Non-Hindus will have to sign declaration at Tirumala

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Months after the visit of YSR Congress party chief Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy stirred up a major controversy by refusing to sign the mandatory declaration form for non-Hindus, the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams has been instructed to enforce the declaration for non-Hindus without fail.
Governor E.S.L. Narasimhan has passed a GO instructing the temple administration that the declaration for non-Hindus is mandatory and to ensure that it is enforced without any bias.

He has instructed TTD senior officials to caution VIPs, politicians and prominent persons from other faiths visiting Tirumala about the mandatory declaration and to get their signatures without fail before they enter the temple.

Though the decision is a welcome one, there is a lot of ambiguity when it comes to implementing it. This is more so because of the close to 50,000 people visiting the Tirumala hill shrine every day — which even crosses the one-lakh mark during holidays and festivals.


Most of the devotees opt for the “Sarva Darshan” mode wherein they are never asked for their ID cards. The issuance of tickets to devotees under the “Divya Darshan” and the Rs 300 special darshan mode are not any different. But when it comes to Arjitha Sevas and the VIP darshan — reserved for politicians, industrialists and other prominent people — every single devotee has to show their ID cards before entering the Vaikuntam Q complex. Their names are also printed on their tickets which help the temple administration easily identify them.
Non-Hindus will have to sign declaration at Tirumala

 

[manesg]

For what reason is this declaration in need? What they try to get out of it? Anyone has any more information?

 

[rishikesan]

It is simple. Hindus follow a certain religion & way of life. Like-wise Christians follow Christ & not the Hindu way. Because some high dignitaries like Sonia Gandhi , when visited the temple, the authorities, was asked tosign a standard declaration prepared by the Hind Endowment Board, to record that she has faith in Hindu religion, But she did not sign instantly & perhaps created unwanted FUZZ . Our religion must follow this ruthlessly & as a routine. It is possible to do this for those who enter from Maha Dhwar. Rest not feasible. The authorities must
not show disunity in getting it done, or else we will be taken for a ride by other religions/ foreigners.
rishikesan

 

[vgane]

There is also a plan to build an Islamic University in Tirupati..Read this

Protest against International Islamic University coming near Tirupati Temple

 

[renuka]

BTW God has no religion..so technically HE is not a Hindu..so does God also have to sign to stay in the temple?

 

[renuka]

There is also a plan to build an Islamic University in Tirupati..Read this

Protest against International Islamic University coming near Tirupati Temple

This has been there long long back..I keep getting this protest emails from Hindu Jagruti Samaj.

 

[Brahmanyan]

Non-Hindus will have to sign declaration at Tirumala.

Honestly I do not understand the significance of getting the signature of non-Hindus in a register. Religion is based
on strong belief of an individual. I don't think that will that change by signing a Register ? All that is needed is that the individuals should respect the ritualistic practices of a Temple that they visit. Temple is also the house of God, it should be open for any one who wish to worship.

Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[sarang]

How to reconsile this with the laws and bylaws of the temple, the board 'only Hindus are allowed' and the wish of astikas? Why non hindus want to enter a Hindu temple which is a place of worship and not a tourist spot? Those who want to worship should not have any objection to sign the declaration affirming their faith in Hinduism.

Honestly I do not understand the significance of getting the signature of non-Hindus in a register. Religion is based
on strong belief of an individual. I don't think that will that change by signing a Register ? All that is needed is that the individuals should respect the ritualistic practices of a Temple that they visit. Temple is also the house of God, it should be open for any one who wish to worship.

Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[renuka]

Honestly I do not understand the significance of getting the signature of non-Hindus in a register. Religion is based
on strong belief of an individual. I don't think that will that change by signing a Register ? All that is needed is that the individuals should respect the ritualistic practices of a Temple that they visit. Temple is also the house of God, it should be open for any one who wish to worship.

Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

I fully agree with what you wrote Sir..

In fact this whole procedure of singing etc totally brings down the glory of Sanathana Dharma..its makes Sanathana Dharma like any other Dualistic religion that preaches exclusiveness.

One fine day the temple authorities are going to find the signature of Lord Venkateswhara in their books and get a heart attack!LOL

 

[renuka]

How to reconsile this with the laws and bylaws of the temple, the board 'only Hindus are allowed' and the wish of astikas? Why non hindus want to enter a Hindu temple which is a place of worship and not a tourist spot? Those who want to worship should not have any objection to sign the declaration affirming their faith in Hinduism.

Dear Sarang ji,

God welcomes everyone...the believer..the non believer..the tourist..the observer..we have no right to feel that only those who want to pray can enter a temple.

I remember many years ago..I had gone to a Buddhist temple here run by Sri Lankan monks..there a sinhalese woman happened to see me and she came up to speak to me..(in Malaysia we do have a good number of Sinhalese people)....

..she asked me "are you Singhalese"? I said no I am an Indian ..then she became sort of unfriendly and asked me "then what are you doing here..this is a Sri Lankan run temple"

I said "I came to pray to Lord Buddha who was born in India"

She left quietly!

She actually felt that she had ownership over the temple just becos she is Sinhalese conveniently forgetting that Lord Buddha was not born in Sri Lanka!LOL

So you see..I feel at a place of worship we have no right to impose rules on anyone that even God wont impose.

Does God ask anyone to sign up to pray to Him?

 

[prasad1]

Honestly I do not understand the significance of getting the signature of non-Hindus in a register. Religion is based
on strong belief of an individual. I don't think that will that change by signing a Register ? All that is needed is that the individuals should respect the ritualistic practices of a Temple that they visit. Temple is also the house of God, it should be open for any one who wish to worship.

Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

Jagan Reddy a Cristian went to the temple would not sign the declaration to honor the temple policy. He would not remove his shoes and still entered the temple, no one could stop him. That is wrong.

 

[renuka]

Jagan Reddy a Cristian went to the temple would not sign the declaration to honor the temple policy. He would not remove his shoes and still entered the temple, no one could stop him. That is wrong.

That is totally wrong! He should have respected the temple and removed his shoes.

 

[venkat2206]

The Declaration is only a confirmation of the person's faith in Hindu religion. By signing the declaration the person is not going to convert into Hindu and hence nothing wrong in bringing a legislation to this effect. Implementation is feasible only if the visitor happen to be a well known personality or a person who books special seva tickets by producing Id cards. Otherwise, the rule is more on paper.

Venkat K

 

[tks]

I know of a white American who is a Vedic and Upanishadic scholar , had lived in India for over a decade and went to visit Guruvayoor temple. He was denied based on the color of his skin and declared a non-Hindu. In Kashi temple the guards made him recite verses of Gita and few slokas before being allowed to enter. I do not blame the guards since they had no direction as to what to do.

However there are people with conversion agenda, or purely tourist interests with a view to see what these 'brutes' are doing that want to go into a temple.

I once met a fellow in a Gita lecture many years ago who came to attend to learn about Hindu philosophy. He was chosen to go to India as a missionary and wanted to understand what we teach and prepare how to counter the teaching. He was honest. As it happened after attending many lectures he gave up his pursuits of conversion and turned to learn more of our teaching.

I think anyone who is a non-Hindu who wants to visit a temple even for non-worship purposes should be allowed provided they are made to see a small movie (less than 15 minutes) and sign a declaration that says that they respect the Hindu way of life & faith (not ask them to sign that they believe in Hinduism), that they understand the tradition and agree to act respectful during and after the visit.

We do not need to insist those that who do not believe be forced to falsely sign just to get entry but we do need to protect the larger interest of faith based people. If someone signs a declaration and does not live up to it they should be taken to jail.

Let us not confuse God's existence within temple only. God in Hindu faith exists everywhere and the temple is a place for people to get themselves focused . Therefore non-Hindu faith people have to say that they will be respectful to other worshippers by following the tradition (like not wearing shoes, not taking pictures etc)

 

[rishikesan]

Mr SARANG

The Declaration is only a confirmation of the person's faith in Hindu religion. By signing the declaration the person is not going to convert into Hindu and hence nothing wrong in bringing a legislation to this effect. Implementation is feasible only if the visitor happen to be a well known personality or a person who books special seva tickets by producing Id cards. Otherwise, the rule is more on paper.

Venkat K

Mr. Sarang has explained in a simple English the essence of the Order. Why at all we should try to split the hair on such divInity followed by the Thirumala Temple, not only this Hill temple, many temples like Sriramgam RenganatHar follow the same When a rule is made people will questIon as to why it is not followed. Secondly for Security purpose this & other rules have to be ensured. Non-Hindus do not decline to sign & they feel happy that they get a chance to practically experience different culture.if any such rules/ restrictions are made by other Religion, we would simply follow. One reason is that we will not know the back-ground for a decision. Days are BAD Strict security should be accepted in the interest of the Vast country with diversified news & being otherwise very liberal.
rishikesan

 

[P.J.]

Supporting Thirumala Temple insisting on a declaration from Non-Hindus was expressed about this subject in Hindu Newspaper even in the year 2012

The TTD is right in insisting on the practice.The great temple of
Tirupati is the abode of the Lord of Hindu Faith.A temple is a place
of worship and not a picnic spot. Any person can worship any God. But
when you want to cut across religious barriers and want to worship God
of a particular religion,without claiming to be a part of the same
religion,then it is mandatory that you show faith in the God of the
religion.What's wrong in insisting for the declaration? As someone
said,it is mandatory to sign the declaration only if you want to be
let inside the temple. If you want to enjoy the scenery of the hills
nobody is preventing and nobody is asking for any declaration.A
temple is a place of religious belief.though it may have cultural and
artistic significance,it is a place of worship alone and not for
anything else.By the same logic,any hindu visiting shrines of other
religion(like velankanni,nagore dharga)must express deep faith in the
presiding deity.thats what is happenning also.

from: B Dhiwakar
Posted on: Jul 28, 2012 at 10:47 IST



In Tirumala, declaration by non-Hindus mandatory - The Hindu

 

[Brahmanyan]

Non-Hindus will have to sign declaration at Tirumala.

That is totally wrong! He should have respected the temple and removed his shoes.

Dear Doctor,

Agreed. When we visit a religious place we should honour the traditions of that place. I have visited many Churches, Mosques and Gurudwaras. In Sheik Zayed Grand Mosque at Abu Dhabi (UAE) no signature is taken to visit, but Ladies are given to wear "Abaya", (a Black loose garment covering whole body, except face, arms and legs). Similarly when we visit Gurudwaras we are expected to remove our foot wear outside and cover our heads. No signatures taken to visit the Gurudwara. Churches are much liberal except maintaining silence, no other regulation is required to follow. Here also no signature is taken.

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[tbs]

hi

in guruvayur temple...there is big board saying NON HINDUS ARE NOT ALLOWED....the great singer who sang many songs abt

lord guruvayurappan was not allowed to enter the temple....some rules are applicable according to religious customs..

 

[tks]

hi

in guruvayur temple...there is big board saying NON HINDUS ARE NOT ALLOWED....the great singer who sang many songs abt

lord guruvayurappan was not allowed to enter the temple....some rules are applicable according to religious customs..

I am not aware of a litmus test for who is a Hindu .. There is no authority to say one is hindu or not ...so this rule does not make sense.

 

[prasad1]

I know of a white American who is a Vedic and Upanishadic scholar , had lived in India for over a decade and went to visit Guruvayoor temple. He was denied based on the color of his skin and declared a non-Hindu. In Kashi temple the guards made him recite verses of Gita and few slokas before being allowed to enter. I do not blame the guards since they had no direction as to what to do.

However there are people with conversion agenda, or purely tourist interests with a view to see what these 'brutes' are doing that want to go into a temple.

I once met a fellow in a Gita lecture many years ago who came to attend to learn about Hindu philosophy. He was chosen to go to India as a missionary and wanted to understand what we teach and prepare how to counter the teaching. He was honest. As it happened after attending many lectures he gave up his pursuits of conversion and turned to learn more of our teaching.

I think anyone who is a non-Hindu who wants to visit a temple even for non-worship purposes should be allowed provided they are made to see a small movie (less than 15 minutes) and sign a declaration that says that they respect the Hindu way of life & faith (not ask them to sign that they believe in Hinduism), that they understand the tradition and agree to act respectful during and after the visit.

We do not need to insist those that who do not believe be forced to falsely sign just to get entry but we do need to protect the larger interest of faith based people. If someone signs a declaration and does not live up to it they should be taken to jail.

Let us not confuse God's existence within temple only. God in Hindu faith exists everywhere and the temple is a place for people to get themselves focused . Therefore non-Hindu faith people have to say that they will be respectful to other worshippers by following the tradition (like not wearing shoes, not taking pictures etc)

I support your view.
I too do not see any reason to restrict the visit to temple purely on Racial reason or religious reason. It is very difficult for the security person to make the determination of who is Hindu or not.
I also do not want the argument that others are doing it so we should also do it.
On the rules (dress code etc) one should follow a uniform policy. In Kerala Temples if you go in european cloths, they expect you to rent the appropriate cloths. They enforce it uniformly.

 

[prasad1]

Dear Doctor,

Agreed. When we visit a religious place we should honour the traditions of that place. I have visited many Churches, Mosques and Gurudwaras. In Sheik Zayed Grand Mosque at Abu Dhabi (UAE) no signature is taken to visit, but Ladies are given to wear "Abaya", (a Black loose garment covering whole body, except face, arms and legs). Similarly when we visit Gurudwaras we are expected to remove our foot wear outside and cover our heads. No signatures taken to visit the Gurudwara. Churches are much liberal except maintaining silence, no other regulation is required to follow. Here also no signature is taken.

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

I think this should be the policy in all places of worship.
Signatures do not mean anything. Enforcement is very tricky, the security guard can arbitrarily deny entry to certain individual.
Policy should posted, should be enforceable, and uniform across all Temples.

 

[sarang]

every traditional temple has its own rules, practices, agama affiliation and hereditary rights. They who want identical systems for all temples have not understood sanatana dharma principles and practices. Painting everything white or black is not only stupid, but be condemned and resisted.
Jayalalita banned animal sacrifice for a while, but rescinded the order. Why?
Our concept of samam or samatvam does not expect or order everyone to be identical or copycats.

I think this should be the policy in all places of worship.
Signatures do not mean anything. Enforcement is very tricky, the security guard can arbitrarily deny entry to certain individual.
Policy should posted, should be enforceable, and uniform across all Temples.

 

[rishikesan]

We, Tamil Brahmins do know that Kerala Temples do not deviate. They follow the rules with no excepion, meaning that they are all temples intended for Hindus & hence Guruvayur/ Thiruananthapuram Etc , unlike T.N. there is laxity.
rishikesan

 

[prasad1]

every traditional temple has its own rules, practices, agama affiliation and hereditary rights. They who want identical systems for all temples have not understood sanatana dharma principles and practices. Painting everything white or black is not only stupid, but be condemned and resisted.
Jayalalita banned animal sacrifice for a while, but rescinded the order. Why?
Our concept of samam or samatvam does not expect or order everyone to be identical or copycats.

As usual you are itching for an argument.
My view of uniformity was for the devotees visiting the temples, So we the people know how to dress appropriately. And no one is rejected at the door by a person enforcing the rule who may be biased by race or looks.
Mr. Sarang you as usual would like to embarrass people other than your kind in public places. I do not subscribe to that idea. You want your kind of Hinduism only. Some of us are Hindus but do not subscribe to Taliban-hinduism.

 

[sarang]

Sheer ignorance of talibanism and Hinduism leads one to hyphenate the two. Hinduism encourages and reveres diversity. No need to elaborate what talibanism demands. There is neither logic nor wisdom in such utterances.