, a state ruled by communists and where there are many Christians, devotion to God is high. There are no people who destroy the temple.. and there are no people who say no to God!! Do not spoil the tradition of the temple!! Men must take off their shirts before entering the temple!! No politician out there is going to object to this!! Women respect the rule that women should not enter some temples. No matter how rich or a politician you are.. you have to come in line..!! There is no special darshanam fee.. Why? Generally there is no fee!! Cannot touch priests!! They go into the sanctum sanctorum only after bathing twice. Puja is not interrupted for anyone or anything till the end of the puja!! They extract only ground sandalwood.. If you want to get that prasadam from them, they will give it only if you give dakshina. (Why grinding sandalwood is so difficult! That's why they charge money. Nothing wrong with this) But there is no restriction to give only so much money!!! No devotee can light a lamp anywhere around the temple as per their wish.. The oil brought in the common lamp should be left in the temple.. Have early morning Nirmalya darshan!! Puja will be done at the time of Puja.. Puja will not stop for anyone.. Those who have paid for the pooja must come at the time specified by the temple administration.. otherwise they will not wait for them and do the pooja!! No sale of temple offerings!! Shops are allowed outside the main tower of the temple!! Flowers, garlands and offerings brought from outside are not allowed inside the sanctum sanctorum!! Archers do not go anywhere else except temple, no one's house for pooja during temple time!! Archers will remain in the shrine until the temple is finished!! They keep clean around the temple!!.. Overall the temple is not for money. For Kerala tradition!! Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx KR: Most of the temples were owned by kings or noble families. With the coming of democracy, most of them are under the management of autonomous organizations <http://www.hindupedia.com/en/Organizations> called Devaswams, which are part of the government. Most of these temples had huge lands as property, but with the enactment of Land Reforms Act by the communist government, most of them became very poor. Nevertheless, today only a very small percentage of temples are dilapidated or neglected. This is because every temple is visited by the local population in the mornings after a bath as a part of their culture and tradition, as also they consider the temple as their own. This community awareness is so great that wherever they are in India or abroad, they make it a point to attend the festivals <http://www.hindupedia.com/en/Festivals> of the temple and contribute to its upkeep. This fact is a little strange, since the major politicians of Kerala are atheists. Unlike other states of India, while the worship in the sanctum is performed by Namboodiris or Embrandiris, the management of these temples is done by the rich landlords, assisted by a few Hindu <http://www.hindupedia.com/en/Hindu> castes called Ambalavasis. (People who live or are dependent on the temples). They are normally strict vegetarians and have different roles to play in the upkeep of a temple. For example, the 'Poduval' caste is in charge of management, the 'Warrier' caste is in charge of looking after the garden of the temple and providing flower garlands for worship in the temple, the 'kurukkals' are in charge of supplying milk to the temple, the 'Marars' are in charge of playing of musical instruments for the temple, the 'Poduval' and 'Nambeesan' are in charge of singing in front of the deity and the 'Chakyars' are in charge of propagating the ancient stories about the temple. Castes with such delineation of responsibilities in temple affairs are not found outside Kerala. Yet another interesting aspect of Kerala temple is the 'Ashta Mangalya Prasnam'. This is an astrological investigation to ascertain whether a particular decision by the temple management has divine approval or to seek specific remedy for calamitous happenings around the temple. For example, if the temple wants to find out whether a new idol can be consecrated or acquire one more elephant etc, an ashta mangalya prasnam is resorted to. A group of very capable astrologers carry out the Ashta Mangalya Prasnam, where there is a sustained debate as to what the position of each star means. The majority opinion is taken as the divine interpretation and the decision is finalized and carried out. Both the people as well as the Devaswoms strictly follow the recommendations of the astrologers. *Who manages Kerala temples?* Kerala has temples that are managed by state-run temple boards, private temple boards, or by community organisations such as Nair Service Society (NSS) and Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana (SNDP) Yogam, Akhila Bharatha Ayyappa Seva Sangham, Gowda Saraswath Brahmin Sabha, Dheevara Sabha, Vishwakarma Sabha, Ayyapa Seva Samithi, pro-BJP Kerala Kshetra Samrakshana Samithi, apart from families and trusts. *How many state-run temples does Kerala have?* Kerala has five state-run autonomous Devaswom (temple) boards, which together manage 3,058 temples in the state. These are Travancore Devaswom Board (1,250 temples, including famous hill shrine of Sabarimala <https://indianexpress.com/about/sabarimala-temple/>), Cochin Devaswom Board (406 temples), Malabar Devaswom Board (1,357 temples) Guruvayur Devaswom Board (11) and Koodalmanikyam board (12). The state also has a Devaswom Ministry with the portfolio in the present LDF government being held by K Radhakrishnan. Ruling parties appoint their nominees, who are also politicians, as president and members of the temple governing board. Role of these outfits includes administration of the temples, management of temple properties and ensuring facilities and infrastructure for devotees. Meanwhile, temples follow rituals as per tradition, irrespective of the party in power. Travancore and Cochin Boards also run educational institutions, including government-aided colleges and schools. The boards also run institutions to impart training in temple art forms. Staff, including priests, are recruited by the respective boards. The previous LDF regime brought in a Devaswom Recruitment Board to streamline the process. In 2017, the Travancore board for the first time appointed Dalits as priests in various temples under it. Later, the Cochin board also appointed non-Brahmin priests. Recruitment to the temples under the boards are done as per Hindu Religious Institutions Act 1951, except for posts which are bequeathed to a family member traditionally. As per the existing norm, SCs get 10% reservation, while STs get 2% share in recruitment. Thus what we are reading above is what is happening in private devaswom and not that of interior temples. KR II 8. Thus, in view of the above, it was not permissible for the High Court to assume that it had jurisdiction to sit in appeal against its earlier judgment of 1951 which had attained finality. Even otherwise, the High Court has committed an error in holding that the said judgment in Marimuthu Dikshitar (Supra) would not operate as res judicata. Even if the Temple was neither established, nor owned by the said respondent, nor such a claim has ever been made by the Dikshitars, once the High Court in earlier judgment has recognised that they constituted `religious denomination’ or section thereof and had right to administer the Temple since they had been administering it for several centuries, the question of re-examination of any issue in this regard could not arise. 39. Relevant features of the order passed by the Commissioner are that the Executive Officer shall be incharge of all immovable properties of the institution; the Executive Officer shall be entitled to the custody of all immovables, livestock and grains; the Executive Officer shall be entitled to receive all the income in cash and kind and all offerings; all such income and offerings shall be in his custody; all the office holders and servants shall work under the immediate control and superintendence of the Executive Officer, though subject to the disciplinary control of the Secretary of the respondent no.6., etc. 40. Section 116 <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/495092/> of the Act 1959 enables the State Government to frame rules to carry out the purpose of the Act for “all matters expressly required or allowed by this Act to be prescribed”. Clause 3 thereof requires approval of the rules by the House of State Legislature. The Executive Officer so appointed by the Commissioner has to function as per assigned duties and to the extent the Commissioner directs him to perform. 41. It is submitted by Dr. Swamy that rules have to be framed defining the circumstances under which the powers under Section 45 <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/495092/> of the Act 1959 can be exercised. The Act <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/495092/> 1959 does not contemplate unguided or unbridled functioning. On the contrary, the prescription of rules to be framed by the State Government under Sections 116 <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/495092/> read with Sections 45 <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/495092/> and 65 <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/495092/>, etc. of the Act 1959 indicates that the legislature only intended to regulate and control any incidence of maladministration and not a complete replacement by introducing a Statutory authority to administer the Temple. 42. Section 2(16) CPC defines the term `prescribed` as prescribed by rules. Further, Section 2(18) CPC defines rules as Rules and forms as contained in the First Schedule or made under Section 122 <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/495092/> or Section 125 CPC. Sections 122 and 125 CPC provide for power of the High Court to make rules with respect to its own functioning and procedure. Therefore, it appears that when the legislature uses the term `prescribed`, it only refers to a power that has simultaneously been provided for or is deemed to have been provided and not otherwise. Similarly, Section 2(n) <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/334666/> of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 defines prescribed as “prescribed by rules made by the State Government or as the case may be, by the Central Government under the Act”. 43. Section 45 <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/495092/> of the Act 1959 provides for appointment of an Executive Officer, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed. The term ‘prescribed’ has not been defined under the Act. Prescribed means prescribed by rules. If the word ‘prescribed’ has not been defined specifically, the same would mean to be prescribed in accordance with law and not otherwise. Therefore, a particular power can be exercised only if a specific enacting law or statutory rules have been framed for that purpose. (See: Manohar Lal Chopra v. Rai Bahadur Rao Raja Seth Hiralal, AIR 1962 SC 527; Hindustan Ideal Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Life Insurance Corporation of India, AIR 1963 SC 1083; Maharashtra SRTC v. Babu Goverdhan Regular Motor Service Warora & Ors., AIR 1970 SC 1926; and Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. & Anr. v. BPL Mobile Cellular Ltd. & Ors., (2008) 13 SCC 597). 44. Shri Subramonium Prasad, learned AAG, has brought the judgment in M.E. Subramani & Ors. v. Commissioner, HR&CE & Ors., AIR 1976 Mad 264, to our notice, wherein the Madras High Court while dealing with these provisions held that the Commissioner can appoint an Executive Officer under Section 45 <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/495092/> even if no conditions have been prescribed in this regard. It may not be possible to approve this view in view of the judgments of this Court referred to in para 41 supra, thus, an Executive Officer could not have been appointed in the absence of any rules prescribing conditions subject to which such appointment could have been made. 45. However, Shri Subramonium Prasad, learned AAG, has submitted that so far as the validity of Section 45 <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/495092/> of the Act 1959 is concerned, it is under challenge in Writ Petition (C) No. 544 of 2009 and the said petition had earlier been tagged with these appeals, but it has been de-linked and is to be beard after the judgment in these appeals is delivered. Thus, in view of the stand taken by the State before this court, going into the issue of validity of Section 45 <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/495092/> of the Act 1959 does not arise and in that respect it has been submitted in written submissions as under: (a) The scheme of administration in Board’s Order No.997 dated 8.5.1933 under the Act 1927 contained various provisions inter- alia that active management would rest in the committee consisting of nine members who were to be elected from among the Podhu Dikshitars (clause 4); (b) At the time of issuing the order of appointment of Executive Officer, the Podhu Dikshitars were given full opportunity of hearing and the powers and duties of the Executive Officer as defined by the Commissioner would show that the religious affairs have not been touched at all and the trustees and the Executive Officers are jointly managing the temple. The Podhu Dikshitars have not been divested of the properties and it was not the intention of the State Government to remove the trustees altogether, rather the Executive Officers function alongwith the trustees; (c) In any event, the Podhu Dikshitars are trustees in the temple and they have not been divested of their properties. The Executive Officer is only collaborating with the trustees in administering the properties. Their religious activities have not been touched. Neither the powers of the trustees have been suspended nor the Executive Officers have been vested with their powers and the Executive Officers only assist the trustees in management of the temple. It was not the intention to remove the trustees altogether, nor the order of appointment of the Executive Officer suspends the scheme already framed way back in 1939. 46. Be that as it may, the case is required to be considered in light of the submissions made on behalf of the State of Tamil Nadu and particularly in view of the written submissions filed on behalf of the State. 47. Even if the management of a temple is taken over to remedy the evil, the management must be handed over to the person concerned immediately after the evil stands remedied. Continuation thereafter would tantamount to usurpation of their proprietary rights or violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution in favour of the persons deprived. Therefore, taking over of the management in such circumstances must be for a limited period. Thus, such expropriatory order requires to be considered strictly as it infringes fundamental rights of the citizens and would amount to divesting them of their legitimate rights to manage and administer the temple for an indefinite period. We are of the view that the impugned order is liable to be set aside for failure to prescribe the duration for which it will be in force. Super-session of rights of administration cannot be of a permanent enduring nature. Its life has to be reasonably fixed so as to be co-terminus with the removal of the consequences of maladministration. The reason is that the objective to take over the management and administration is not the removal and replacement of the existing administration but to rectify and stump out the consequences of maladministration. Power to regulate does not mean power to supersede the administration for indefinite period. Regulate is defined as to direct; to direct by rule or restriction; to direct or manage according to the certain standards, to restrain or restrict. The word `regulate’ is difficult to define as having any precise meaning. It is a word of broad import, having a broad meaning and may be very comprehensive in scope. Thus, it may mean to control or to subject to governing principles. Regulate has different set of meaning and must take its colour from the context in which it is used having regard to the purpose and object of the legislation. The word `regulate’ is elastic enough to include issuance of directions etc. (Vide: K. Ramanathan v. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr., AIR 1985 SC 660; and Balmer Lawrie & Company Limited & Ors. Partha Sarathi Sen Roy & Ors., (2013) 8 SCC 345) 48. Even otherwise it is not permissible for the State/Statutory Authorities to supersede the administration by adopting any oblique/circuitous method. In Sant Lal Gupta & Ors. v. Modern Coop. Group Housing Society Ltd. & Ors., (2010) 13 SCC 336, this Court held: “It is a settled proposition of law that what cannot be done directly, is not permissible to be done obliquely, meaning thereby, whatever is prohibited by law to be done, cannot legally be effected by an indirect and circuitous contrivance on the principle of “quando aliquid prohibetur, prohibetur et omne per quod devenitur ad illud”. An authority cannot be permitted to evade a law by “shift or contrivance”.” (See also: Jagir Singh v. Ranbir Singh <https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1621718/>, AIR 1979 SC 381; A.P. Diary Dev. Corporation federation v. B. Narsimha Reddy & Ors. AIR 2011 SC 3298; and State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. v. K. Shyam Sunder & Ors. AIR 2011 SC 3470). 49. We would also like to bring on record that various instances whereby acts of mismanagement/maladministration/ misappropriation alleged to have been committed by Podhu Dikshitars have been brought to our notice. We have not gone into those issues since we have come to the conclusion that the power under the Act 1959 for appointment of an Executive Officer could not have been exercised in the absence of any prescription of circumstances/ conditions in which such an appointment may be made. More so, the order of appointment of the Executive Officer does not disclose as for what reasons and under what circumstances his appointment was necessitated. Even otherwise, the order in which no period of its operation is prescribed, is not sustainable being ex facie arbitrary, illegal and unjust. 50. Thus, the appeals are allowed. Judgments/orders impugned are set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. KR IRS 81222 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZorwZLdFzie1UHAFKB4a06JZW_Sup5JZFyfTvoEw49S_fA%40mail.gmail.com.
