The Chidambara Rahasyam

If there are men who want to see anything in the world
other than the dance of Aran, whose feet we serve,
in Cirrampalam shrine in Tillai,
where the areca tree with broad fronds grows tall,
the streets are lined with great mansions,
and all the fields are watered
by streams full of valai fish—
then they are but devil-devotees,
seeing worthless things with rheumy eyes.”

APPAR, TRANSLATED BY INDIRA VISWANATHAN PETERSON¹

Chidambaram, or Tillai, the sacred shrine of Śiva as Naṭarāja, has been the epicenter of Tamil Śaivism for over a millennium. Located in South Arcot district a few hours from Chennai, one would be hard-pressed to find a shrine with a richer history of religion and art. The Nāyanmārs Appar, Sundarar and Jñānasambandar have sung about Tillai in their verses of Tillai being the spiritual and ritualistic centre, beginning in the 8^th century AD. While literary works such as the Cidambara Māhātmya in Saṃskrit and Koyil Purāṇam in Tamil trace the sanctity of the shrine back to the time of Sages Patañjali and Vyāghrapāda, circa second century BCE, the Tamil work Tirumandiram pushes its antiquity even further back, to the 5th century BCE. Śiva is said to have performed his ānanda tāṇḍava at the Cit Sabhā, which represents wisdom, where he continues to dance eternally. Naṭarāja is known as ‘Sabhānāyaka’ or ‘Sabhāpati’, both meaning ‘Lord of the sabhas ’, with sabha here referring to the five assembly halls found in the structure of the temple. Hence the temple has come to be known as Naṭarāja Temple or Sabhānāyaka temple. The five steps leading to the Cit Sabhā represent the five sacred letters of pañcākṣara mantra, namely na, ma, śi, vā, ya. The twenty-eight pillars in Cit Sabhā signify the twenty-eight holy scriptures, the sixty-four letters above the pillars signify the sixty-four arts, and so on and so forth, building a magnificently meaningful hall at the crux of the shrine.

History of the Temple²

Epigraphical evidence shows that Chidambaram sprawled over a much larger area in prior centuries than it does now. A 12th century inscription mentions it as Perumpatrapuliyūr-Taniyūr, a large self-governing local unit comprising 23 hamlets with a radius of eight miles. The temple complex itself comprised an area of almost 40 acres, as it does in the present. Century after century, the various dynasties of Southern India contributed to the grandeur of the temple. Aditya I (871-907 AD) of the Cholas is credited for gilding the inside of the kanaka sabhā, while Parantaka I (901-953 AD) utilized the wealth from his conquests to enrich the shrine. From the time of Kulottunga-I (1070-1120 AD), the history of the Cholas and other successive dynasties and the history of Chidambaram have been entwined. Every rise in a conquest or kingdom has been noted by additional structures, additions and renovations in the temple. Kanchipuram inscriptions reveal that Kulottunga-I constructed a palace at Chidambaram, probably to supervise the exhaustive renovations he undertook in the temple. From an inscription it is gleaned that he installed a stone brought from Cambodia in Edirambalam to establish a relationship with the king of Cambodia. After the Cholas, the rise of the Mediaeval Pandyas during 1216 AD did not in any way diminish the royal patronage to the temple. After the Muslim invasions, the renaissance of Hinduism during Vijayanagara rule witnessed a benevolent and enriching temple administration throughout Southern India. An inscription dated to1428 A.D. found in the temple shows the continuous patronage of the shrine by the Vijayanagara kings. Among them a significant benefaction is the construction of the north gopura in 1560 by Kṛṣṇadevarāya. Another Vijayanagara ruler, Achyuta Rāya bestowed 18 villages for the completion of this gopura in 1529 AD, when it was completed. The Nāyakas of Thanjavur also made endowments to this temple, an instance being the gift of a village on 22nd Jan 1567, to the Chidambaram temple by Achuttapa Nayakar, as evidenced by another inscription. This continued generous patronage continued until the 17^th century, when kings and patrons would make continuous additions to the structure of the temple and its endowments. Throughout this time, the administration of the temple was held squarely in the hands of the Dīkṣitars, their authority in the shrine never being questioned or usurped. In the 18^th century, the French occupied the temple and used it as a Fort during the French wars from 1753 to 1760 A.D. and also during the invasion by Hyder Ali. Hyder Ali succeeded in occupying the temple in 1780 A.D., and it was only in 1781 that Sir Eyre Coote attacked and gained victory. Owing to these wars the temple suffered significant destruction, mostly in the form of demolition of many maṇḍapas in the Third Prākāra. Many of the valuable inscriptions were destroyed or lost during these wars. An inscription dated 1773 A.D. mentions that Lord Naṭarāja’s idol was brought back to Cit Sabha from Tiruvarur in this year, having been taken there during the war. In this manner, century after century, Chidambaram has been an inseparable link between religion and temporal power.

With the expansion of British rule in the nineteenth century, the Naṭarāja Temple had no land to its name, and instead relied on specific contracts with patrons (kaṭṭaḷaitār or upayatār) for its survival. During the second half of the 19th century, the Ceṭṭiyārs of Nāṭṭukoṭṭai in southern Tamil Nadu, who had made economic advances into Burma under the protection of British rule, accumulated enormous wealth and strived to renovate the Naṭarāja Temple³. The construction and restoration of the main temple buildings and walls seen today were possible only due to the financial support offered by the Ceṭṭiyārs and other members of the newly-arisen merchant class in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They built a school in Chidambaram, provided the necessaries for religious services, and maintained the flower gardens.With the growing popularity of pilgrimages, they also built accommodation facilities for pilgrims. Among these patrons, the name of Annamalai Cettiyar, the founder of Annamalai University, is especially well-known.

The Dīkṣitars

The Naṭarāja temple is administered by an endogenous group of brāhmaṇas known as the Dīkṣitars, who function as both priests and trustees. The Dīkṣitars are divided into four patrilineal exogamous groups (gotras), and marriage takes place between the gotras, between which there is no distinction drawn. The Dīkṣitars have been associated with the shrine since its first inception, mentioned multiple times in the Tevāram and featuring in the sthala purāṇa. The association of the Dīkṣitars of Chidambaram with the temple is inseverable. They are a close-knit community of about 250 families numbering about 1500, and have been associated with the shrine since its inception, for about 20 generations or at least a millennium. At the time of the establishment of the temple, it is recounted that 3000 learned brāhmaṇas of great spiritual merit were brought from Antarvedi to Chidambaram to conduct sacred rituals for the Lord Naṭarāja. According to the sthala purāṇa, Lord Naṭarāja himself is regarded by the Dīkṣitars as one of them, and is, apart from being the object of their worship, also the leader of their clan. The Dīkṣitars were responsible for bringing the jyōti mūrti of Naṭarāja to Chidambaram from Antarvedi (near Varanasi), the ancestral home of the Dīkṣitars.

Along with the Dīkṣitars, there are several other brāhmaṇas who participate in the religious rites of the temple. One of them are referred to as the Cōzhiyas, said to have been as many as six earlier, but at present numbering three. They are related to one another, and their forebears have participated in the religious rites of the temple over successive generations. They assist in hōmas that take place at the temple and also serve as the domestic priests or purohitas for the Dīkṣitars, performing their rites of passage, ranging from pregnancy and childbirth to marriage and death, as well as services for their ancestors. They are therefore, referred to with reverence as ‘venerable master’ (vāttiyār) by the Dīkṣitars.

There are also some non-brahmin employees, such as a clerk/administrative assistant (called a podumanitan who manages the roster of the priests), florists, temple bell-ringers, watchmen, charwomen, goldsmiths, blacksmiths, washermen, chanters (of the Tevāram), tavil and nādaswara players, etc. belonging to various castes.

Administrative Functioning

The Naṭarāja Temple is administered in accordance with a document detailing temple law, known as the Śrī Sabhānāyagar Koil Saṭṭam, which is said to be elaborately thorough and reasonable. The main executive or administrative organ in charge of the temple is called the ‘podu Dīkṣitar’ and composed of all the married male Dīkṣitars. A periodic meeting is held at Devasabhā or Kalyāṇamaṇḍapa every twenty days to discuss various matters of concern. At the start of the meeting, the podumaṇiṭaṇ brings a lamp from the inner sanctuary of the Cit Sabhā to the meeting place. This signifies that Śiva too is participating in the meeting, and the podumaṇiṭaṇ suggests topics for discussion. The podu Dīkṣitar has a supervisory organ in the form of a committee made up of nine members. Their term of office is from 1 April until 31 March of the following year. The committee chairman assumes in particular the role of representative of the Dīkṣitars when dealing with the outside world, but he is neither leader nor head of the Dīkṣitar community, for the Dīkṣitars maintain that their leader is Śiva himself. This committee is directly concerned with the administration and maintenance of the temple. If, for example, a priest on duty has not been discharging his duties properly, the committee will hold a hearing and may impose a fine.

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 worship⁴. 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 state⁵.

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 Math⁶ 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 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 Nadu⁷ and later by the Supreme Court in Subramanian Swamy v. State of Tamil Nadu⁸ — 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 reasons⁹. 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 20^th 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.

Footnotes

1. Peterson, Indira Viswanathan. Poems to Śiva: The Hymns of the Tamil Saints. India: Motilal Banarsidass, 1991.
2. Much of this non-exhaustive historical account is based on Natarajan, B.., Venkataraman, Balasubrahmanyam., Ramachandran, Balasubrahmanyan. Tillai and Nataraja. India: Mudgala Trust, 1994, and 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.
3. 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.
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. 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 gynaecological 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 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.