Finally, bowing to mounting national and international pressures, Prime Minister Prachanda revoked his decision to appoint new priests at the Pashupatinath Temple. Earlier, the decision had been taken to appoint two Nepali priests — Dr Bishnu Prasad Dahal and Shaligram Dhakal — at the Pashupatinath Temple. Opposing the new appointments, the Bhandaris had been preventing puja. The pressure and protests had been mounted over the replacement of South Indian Bhattas by Nepali priests. Afterwards, issuing an interim order on a writ petition, the apex court had issued a stay order to the government and Pashupati Area Development Trust (PADT) not to let the newly appointed Nepali priests offer worship till the Supreme Court (SC) issued its final verdict.

The SC in its interim order directed reinstatement of former Indian Bhattas. The petitioners (Bhandaris, who were the traditional caretakers of the temple) contended that age-old tradition and laws were violated while appointing new Nepali priests. It must be noted, however, that appointment of Nepali priests is not a new tradition. Historian Gyan Mani Nepal in a vernacular daily, claimed that Nepali priests were appointed as head priests at the Pashupati temple until first half of the 18th century. It was only after Danda Pani Sanyasi, the then ruler of Nepal that South Indian Bhattas were appointed at the temple so that puja rituals continued even if the entire nation observed mourning ritual (ashauch) for a dead king. Now with monarchy gone, there is no question of Nepalis observing any such ritual which would affect the regular puja and other rituals at the temple.

At the same time, some political leaders lent support to the protest against the appointment of Nepali citizens as the priests of Pashupatinath Temple. Former king Gyanendra also took the opportunity to break his long silence saying Pashupatinath should be kept free from politics, and called for unhindered religious activities at the temple. The Bhattas had been accused of ‘embezzling’ the collected offerings and of not depositing these to the temple fund. Investigation had been made earlier into alleged irregularities of the temple funds. Misuse of people’s offerings to Pashupatinath temple had been reported time and again. Bhattas claim that the income of the temple was always divided between Bhattas and Bhandaris and that there was no irregularity. The Mool Bhatta also said that he had only been taking the amount of the special puja and the amount would be deposited in the safe of the temple.

Though hundreds of thousands of devotees visit the Pashupatinath temple, the

annual offerings to the temple reportedly just amounted to 71,000 rupees this year. Many believe this amount to be very low in comparison to the number of devotees visiting the temple every day. It is estimated that hundreds of thousands of rupees are collected during the closed-door prayers during the month of Poush, but it is not transparent how many people offer such prayers and how much money they pay for such prayers.

People say the money can be misappropriated with mutual consensus among

the priests, who are responsible for the

protection of the property of the temple. The information that a donation of

Rs 306,900 had been collected and deposited in the fund in a short period from January 1, since the appointment of new priests amply supports the allegation.

Obviously, for the Hindus of the entire world including India, Lord Pashupatinath evokes the deepest sense of reverence. But, the task of appointing the temple priests is the task of the authority concerned. Similarly, it may be worth mentioning that the PADT had moved ahead

with the appointment of two priests of Nepali citizenship, after the resignations had been accepted. The appointment of Nepali priests was also a break from a tradition that obviously annoyed some sections of the society.

Undeniably, the procedure, however, was debatable. It could have been made acceptable to all groups by inviting applications for selection through free competition.

But, any attempt to provoke Hindu orthodox political leaders over the issue in the name of tradition and procedure cannot be taken in a positive light. Under the existing law, nationality of priests has not been mentioned, making it open, provided they meet certain criteria. Therefore, it is up to the appointing authority to choose the priests of any nationality. However, it must be expected that a fresh process with transparent selection procedure will be adopted to appoint new priests for the temple.

The recent events have provided a direction for further reforms in the management of the sacred temple, including the appointment of the priests. Due process and transparency can soothe public nerves over the priest issue.

Chalise is a journalist and litterateur