The tensions that come to the forefront in the context of the famous Car Festival of lord Jagannath and the other two deities do not convey a holy and pious signal regarding the famous temple, the Shreemandir, and the administration of its affairs.
To a stranger, the temple would look like a major “industry” and the conduct of its affairs would accordingly take the colour of “commerce”. This is not a favourable indicator of our image and culture. In fact, these features are contrary and repugnant to our tradition and heritage. One is unhappy and ashamed to notice and identify this malady. However, it is better to face the unpleasant truth than permit the degeneration that is most likely to flow from the given state of affairs.
In the discharge of different duties and assignments relating to the affairs of the temple, there are age-old prescriptions and practices.Every cog in the wheel has its relevance, significance and importance. But at the same time, there has to be, and there exists, a hierarchical structure with an unavoidable chain of command. No activity in the service of the lord is an isolated one, independent of the others.
They are all mutually complementary to one another. When persons responsible for one facet of the totality of services to the lords tend to be selfish and motivated, they do not enhance the efficiency and image of the institution as an integral entity.Events over the last few years have brought to the fore, in a brazen and crude manner, the unreasonable and arrogant attitude of the disruptive elements. The Record of Rights (RoR) is to govern the religious affairs of the temple.
Any doubt or ambiguity is to be resolved as per the opinion/advice of the Jagadguru Shankaracharya of the Govardhan Peeth of Puri, who is also the designated Mahanayak of the Mukti Mandap Pandit Sabha. It must be appreciated that as per law, the temple administration is obliged to follow the prescriptions of the RoR.
Consequently, they are to abide by the opinion/advice of the Jagadguru Shankaracharya and are not entitled or authorised to preside over the opinion/advice of the Shankaracharya or issue advisories or directives to him in matters relating to religious affairs and practices.
This is the essence of the directives of the Odisha High Court in its order of June 20, 2014. But newspaper reports and the recent events demonstrate that the temple administration, under undisclosed dictates and influence, issued advisories/directives to the Jagadguru through an apparent perverse interpretation of law and the directions/orders of the High Court.
These advisories/directives did not fall within the matters that are “secular” but were manifestly in the context of “religious” practice and related requirements. It looked as though some improper balancing act was being attempted so that some elements within the domain of religious affairs felt that they are no less than the Jagadguru or the Gajapati.
This projection and pursuant actions have conveyed a much-distorted image of the administration going up to the authorities of the State Government. This is a reasonable inference in the background that the High Court had found fault with the authorities of the Government in trying to preside over and alter the advisory/opinion of the Jagadguru as endorsed by the temple administration.
There appears to be some amount of personalised pique and false ego. This is demonstrated by utterances like “The Jagadguru has fallen into the hole he dug”. Such expressions are the outcome of a blurring of reason, relevance and equanimity. There appears to be an insensitive arrogance of power and an element of over-lording of religious affairs, which are beyond the jurisdiction of the authorities of the State in a secular country such as ours.
One cannot per se find fault with the allegation that there have been attempts at presiding over religious affairs, which are immune from any interference by the authorities of the Government as per the mandates of the Constitution of India. This immunity is founded on the stipulations of the Fundamental Rights under the Constitution under Articles 25 and 26 thereof.Introducing an avoidable controversy into sacred religious affairs in an intrusive manner has the potentials for justifying allegations of indulgence in pseudo-secularism.
The average believer or devotee continues to be perplexed about the rationale of the controversy, its relevance and its objective. The origin of the malady lies in the big egos of small mortals. Such discordant, disruptive, dislocating, disrespectful and defiant attitude has, with the greatest of respect, no place in the grandeur of the great festival of faith and devotion.
The great Car Festival has rolled on with undiluted success of the “Juggernaut”. But the blemishes, hurts, excesses and insults remain as scars and sores on the smooth and sublime path of one of the greatest religious occasions.The deities came down from their throne in the temple to happily mingle with the millions of their devotees, but they could clearly hear the prayers of one of their premier worshippers, who sounded insulted and injured.
The worshipper is not an individual but the head of the “institution” having a pivotal role in the “religious” affairs of the temple. Frictions and fissures have no place in the harmonious onward march of religious devotion and faith.They raise their ugly and misdirected heads when reason, restraint and rationality take a backseat, and avoidable aberrations come to the forefront. Collective conscience and wisdom are under severe stress and face a disruptive challenge.
The factors and persons responsible for fermenting such measures need to be identified and suitably educated. And this certainly concerns us.
(The writer, a Senior Advocate, is a former All India Service officer, a former diplomat, a former editor and a former Advocate General of Odisha. jayantdas@hotmail.com)