Freeing Hindu temples from Govts - what is the goal , feasible extent and approach ?

[Manish_P]

One obstacle...

Seer accuses Karnataka govt of taking 30 pc cut in grants for mutts, CM assures probe if details provided

After Dingaleshwara Swamiji of the Balehosur Mutt said that officials of the Karnataka government demanded a 30 per cent commission from mutts to release funds, CM Bommai on Monday said that a thorough investigation would be done if the seer provides the details.

"A thorough probe would be conducted if Dingaleshwara Swamiji provides details on his statement on paying commission for getting a government grant", Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai said.

"The ruling BJP not only takes a commission from contractors, it even takes 35 per cent commission from religious seers. Corruption has reached this level. The officials say that funds cannot be released until the commission is paid," the seer said on Monday while speaking at the Sankalpa Yatra programme in Bagalkot district.

[Sachin]

x-Post on the 30% bribe scheme in KA
When we talk about 'freeing temples', it would also be better to check how the various pontiffs/seers/Mutts plan to manage the affairs. In KA at least there are Seers/Mutts who have strong political affiliations (cutting across political parties), and so it will be better that to ensure that after 'freeing' temples it lands up in the hands of people who have more ulterior interests. Caste based fissures in Hindu society at this stage is only going to cause more harm.

[Cyrano]

Sachin saar,
Your post seems to assume a few things:
1. pontiffs/seers/Mutts will manage their affairs "badly"
Why is this a given? What is "bad" management of a non-secular, private space ? Who should decide what is good or bad for them - you? me? or those who own the place and its adherents? Who will check? Based on what criteria?

2. Freed temples will land in people's hands with "ulterior interests"
Again, Why is this a given? What is "ulterior" for a non-secular, private space ? Who should decide what is ulterior or not? - you? me? or those who own the place and its adherents?

3. Caste based fissures in Hindu society at this stage is only going to cause more harm.
Have you any examples of pontiffs/seers/Mutts (this terminology itself is colonial imposed in case you haven't noticed. The right words would be guru, acharya, mathadhipathi...) who caused caste based divisions and harmed hindu society? are these examples so overwhelmingly dominant that one should think these will be an inevitable consequence of freeing hindu religious institutions?

Where is this precept that any hindu institution should be seen with suspicion by default coming from? Why aren't institutions of other religions subject to the same? Because their religion is somehow superior and make their followers more moral?

Think about it...

[Sachin]

What is "bad" management of a non-secular, private space ?

What is "ulterior" for a non-secular, private space ?

who caused caste based divisions and harmed hindu society?

I only have limited examples from KA state. By 'bad management', I only meant using of the non-secular, private space to hit at other Hindu castes/groups. At least in KA, Mutts are very much caste based. Same is my definition of 'ulterior' as well. There should not be any friendly fire between Hindus.
Lingayat subsect warns Karnataka govt of renewed OBC quota agitation from April 1. News such as these clearly indicate that caste based politics can still take its ugly form, and the spiritual Gurus/leaders are also willing to play with that fire.

Where is this precept that any hindu institution should be seen with suspicion by default coming from? Why aren't institutions of other religions subject to the same? Because their religion is somehow superior and make their followers more moral?

What I have observed is that other religions (due its regimented way of seeing things) generally have a fairly demoratic way to run their religious instituitions. From what I have seen so far, it seems to work on the ground. The fundamental principle seems to be having a nominal roll of 'believers' attached to every 'religious place'/place of worship and a kind of elections to select the people who would manage the affairs. When it comes to temples, there is never such a scheme - especially in bigger temples where management is already taken over by the state governments. A few temples in KL are privately managed, they do have an election system in place as well. All is fine; but then the voters in the nominal roll are from a specific caste group.

[Cyrano]

Reservations induced caste jockeying to grab as much benefits and privileges as they can has happened before. Yes a religious Matha leader could get involved in that, in the lingayat example they already are. But the problem lies with the reservations system based on Mandal Report based on 1950S census iirc. If everyone is grabbing something, who will sit on the sidelines? This will continue irrespective of temples etc freed or not.

Regarding other religions, please read the wakf act 1995 passed by Congress under PVNR, the den of corruption and non-accountability it guarantees. The muslim community has its own caste hierarchy.
https://minorityaffairs.gov.in/acts/wakf-act

Christians have a deep rooted caste+denomination based discrimination thats even worse. For ex: community boycott of xtians crossing caste & church denomination boundaries to marry outside. see some videos of Esther dhanaraj and another lady on yt. The amount of unaccounted money various churches, dioceses have is astronomical. What their clergy can coverup thanks to running prestigious schools to which IAS, IPS, IRS, IT, judiciary etc send their children is jaw dropping.

Any hindu org misdemeanours pale in comparison. We need to come out if this mindset that hindu organisations cant responsibility auto regulate and adopt good governance practices. There can be some chaos initially but I firmly believe freeing temples will do lot more good than harm.