By Dr Swati Jindal Garg
“I always tell people that religious institutions and political institutions should be separate. So while I’m telling people that, I myself continue with them combined. Hypocrisy!”
—The Dalai Lama
While the Dalai Lama might have the objectivity to recognise his own failings, sadly, most of us do not. The debate on whether governments should have control over Hindu temples has created a stir that has raised many valid questions.
Some state governments have even started initiating steps to liberate Hindu temples from government control. This started since the days of Jawaharlal Nehru who had ensured this through various rules and regulations. The Congress party, which holds the credit for adding the words “Socialist and Secular” to the Preamble, has also been the instigator of this dichotomous secularism wherein freedom to manage one’s religious affairs is given with one hand and taken from the other.
This dichotomy is even more obvious considering that despite the guarantee given to all citizens under Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution declaring that every denomination shall have the right to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes; to manage its own affairs in matters of religion and to own and acquire property and administer it, this hasn’t been the case for all religions. While Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and other religious denominations have been utilising these constitutional guarantees to the fullest and managing their institutions, which are out of bounds for the government, the same cannot be said for Hindu temples that are still under governmental control in most states.
This controversy gained momentum after the recent two-day central governing council meet of the VHP in Kanchipuram where the joint general secretary of the organisation, Dr Surendra Jain, said that all state governments should enact laws to curb illegal conversions, love jihad, control and demolition of Hindu temples and growing hate speeches against Hindu beliefs and deities.
The VHP also officially announced an action plan for the 60th year of its foundation, which is in 2024, stating that it will enrol more than one crore members and raise its units to one lakh with 15 lakh karyakartas. Saying that this meeting will prove to be an important milestone in making a competent and harmonious Hindu society, Jain also condemned the act of forceful religious conversions, welcoming state governments who have made a law in this regard.
DK Shivakumar, president of the Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC), in his recent tweets in Kannada, on the other hand said that the exchequer gets a lot of funds from Hindu temples in southern states. As a result of Covid, the state’s treasury is getting emptied out. At a time like this, to liberate temples from state control and hand them over to private individuals is like rubbing salt on wounds, he said.
Karnataka, which reportedly has close to 35,000 temples, has placed temples in three categories depending on the annual revenue they generate. It has prominent temples generating around Rs 1,400 crore in the last couple of years. The KPCC president’s contention wherein he sees the offerings of Hindu devotees in temples as revenue just like excise and sales tax defies all logic. One of the biggest contributory factors to this logic may also be the silence of the Hindu community that has allowed politicians to see it as a right of the government to treat temples as mints. If the KPCC president cannot treat mosques, churches and gurdwaras as sources of government revenue, why should he treat temples as such?
If there are rules that require temple managements to seek permission from the government to utilise their income for development purposes, does that mean that Hindus are barred from exercising the right to establish and maintain their religious places and manage the affairs of their religion?
Another argument advanced by those who are in favour of state control over temples is that if Hindu temples are managed by Hindu Societies, then it will lead to mismanagement. An answer to this was aptly given by Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev who said that there were 44,000 temples with over half a million acres of land under the management of the Tamil Nadu government. However, revenue from these temples is a paltry Rs 128 crore. In comparison, the Sadhguru said, the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee manages 85 gurdwaras, but its budget is over Rs 1,000 crore. This clearly shows that governmental control does not necessarily mean better management.
The next question is that if Muslim and Christian institutions are not managed well, then would the government take over their control too? If not, why is differential treatment being meted out to Hindu temples?
A temple is not just a brick and mortar structure. It cannot be run by placing employees in the right places. It needs the right amount of passion and devotion. Putting it under government control is akin to running it through people who might not feel for it as much as its devotees and hence, it will not run as it should. It also seems to be an act reminiscent of the colonial era that saw temples as a source of land, gold, diamonds and wealth. The East India Company took over temples way back in 1817 with the passing of the Madras Regulation and transported everything it could from the temples. In 1925, when these temples started becoming the hub for organising freedom movements, the Madras Religious and Charitable Endowments Act was brought in to bring all temples under government control. Strong protests from minority communities made them safe and hence, only Hindu temples were brought within the ambit of the Act.
Excluding mosques, churches and gurdwaras from government control and including only Hindu temples is discrimination. Most say that leaving temples to be looked after and run by devotees will definitely increase revenue. Temples will not only get the human touch they need, but will also be run with a lot of soul.
The way gurdwaras managed their resources and came forward during the pandemic shows management skills that no institution could have taught to its students. There are certain things that come only with devotion and faith and have no connection with rules and laws of management.
The involvement of the government also means that the temple revenue is filtered through the system and ultimately, only the residue reaches the needy. States are anyways reaping multiple benefits owing to the existence of temples without having the benefit of running the management and finances as well. Temple tourism alone runs many states and gives them a never ending revenue source.
In a state like Tamil Nadu where the temple tower is also the state emblem and many towns are called temple towns, not recognising the contribution of the Hindu community and not allowing them to manage their own temples is grave injustice and also misuse of the temple funds. It is high time that political parties learn to read the nerve of the people and start making their manifestoes based on that.
Of all the states, the Tamil Nadu government holds the highest number of temples—approximately 44,000—under its control. All this is done under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department under laws that are draconian. The need of the hour is that the government returns temples to be managed by devotees. Sadhguru has aptly said: “Above all, after 74 years of free India, if people do not have the freedom to practice their religion the way they want, what kind of freedom is that? Before the 75th Independence Day, we must free the temple.”
—The writer is an Advocate-on-Record practising in the Supreme Court, Delhi High Court and all district courts and tribunals in Delhi