Page 278 - DSOC201_SOCIAL_STRUCTURE_AND_SOCIAL_CHANGE_ENGLISH

Unit 12: Processes of Change

Organizations which profess to propagate Indian culture and thought also propagate Hinduism. The Notes
classical literature and thought of India are all Hindu, Buddhist and Jain, and books which popularize
classical thought cannot help spreading a body of ideas shared by these three faiths. It is difficult
indeed to draw a sharp line between the cultural and the religious in a country such as India, which
has a long and recorded history, and where religion has been pervasive. Indian music, painting,
sculpture and dance draw greatly on Hindu religion, iconography and mythology. An interesting
development in the twentieth century is the emergence of Indian dance and ballet divorced from the
traditional contexts of temple and festival, as purely aesthetic forms.
The government, too, is playing an important role in modernizing Hinduism through legislation and
other means. It is doing this in spite of the fact that the Constitution declares India to be a secular
state. I have already referred to the outlawing of Untouchability. Changes have also been introduced
in Hindu personal and family law: bigamy is punishable by law; divorce and inter-caste and widow
marriage are permitted; and widows and daughters have been given shares in ancestral immovable
property. The administration of Hindu temples and monasteries is being radically altered by legislation
undertaken by the states. The first of such attempts was embodied in the Madras Religious
Endowments Act of 1927, and under it the government appointed a Board of Commissioners headed
by a president to supervise the administration of Hindu endowments. This gave way in 1951 to the
Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, under which was created a new department
of government headed by a Commissioner. “The task of supervising temples and mathas thus passed
from a regulatory commission to an executive department directly under a cabinet minister.” This
Act, which conferred great powers on the Commissioner, was challenged in the courts and the Supreme
Court declared some of its provisions invalid. A new act was passed in 1959 with a view to meeting
the objections of the court, and while it curtails some of the powers of the Commissioner vis-a-vis
mathas and denominational temples, “the whole system of control over temples belonging to the
general Hindu public, with vast powers vested in the Commissioner, has remained intact. As has
been mentioned, these temples constitute the great majority of the Hindu religious institutions.”
Other states such as Mysore, Bombay, Bihar and Orissa have also passed legislation, though not so
far-reaching as in Madras, controlling the administration of Hindu religious endowments. In 1960
the Government of India appointed a Hindu Religious Endowments Commission, under the
chairmanship of Sir C.R Ramaswamy Aiyer, to examine the administration of Hindu religious
endowments and suggest measures for its improvement. The Commission’s report, submitted in
1962, urged the speedy enactment of legislation providing for governmental supervision of temples
in states which did not already have such legislation, namely, Assam, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh
and Punjab, and the setting up of institutes to provide priests with instruction in Sanskrit, scriptures
and ritual, and of theological colleges for the study of religion along with the humanities. Moreover,
the Commission recommended that the Government of India give consideration to enacting uniform
legislation regulating endowments for all communities. (Bombay state already has such legislation
in the Bombay Public Trusts Acts of 1950.)
Legislation undertaken by several states, ostensibly to ensure that endowment funds are not misspent,
has resulted in establishment of government departments which determine how Hindu temples and
monasteries are to be run and how their money is spent.
Thus funds from the famous temple at Tirupathi (regulated by special legislation)
have been used to establish a university, schools, orphanages, hospitals, etc.
Throughout South India, Tirupathi has become the symbol and the model of the
new Hinduism which transforms the offerings of individualistic piety and devotion
to God into social institutions, dedicated to the service of man. Hinduism is being
infused with a modern outlook and a new sense of social responsibility. This is a
religious reformation of a fundamental nature. But as the agency of this reform is
to a large extent the state, it should not be surprising if devout Hindus object to the
liberties being taken with their religion.
Thus the state has become an important means of reinterpretation of Hinduism in the middle decades
of the twentieth century, and this in spite of India’s proclaimed policy of being a secular state. The
state, though most important, is not the only organization performing this function, as I have pointed

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 273