Supreme Court’s Verdict On Archaga’s Case: A Trickery To Legitimize
Brahminical Hegemony And Untouchability
By APSC-IITM
18 January, 2016
Countercurrents.org
The Supreme Court’s verdict on a case moved by the brahmin priests of Madurai meenakshi amman temple against 2006 Tamilnadu governments GO states that “Any person who is a Hindu and possessing the requisite qualification and training can be appointed as a archaka (priest) in Hindu temples” has been delivered with deceitful statements to shield brahminical tyranny and untouchability.
In 2006, after the issuance of government order by the DMK government, priest training school had been started in Tamilnadu. In this school, totally 206 students belonging to various castes including Brahmin, caste hindus and untouchables have got training and obtained deeksha (eligibility condition to perform pooja to the idols). However, brahmin archakas from madurai got stay order in Supreme Court against the appointment of trained students by stating that the training school for priests itself is unconstitutional and appointment as archakas is against hindu religion, custom and traditions and it is against the rights provided by articles 25 and 26 of Indian constitution.
On behalf of trained archaka students, People’s right protection centre (PRPC) and People’s Art Literary and Association from Tamilnadu (PALA) have attempted to unite all trained students under a union to fight against this brahminical hegemony and intervened in Supreme Court hearings. After a long-drawn-out trail for so many years, this verdict has been given now.
Bottom line of this whole verdict is that “1000 years of brahminical tyranny and untouchability are legalized and will be maintained in this country under constitutional frame work”. Earlier (before 1000 ago) Nanthanar was lynched and he was told that you are an untouchable and you should not enter in to the temple. For him, the verdict had been executed on the same day. Strikingly, not only for Nanthanar but also for god like Madurai Veeran who belongs to sakkiliyar (scheduled caste); there is no place inside the temple, where his sanctum sanctorum is placed outside the premises of Madurai meenakshi amman temple.
This situation is not even been changed a bit now. Only difference is that apart from single–day judgment to Nanthanar, eight years has been stretched for these trained priest students. This verdict also given a chance to Brahmin archakas to expel these eligible trained students through court, where the student’s right to become priests has been denied simply based on their birth! That too, without telling this directly, the verdict is beating about the bush in a dishonest way!
The case moved by the brahmin archakas to apex court is to nullify the 2006 GO. However, the verdict didn’t say to scrap down the GO directly. The verdict also neither said to stay the appointment of those 206 students in agama based temples. But it contents that those 206 students can be appointed, at the same time the appointment should be within the view of agamas, customs and traditions and they cannot be ruled out. i.e. ‘elephant can be closed in a pot but at the same time pot should not be broken’ is message of the verdict!
Suppose to appoint a few of these students either in Mylapore kapalishwara temple or in Triplicane parthasarathy temple or in Madurai meenakshi amman temple, brahmin archakas working in these temples can challenge such appointments in civil suit as per the verdict and they can expel archaka students by proving that archaka appointment is against agama principles. i.e. if a student gets an appointment in any one of the temples, brahmin archakas can get stay order in the court on the very next day of the appointment. It is the reality that even if students go to the court, they cannot get the justice throughout their lifetime. That’s why this verdict is highly deceitful!
On the contrary, a few whom aligning on the agenda of ‘all castes to become priests’ is welcoming the verdict since Supreme court didn’t scrap down the GO directly brought by the DMK government. They put forth an argument that brahmin archakas cannot able to prove the appointment of students is against the agama principle, as none of the agama’s texts particularly mentioned about the condition of only brahmin or their sub-caste person to be a priest in any particular temple.
It is true that none of the agama’s texts mentioned ‘only brahmins to be appointed as archakas’. However, it is not the new truth known today! This truth was even known in the past in 1971 Seshammal’s verdict! However, the tactics of brahmin archakas are such that wherever they want to coin agama principles, they have used words like tradition and custom in conjunction with agama principles. With the help of such words, they procure to buy any amount of fraudulent argument to stall their so called ‘rights’ in courts. In this way, they rejoice with political and legal protection (frame work) for brahminism and untouchability so far!
Of course, we can fight against the state apparatus and Brahmin archakas in order to appoint trained archaka students as priests, by citing that nothing is there in agama text to prohibit non-brahmin student to be appointed as priests. However such protest will only help in expose the state, constitutional law and courts that protect the caste system whereas it would not help to install the right of equality for all!
By principle, either religious right or religious institutions right, it should not intervene or dominate the right of equality of a citizen. However, our constitution allows religions to dominate over individual rights. This is the reason when untouchability is looked as a punishable offence on social aspect; our constitution rather recognizes it as a religious right of brahaminism through article 25!
Therefore either to install our right of equality or to uproot brahminism and untouchability, working within the boundaries of agama and tradition or using such entities will only be a another dimension of surrendering our protest to the religious hegemony! For example, at this place, it is highly fruitful to think of Periyar’s reply given to Gandhi’s argument where Gandhi contented that by placing and proving untouchability is against hindu-religious principles, untouchability can be destroyed. (But the soul of hindu religion is untouchability only!) The agenda of all castes to be priests put forth by Periyar was only to abolish caste-untouchability (Ilayaperumal committee looked the agenda of all castes to be priests as a part to abolish untouchability). But on the contrary, we should not shrink Periyar’s agenda as a tactic to somehow to get archaka’s appointment.
Nobody can deny that ours is a tradition that safeguards caste and untouchability. In this regard, the question rose by this case is very central; shall we recognize brahminical hegemony or caste or untouchability as a religious right based on tradition or custom? Supreme court verdict says that ‘it can be recognized’. The argument putforth by PRPC, cited article 17 that whichever a custom or tradition that pronounces a non-brahmin as an untouchable by touching an idol is an untouchable crime. But the Supreme Court refuted the argument and gave a peculiar statement in its verdict as follows: “the judgment taken note of the particular class or caste to which the Archakas of a temple must belong as prescribed by the Agamas. All that it does and says is that some of the Agamas do incorporate a fundamental religious belief of the necessity of performance of the Poojas by Archakas belonging to a particular and distinct sect/group/denomination, failing which, there will be defilement of deity requiring purification ceremonies. Surely, if the Agamas in question do not proscribe any group of citizens from being appointed as Archakas on the basis of caste or class the sanctity of Article 17 or any other provision of Part III of the Constitution or even the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 will not be violated”. i.e. Since particular sect eligible for performing pooja is not defined in particular in agama principles, one cannot consider/termed it as untouchability. This is how the judgment particularly (!!!) conveyed and recognized brahminical hegemony and untouchability with deceitful English in an exquisiteness manner!
By hiding this truth, to say, ‘this verdict didn’t scrap the GO brought by the DMK government and therefore it is a victory’ would not be appropriate. Rather, the fact is that this verdict scrapped the GO in reality! The verdict said that the appointment of archakas in Tamilnadu should follow agama principles, tradition and custom and at the same time it should conform to constitutional mandates and principle. The bench further said that it cannot pass an order acceptable to over all, whereas it contents that the validity of archakas can be challenged and such matters will have to be dealt with on a case-to-case basis since it would involve a determination of the contours of a claimed custom.
1971 Seshammal verdict disposed the writ petition of Sivacharyas by ruling that one cannot claim hereditary right in appointment of archakas. When this verdict was celebrated at that time, Periyar exposed the verdict as ‘operation success, patient dead’, where he revealed that Brahmin archakas only succeeded in that case, though they appeared to be lost.
After Seshammal verdict, the mere change happened now in the external reality is that 206 trained priest students are prepared and ready to be appointed. But by without rejecting the GO, the present verdict once again made an appearance that brahmin archakas are lost. But this is an illusion. In fact, this verdict is one step all and above the seshammal’s verdict, where it has been delivered in a tactical deceitful language. Therefore, exposing this verdict is the only primary duty of those who are in a line to annihilate caste and uproot brahminism from this country.
Ambedkar-Periyar Study Circle , An independent student body recognized by IITM)