Only last night (May 5, 2024), in my blogpost with the above title, I had spoken of the religious harmony and goodwill between Saivism and Vaishnavism that is found symbolised inside the Nellaiappan Temple in Tirunelveli where both Sannidhis of Shiva and Govindaraja Perumal can be seen abutting each other and worshipped side by side . Pls see
I fear I might have spoken too hastily, too unthinkingly and too unwisely … for only this morning I read in The Hindu a news report on a legal tussle going on in the Madras High Court between Saivite and Vaishnavite clergy of the Chidambaram Sabhanayaka Temple over an issue related to Sri Govindaraja Perumal Brahmotsavam festivity there.
At the heart of the issue is the plaint lodged in court by Sri T.R. Ramesh, president of Temple Worshippers’ Society, who is agitating “against proposed conduct of the Brahmotsavam, on the ground that Lord Thillai Govindaraja Perumal has only a sub-shrine in the Sabanayagar temple and that it could not be construed to be a separate temple by itself.”
In his affidavit, the PIL petitioner stated that the Sabanayagar temple had a history of over 2,000 years and its origin was lost in antiquity. He said, the presiding deity of the temple was Lord Natarajar, the dancing form of Lord Shiva.
The principal reason for the court case filed by T.R.Ramesh seems to be arising from a deep-seated sense of pique felt by the Saivites of the Chidambaram temple over the fact that the Vaishnava community, historically, have not reciprocated sentiments of mutuality of respect and religious accommodation. The submission to the court seems to be a subtle move to make a point through implied accusation —- “when it was common to have a sub-shrine for Lord Vishnu in the temples where Lord Shiva was the presiding deity …. the inverse could not be found anywhere ….”
The grouse of Saivites against Vaishnavites seems to be an atavistic carryover from a very distant past : when you give me no space in your temple why must I go out on a limb to accommodate yours in my temple?
“There is no archaeological evidence or inscriptions to show that Govindaraja Perumal shrine existed before 1539,” the petitioner said and contended that it was common to have a sub-shrine for Lord Vishnu in the temples where Lord Shiva was the presiding deity though the inverse could not be found anywhere but for the Azhagiya Nambirayar temple at Tirukkurungudi in Tirunelveli district.”
We must wait to see how the above matter is going to be adjudicated upon by the Madras High Court.
Meanwhile what intrigues me is the following paragraph in the Hindu news reporting:
“He (T R Ramesh) further claimed that it was only in 1539 that King Achutha Devarayar, belonging to the Vijayanagar dynasty, had constructed the shrine for Thillai Govindaraja Perumal in the Sabanayagar temple and that it was called Chitra Kootam. Saints Kulasekhara Azhwar and Tirumangai Azhwar had sung hymns in praise of Lord Mahavishnu in the Chitra Kootam and hence it came to be known as one of the 108 Divyadesams.
“There is no archaeological evidence or inscriptions to show that Govindaraja Perumal shrine existed before 1539…”
The above averments of T R Ramesh … if the Hindu reporting is accurate … seems to suggest that Kulasekhara Azhwar and Tirumangai Azhwar who sang mystic hymns in praise of Govindaraja Perumal deity inside the Nataraja temple did so only after 1539 CE when it was that the idol according to him was installed and consecrated there under the orders of the Vijayanagara King!
Nothing could be further from the truth! Both Azhwars predated the Vijayanagara Empire … they lived in the 8th century CE. The hymns of the Azhwars clearly could not have been sung in the 8th century CE for a deity inside Chidambaram temple that is being claimed was installed only in 1539 CE ?!!
Let’s wait and hear what the Madras High Court has to rule on the matter.
Sudarshan Madabushi