Temple Administration : Past and Present
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Orissa Review June-July - 2007 Temple Administration : Past and Present Dr. Nilakantha Mishra Analysing the story of invasion of 'Shree Mandira' which could protect the deity and counter the by "Raktabahu" as described in 'Madala Panji', invader. To protect the icons from the cyclonic famous historian 'Hunter' settled for the year 318 invasion of such people, some dedicated Sevayats AD as the establishment of the shrine of Lord sailed the idol to village 'Gopali' (Nearly 19 km Shree Purusottam in Puri. away from river bank of According to the views of Sri Mahanadi Block - Bira S.N. Rajguru, in 4th century Maharajpur, Dist.-Sonepur) AD, Brahmins and Bouddhs even risking their own lives. used to sit together in Purusha Till the arrival of Adi Mandap near sea beach, Shankaracharya, (788 AD - where they worshipped their 820 AD) shrine of Puri was respective deities by chanting idolless. Shankaracharya their mantras and hymns. came to Puri in the later Devotees from far off places middle part of his life, and with came to Puri and offered their the help of Keshari Pata Raja, valuables in cash and kind to discovered as well as re- Sri Purushottam as a token of incarnated the idol. their deep devotion. Their Researchers opine that contribution and donation Shankaracharya came to Puri ultimately resulted in during the 'Bhowmakara' accumulation of huge wealth. dynasty. History and other The celebrity status of evidences also corroborate the God and accumulation of the view of researchers. this huge wealth tempted many fanatics to invade Different stone inscriptions, copper plate the land and shrine. 'Raktabahu' was the first etc. found in different parts of India attest the among them, who grabbed a huge part of it and celebrity status of shrine at its peak in 9th century. carried that to his native place. This implies that, During the rule of 'Ananga Bhima Deva(III)' of though, celebrity and wealth was enormous but Ganga dynasty (1201-1238), the Chhatisha the system of effective management wasn't there, Nijoga seva was introduced in Puri temple. This 91 Orissa Review June-July - 2007 seva included original 9 traditional Sevayats of Shankaracharya of Puri Gobardhan Pitha Matha, earlier days. During the rule of 'Ganga' and 'Surya' who's also president of Puri Mukti Mandap Pandit dynasty, temple administration and management Sabha. Learned scholars of Mukti Mandap and were running under effective patronage of devoted other parts of the country, Rajguru, Mandira kings. Parichcha, minister-in-charge of temple After the battle of 'Gohiratikiri' of 1568, administration and any other special invitee Orissa was subjugated by Afghan rulers. associate themselves in sorting out the difficult and Subsequently by co-operation of Moughul rulers, controversial issues of temple administration as Gajapati Rama Chandra Dev established 'Bhoi' and when required. dynasty carving a small state 'Khurda', which In execution level, there's a committee included Puri, Cuttack, Athagarh of Ganjam under the chairmanship of Gajapati Maharaj. district, Banki and a major portion of undivided During Bhoi dynasty, Minister-in-charge of the Dhenkanal district. Ramachandra Dev, who was temple, Buxi (Head of Army), Council of Pandits popularly known as 'Dwiti Indradyumna' as he used to help in temple administration. Complete had resanctified and again consecrated the deities by recovering their remnants from Bishan Mohanty subjugation of Orissa by Moghul General Maan as was collected by him after 'Kala Pahaada' set Singh, conquering Naseer Khan (an Afghan ruler) the idols ablaze. The administration of the state on 5th Aug. 1590 further strengthened Sri runs in the name of Lord Jagannath. To strengthen Ramachandra Dev to tone up temple management. his clutch over state administration and to obtain Maan Singh adorned the king with the title of loyalty of subordinate kings, Sri Ramachandra Gajapati Maharaj. Upto 1760, the temple Deva assigned Gumasta Batakrushna Mohanty administration was smoothly managed by him. But to write Madalapanji. In this temple chronicle, declaration of a war against - Birakishor' Dev (I) shape and nature of temple administration was of Bhoi dynasty by Jagannath Narayan Dev, reflected upto a greater extent. Maharaj of Paralakhemundi ruined the temple In subsequent stage, due to the bulk of administration. Parala Maharaja claimed his Madala Panji, its content covering different entitlement over temple on the ground that his dimensions related to temple management, it was ancestors constructed and consecrated temple in divided into 4 parts i.e. :- 12th century. Birakishor Dev (I) took shelter in the camp of Marathas and in later period won 1. Bhandara Khanja Madala - maintained by the battle with a condition to pay one lakh rupees Pattajoshi Mohapatra as compensation to Marathas towards war 2. Deula Madala / Karmangi Madala - expenses. But crippled finance of the State maintained by Deula Karana couldn't meet with this agreement and hence 3. Deshapanji Madala - prepared by Deula Marathas took mortgage of four profit generating Karana Praganas, whose income were meant for temple expenses. 4. Rajakhanja Madala - Prepared and maintained by Tadhau Karana In earlier days, Bhoi kings appointed four In temple management, usually advisory ministers (Rajgurus) for and policy making aspect is taken care of by (i) Effective collection of state revenues 92 Orissa Review June-July - 2007 (ii) Look after state administration Governor General Lord Wellesely waged a war (iii) Supervision of temple management against them on 18th Sept. 1800. Colonel Harcourt, the General of the battle defeated and (iv) Orientation of people in religious way of subjugated Orissa by signing a pact on 17th thinking. December 1803. The pact was between After war, Marathas were the authority of Yashowant Rao Ramchandra on behalf of king temple administration. They appointed four of Berar and Arthur Wellesely on behalf of East parichchas for conduction of rites and rituals, India Company. This resulted in total control of internal temple management, finance management the State and temple. of the temple and collection of revenue from Governor General Lord Welleselly, in his different sources to meet temple expenses. They despatch to Lt. Colonel Campbell, Commander had appointed only one parichcha for the above - southern forces, commanded him to maintain works but soon followed the Bhoi way of the sanctity of the shrine without hurting the administration by dividing the work into four religious sentiments of the Sevayats. divisions as stated earlier. Marathas were sincere in temple administration. So, number of pilgrims East India Company appointed one as well as the revenue of the temple increased Parichcha for temple administration. In 1803, the manifold, which came out of the offerings of the rift between the company and Raja Mukunda pilgrims. Usually temple revenue comes from the Deva became acute, leading to confiscation of following sources i.e. : the state of Khurda. Aggrieved company (i) Land revenue collected from different instructed temple Parichcha not to use even the praganas. name and gotra(clan) of the king in regular and routine temple practice. From 1803 to 1806, East (ii) Contribution from sevayats as 40% of their India Company was directly involved in temple 'pindika' income (the income collected from management. On certain fiscal ground, Mukunda their pilgrims). Deva (II) was confined to his palace under (iii) Sale proceeds of kotha khanja of Shree surveillance. In the meanwhile, the first Collector Mandira. of Puri, Charles Groom submitted a detail report (iv) 'Sulli Mahaal' contribution i.e. 25% of the in 1905 to Thomas Fortesch, Secy. to the amount paid by pilgrims at checkpoints of Commissioner of Cuttack Province, regarding the Zobra (Cuttack) and Atharanala (Puri). role and functions of different Sevayats including Gajapati as the chief of Sevayats. After reaching If above ones were inadequate, Maratha an agreement between East India Company and rulers used to compensate the required sum from Gajapati Mukunda Deva, the king was released state exchequer. Bhonsla Supremo, staying at from confinement. In 1806, company gave up Nagpur, was the final authority regarding each temple management after being criticised by and everything of the temple. At lower level, Christian missionaries as temple belonged to temple Subedar and Naib Subedar heard and idolatry. Pressure from different sectors led disposed of petty matters. company to promulgate "The Regulation IV of During British rule, temple administration 1806', which formed a council of three Pundits took a new shape. To curb unruly Maratha rulers, for temple administration. Subsequently this 93 Orissa Review June-July - 2007 regulation was replaced by act of 1809. As per On the amendment of legal provision, the Section II(I) of this regulation, the total temple section II of Act X of 1840 reaffirmed the management was vested to king of Khurda, who absolute authority of Puri Raja as superintendent. would stay at Puri to look after the temple Abolition of pilgrims' tax necessiated more management, regulating the activities of the financial help from the Government Sector. So priests, officers and sevayats. King was the authorities diverted the income of 27,000 responsible for management of codified laws, Kharcha Mahaal on 25th Nov. 1843, reducing established usages. Again this law was abolished the temple grant from 53000 to 35738. To bridge and the Council of three Pundits was resolved. the gap of Rs.17261/-, an additional land was But in practice, the real chain of control was in given by them. the hands of the company. Later the company The Christian missionaries continuously selected three employees to assist the king, who nagged the British authorities to reduce the grant were answerable to the Company. provided by them to the temple but this proposal In the meanwhile, Buxi Jagabandhu was finally refused by Governor General on 12th Bidyadhar Mohapatra of Rodanga killa waged a August 1852. Unfortunately, there was war against Company administration on 29th mismanagement in Dola festival of 1853, which March 1817 claiming his entitlement over his resulted in stampede claiming 27 lives.