Crisis Brewing in ‘Ayodhya of South’

The Sangh Parivar activists call it the ‘Ayodhya of South’. But for ages, it has been known as Thiruparankundram, less than 10 km from Madurai in Tamil Nadu. The place derives its name from Lord Murugan – thiru(venerable) paran (referring to Lord Murugan), and kundram(hill). The ‘sacred hill’ is no longer what it used to be – a place where both Hindus and Muslims prayed in their respective worship places, and at each other’s holy places too.

It has become a hotspot of tension. The Sangh Parivar elements have been stoking communal fire. As the State Assembly elections are drawing nearer, the whole issue is assuming political overtones, with rival parties trying to cater to their vote bank, adding fuel to the fire.

The hill is a monolithic rock spread over 170 acres and has shrines of three religions – the Murugan (Subramanyan) temple at the foothills, a Vishwanatha temple, and a few Hindu shrines spread in different places on the hill; the dargah of Sufi saint Hazrath Sultan Sikandar Badshah Aulia; and cave carvings and Tamil inscriptions belonging to Jains. There is also a tall Pillar, the present thorn of contention, about 30 to 40 feet from the dargah.

According to reports, the lighting of Karthigai Deepam (a sacred lamp lighting ritual performed annually) has traditionally been held at a mandapam in the hilltop Pillaiyar temple, not on the pillar near the dargah. But this year, the Hindutva wave reached Thiruparankundram too. A Hindu outfit leader Rama Ravikumar petitioned the Madurai Bench of the High Court claiming that the pillar near the dargah was the rightful place to light the lamp, and it should be permitted.

The single-judge bench of Justice G. R. Swaminathan directed Subramanyan temple authorities to ensure that the lamp was lit at the pillar (known as Deepathoon) near dargah. He instructed the CRPF personnel, and not the State police, to escort the team going to light the lamp. The Tamil Nadu government declined to follow the order. All hell let loose when the State police stopped the team from going to the pillar. Instead, the lamp was lit, as usual, at the Pillaiyar mandapam at the hilltop.

are allegations from several corners that Justice Swaminathan has been favouring one section of the community in his judgments. The notice for an impeachment motion against him submitted by over 100 Opposition MPs to the Lok Sabha Speaker has to be viewed in this background. Meanwhile, more than 50 former judges, including retired Supreme Court Judges, have issued a statement condemning the move.

The Thiruparankundram issue has not reached the boiling point all of a sudden. It has been in the making for some time. Several petitions had been filed in the past seeking lighting of the lamp at the pillar close to the dargah, but they were all dismissed.

In 2014, a petition seeking lighting of the lamp on the pillar was dismissed by Justice Venugopal since the petitioners had failed to provide evidence to substantiate their demand. In 2017, a Division Bench comprising Justices Kalyanasundaram and Bhavani Subbarayan had dismissed a petition in this regard, noting that the administrations of the temple and the dargah had agreed to the existing site (Pillaiyar temple) for lighting the lamp. The court had observed that there was no need to change it.

Hence, the verdict of Justice Swaminathan allowing the lighting of the lamp on the pillar raised doubts in the minds of the people.

Prior to this, another incident had taken place, giving enough fodder to the trouble-makers to fish in the muddied waters. The dargah committee had decided to hold a festival in October in which goats and hens would be slaughtered. It invited people of all religions to enjoy the feast.

A petition was filed in the High Court against the decision of the dargah committee, but a Division Bench of Justices J Nisha Banu and S Srimathy differed on the issue. While Justice Banu dismissed the petition, noting that animal sacrifice was in practice in various religions and cannot be banned selectively. She also said that the dargah had a separate premise away from the temple, and animal sacrifice can be permitted there. However, Justice Srimathy found the practice of animal sacrifice at the dargah not supported by previous records. Hence, the case was transferred to a single bench of Justice R. Vijayakumar who prohibited the ritual of animal sacrifice. This brought the issue to a flashpoint.

According to reports, animal sacrifice was going on at the dargah for years without any problem. The dargah committee had told the court that it was a place of worship that attracted pilgrims from all religions. They pointed out that one of the main persons who performed the halal (slaughter) at the dargah was not a Muslim but a Hindu named Paramasivam.

The dispute over the ownership of Thiruparankundram hill is not new. Litigation has been going on for a century. Courts have consistently held the temple’s title over the hill while recognising the dargah’s right over the plot it stands. Hence, the Sangh Parivar outfits’ claim over the entire hill has no legal sanction.

Tamil Nadu is a hard nut for the BJP to crack. The temple-dargah issue came as a godsend for them. Led by several Sangh Parivar outfits, a ‘Mahanaadu’ (conference) was held in Madurai in June, which saw an unprecedented number of participants. At this meeting, the main demand was a ban on animal sacrifice at the dargah. They also demanded the renaming of the hill as Skandar Malai after one of the many names of Lord Murugan.  As the Assembly elections draw closer, one can expect more drama in Tamil Nadu on communal lines.