Our Temples
(Prof.
K. R. PISHAROTI, M.A.)
Religious
sanctuaries, like temples, mosques and churches, reveal one phase of a people’s
cultural attainments in the arts of peace, particularly architecture,
sculpture, painting and dance and music, which enrich life and make life worth
living. They also bespeak the people’s cherished conceptions of religion and
religious practices and elucidate to some extent the growth and development of
philosophical ideas which make life less a burden and more hopeful. A study of
the temples, then, is a desirable equipment for those who value culture for its
own sake. It is proposed to notice here some general features of the temples in
Cochin, some of which at least are as old as any elsewhere in India and at the
same time possess an unbroken continuity from the days of their foundation in
the dim and distant past.
A
Hindu temple is conceived as the palace of the deity enshrined therein. The sanctum
sanctorum is His or Her living quarters, and consequently it
is the most central structure, every other edifice in the temple area being
subordinate to it. As a result of this conception, all the ancillary structures
bear a distinct proportion to the central building, which is always the angi,
the others being angas. As a general rule, then, from the external
structures one can deduce the nature of the Sri Koyil–its size and
ornamentation. The size of the Sri Koyil itself depends upon the size of
the idol installed therein. As man’s position determines the nature of his
residence, so the nature of the God to be installed in a temple determines the
nature and size of the temple to be built for Him. This humanising aspect,
associated with our temples, is further revealed by the convention, obtaining
amongst us even today, which lays down that no private dwelling in the temple
area should rise higher than the temple itself. In this respect our temples
differ from the temples elsewhere in India.
Again,
our temples are very important in that they tend to elucidate some aspects of
Indian architecture. Thus the essential basis of the three styles of Hindu
architecture, namely Nagara, Dravida and Vesara finds
clarification only in a study of our religious structures–a subject that has
been a fruitful field of speculative theorisings. Nowhere, indeed, are the two
styles of Nagara and Vesara seen in their original purity and
simplicity more than in our parts: elsewhere in India they have become mixed
up, thus leading to a misinterpretation of the Hindu texts on the subject. As a
matter of fact, for a correct understanding of the original texts on Indian
architecture a study of our temple structures is a desideratum. Indeed, our
land has produced a large number of original treatises on the subject which
still smoulder in certain family archives, unknown and uncared for. It is
really flattering to our sense of national pride to remember that the great
architectural splendours of Mamallapuram were designed and built under the
supervision of a Malayali architect, Matrdatta by name, whose presence there
was held out by Mahendra Vikrama as a temptation for Dandin to visit his
capital. Thus, though we have no glories of architecture to hold out to the
visitor to our land, a study of our structures will certainly go a great way
towards a proper understanding of the texts on Indian architecture.
Our
temples have always been serving as the very hub of our intellectual and
aesthetic life. Many of the more important temples have permanent endowments
for the reading of the Hindu epics, Mahabharata, Ramayana and Bhagavata,
with expository comments in the local vernacular. The free feeding given to
Brahmins in the temple has helped the creation of a literanti leisured
class who made literary pursuits their main concern. This is to a very great
extent responsible for our rich contribution to the sum total of Indian
literature. Again, the provision that is found made for the annual staging of
Sanskrit dramas in almost every major temple, known locally as
Kutiyattam, and the expository recitals, called Prabandhamkuttu, kept
alive the traditions of the Indian stage and further helped
the creation of another type of stage entertainment in the local vernacular,
known as Kathakali, which has now attained all-India reputation. The
annual representations of Kuttu and Kutiyattam and the seasonal
representations of Kathakali and its off-shoot Tullal–these have
tended to preserve in our land the traditional mode of acting and dancing. As a
matter of fact, a full interpretation and exposition of Bharata’s Natya-sastra
are possible only in the light of a study of the Kerala stage. The
popularity of our stage and the modus operandi introduced in the matter
of Pauranik expositions and recitals, have tended to develop a critical
spirit which has developed and borne fruit in the shape of excellent
commentaries upon Sanskrit dramas and Kavyas as well as on texts on literary
criticism. Our temples, thus, have played a very important part in our cultural
development-both intellectual and aesthetic.
Scarcely
less important is the part they played, particularly in ancient days, in the
everyday life of the people by the organisation of what are called Sanketams,
which was an institution, unique to our parts, of the nature of imperium
in imperio, exercising almost independent sovereign powers within their
jurisdiction and that even over the head of the ruler himself. Keeping
themselves aloof from all the vortex of local and inter-statal politics,
religious factions and social turmoils, they wielded considerable authority
within their area. In actual practical life, their importance lay in offering a
safe asylum for all kinds of offenders, criminals included, for the sanctity
attached to them was inviolable; particularly in those days, when the country
was ruled by a number of petty potentates, they always managed to maintain
justice between man and man. Thanks to the amenities they afforded to the
law-abiding, thanks to the power and influence they had even in coercing
rulers and thanks to the justice they meted out to all alike from the highest
to the lowest, Sanketams enjoyed considerable popularity in the days of
yore. However, with the consolidation of the country under a single ruler and
the organisation of the modern types of government, they have presumably come
to outlive their utility and so have died a natural death. Sanketams exist
even today, but shorn of all power even in matters of religion, like fossils
from a dead past. But they were valued institutions in their days and they have
sowed the seeds of representative government.
Temples,
again, formed the centre and the source, as well, of the corporate activities
of the people of the locality. The service needs of the temple spontaneously
evoked private charity which took permanent form in the shape of endowments,
donations, etc., and such benefactions stimulated individual liberality, the
recording of which on permanent material tended further to inspire similar acts
of devotional charity. The constant stream of public charity necessitated, in
turn, the constitution of a permanent body for their organisation and
administration, and this naturally led to the evolution of a hierarchy of
temple officials, whose collective voice, though not paramount, was considered
to be of sufficient authority in matters of detail and even of policy regarding
the utilisation of the funds committed to the care of the temple. It was here
that the temple came prominently into contact with the public at large and here
the manifold activities of the managing committee came into full
play–activities embracing varied fields of progress, political and economic and
religious, social and literary. The temple thus offered a wide field for public
service and invited co-operation and corporate enterprise. This, then, forms an
important feature of our temples and this explains to some extent the absence
of struggles for political independence by any community for itself.
Closely
allied to this, and probably born thereof, is another institution associated
with our temples, known by the name of Pattinipuras, i.e., Houses of
Hunger-strike. Vestiges of such houses we find even now, as, for instance, in
the temple at Trichur. There hunger-strikes were practised en masse, as
and when the oppressive conduct of a local chieftain demanded it. From
available evidence it appears that our fore-fathers practised hunger-strikes
with considerable success,–only they resorted to it in extreme cases, when the
benefit of the whole community demanded it, and when they became convinced that
there was no other method of getting their wrongs redressed. It is interesting
to mention here that, when hunger strike en masse did not produce the
result sought, then the Vedic brahmins in the locality would make an image of
the chieftain, against whose oppression the strike was begun, and hang the image
in front of the temple and leave the place for ever; and in the locality where
such a thing has been done Vedic recitals and Vedic sacrifices are prohibited.
Such a one is the temple at Kalati, near Chalakuti.
There
are, again, some noteworthy one-man institutions, connected with some of our
major temples, such, for instance, as the Perumpulayan of the
Elankunnapula temple, the Taccuta Kammal of the Irinjalakuda temple, the
Yogatiripad of the Trichur temple, the Komaram of the Cranganore
Bhagavati shrine etc., It is the duty of the Perumpulayan to bring the coir for
hoisting the flag on the temple flagstaff in connection with the annual
festival, and this right has been given him in return for the discovery of the
shrine by an ancestor of his. A nayar is elevated to the position of a high
temple dignitary, under the name Taccuta Kammal, and he looks after the
temporal management of the temple at Irinjalakuda. In olden days, the
extensively endowed Trichur temple had its secular and spiritual affairs looked
after by a brahmin, elevated to the rank of a Yogatiripad. The Komaram,
also called Veliccapadu, is the earthly representative of the
Goddess enshrined and takes Her place in all mundane affairs. These and other
institutional functionaries, form another interesting subject of study.
We
have here noticed a few peculiarities of our temples. The why and wherefore of
the same, it is not easy to explain. We may not, however, better conclude these
notes than with a reference to another important feature of our religious life.
Our land was the meeting place of all the most important religions in the
world–the Vedic religion, the Brahminic religion with its two main branches of
Vaishnavism and Saivitism, the non-thesitic religions of Buddhism and Jainism,
and the alien religions of Judaism. Christianity, and Mohamedanism;
and our conceptions of religion and philosophy were influenced not
merely by these religions, native and foreign, but also by the Grecien, the
Roman and the Chinese schools of philosophy, which nations had their thriving
colonies in our midst at Mousiris, the ancient emporium of trade
and commerce on the West Coast. The various theistic cults and sects, faiths
and creeds, whether they be Dravidian, Vedic or Brahminical, lived side by side
in amity and friendship with the non-theistic ones, whether they be foreign or
native; and religious persecution and religious animosity were unknown amongst
us. Mutual toleration and mutual accommodation, arising from a kathenotheistic
outlook, have come to be practised amongst us from times of yore. May not this
attitude serve as our example and give a lead to those parts of India which are
torn asunder by religious animosities?