For some time, Chaitanyacharya, wielding the godly title, tried to reach out to lay devotees in the hope that they would give him donations and offerings through which he could repay his loans. ‘But donations and offerings do not come just like that. The title is not sufficient to make you wealthy. You have to be a good orator to impress devotees and you have to know various tricks and have the kind of network required to spread your area of influence in order to motivate more and more wealthy people to become your disciples. But Chaitanyacharya had none of these qualities, and so when the moneylenders began knocking at his door, he had no option but to run away from his house. For a few years, he remained completely traceless. One day in 2015, he suddenly came to my temple in Ayodhya. I asked him: “Maharaj, where is your danda?” He said: “I have thrown it forever and I have also left Cuttack.” That was the last time I saw him. I did not hear about him after that,’ Yugal Kishore Shastri said. ‘Now I think I should have warned him about the risk he was taking by becoming a god without having the skills to prove himself as one.’
7
PRECEPTORS TO THE WORLD
Achyutanand Tirth had reached the end of his tether. Fourteen months after getting himself anointed the shankaracharya of the Dwarka peetha, also called Sharada peetha, he found himself besieged not only by the peetha’s reigning pontiff Swaroopanand Saraswati and his disciples but also by the Dasanami akharas.
Though Achyutanand Tirth was an influential mahant in Haridwar, an open supporter of Hindutva politics and close to the VHP, the Dasanami akharas—a majority of whose sadhus are associated with the VHP—did not help him wrest power from Swaroopanand Saraswati, considered close to the Congress party. Instead, the akharas ostracised Achyutanand Tirth and threatened to ban him from attending Kumbh Melas. Finally, on 20 April 2018, he gave up the title.
‘You cannot take away the status of a dandi sadhu from me. What is a gaddi [the throne of shankaracharya] after all? A bit of wood covered with velvet,’ he told me days after giving up the coveted title.1 ‘A sadhu is one who is ready to give up anything. This is what my guru taught me. Even now he guides me.’ His guru died over a decade ago. ‘I can interact with my guru just as I do with you. One day, while I was facing all kinds of verbal abuse from the disciples of Swaroopanand Saraswati, my guru appeared before me and asked me to get out of the muck and resign from the post of shankaracharya. He told me that such a decision would be good for me as well as for humankind. My guru’s commandment led to my self-realisation and I resigned on the birth anniversary of Adi Shankara. You can call this some kind of divine intervention.’
This divine intervention, however, seems to have guided Achyutanand Tirth only after he became certain that the Dasanami akharas would not support him.
When Achyutanand Tirth took up the title in February 2017, both Shaiva and Vaishnava akharas were in the midst of a crisis. It had started building a few months ago, during the Ujjain Kumbh Mela in April–May 2016, when the media exposed a series of scandals involving the granting of coveted titles to religious leaders. Radhe Maa was not allowed by Dasanami nagas to enter Ujjain’s Kumbh Mela, called Simhastha. Similarly, a mob of Vaishnava sadhus vandalised the pandal erected in the Mela area by the followers of Asaram Bapu, a controversial religious leader who had been arrested on charges of raping a minor girl in 2013. (On 25 April 2018, he was sentenced to life imprisonment.) The end of the Simhastha was also marred by a violent clash between two factions of Awahan akhara’s naga sadhus over the post of shri mahant. Rahul Puri, a naga who was injured by a bullet in the clash, openly asserted, as reported in Dainik Bhaskar, that important positions in the akharas were being sold for huge amounts of money.
Following this, similar scandals involving high-profile sadhus and babas started appearing in the media regularly. The All India Akhara Parishad, for the first time in its history, issued two consecutive lists of ‘fake sadhus and babas’, first in September and then in December 2017, and warned the laity to beware of them. The list included, among others, Radhe Maa, Asaram Bapu, his son Narayan Sai, and Swami Aseemanand—an RSS pracharak who was accused in the Mecca masjid blast and Ajmer dargah blast cases of 2007, but was exonerated for lack of evidence. It was in this climate that the Dasanami akharas did not come forward in support of Achyutanand Tirth.
Trouble started brewing for Achyutanand Tirth even before he got himself anointed shankaracharya. Two days before his pattabhishek, the AIAP president, Narendra Giri, threatened to ostracise him in case he declared himself the new shankaracharya. A letter, signed by Narendra Giri and sent to Achyutanand Tirth, alleged that the latter was ‘trying to be a self-styled shankaracharya’ and that this would not be tolerated.2 Once Achyutanand assumed the title, the AIAP ‘expelled’ him as well as those who had attended the anointment ceremony from the ‘community’ of sadhus.3
When, in the first week of September 2017, local Hindi newspapers in Haridwar carried reports that his name might also be included in the list of fake babas being prepared by the AIAP, his legal representatives warned the akharas of dire consequences if they put his name in the list. Though his name did not figure in the list, his fate was sealed in March 2018, when the AIAP declared that barring pontiffs of ‘established’ peethas, it would not allow any other dharma guru to use the title of shankaracharya in the upcoming Ardh Kumbh Mela to be held in Allahabad in January–March 2019, and that the Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath had accepted this recommendation and directed the local authorities to act accordingly. The AIAP also announced the formation of a team of 500 naga sadhus who would be on round-the-clock duty during the Ardh Kumbh, to keep an eye on the activities of self-made religious heads.
Out of ideas, baffled by the VHP’s indifference, badgered by akharas and beaten in the race by Swaroopanand Saraswati, Achyutanand Tirth gave up his title.
II
Shankaracharyas are dandi sadhus, who are placed at the apex of the Dasanami structure and are referred to as jagat gurus or preceptors to the world. They reside at mutts or peethas supposedly founded by Adi Shankara. Till the beginning of the twentieth century, shankaracharyas were considered the spiritual head of all the sanyasis of the order. As elucidated in the previous chapter, though shankaracharyas used to perform the role of priests during the initiation of sanyasis and nagas, who in turn, used to carry the palanquin of shankaracharyas in the Kumbh processions as a mark of respect, this relationship soured around the beginning of the twentieth century when nagas and paramhansas developed their own system of initiation.
Though now estranged from the Dasanami akharas, the title retains its significance since Hindus consider the peetha of a shankaracharya to be the oldest surviving gaddi. The position is also highly lucrative because it attracts a large number of followers; the proliferation of shankaracharyas has been almost as fast as that of mahamandaleshwars. Which is why, akharas still intervene when there is a dispute related to a peetha.
‘Adi Shankaracharya founded four peethas in four directions on the basis of four Vedas. He also laid down the rules as to who could be acharya of which peetha. All this is written in Mathamanaya. There is no room for any confusion, but still new shankaracharyas keep cropping up every now and then,’ Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati, the heir apparent of Swaroopanand Saraswati, told me.4
In practice, however, there is utter confusion regarding the authenticity of a series of short Sanskrit texts, known as Mathamanaya, Mathamanayastotra, Mathamanayasetu and Mathetivritta, which detail the various amanayas or sacred traditions, all, supposedly—but improbably—written by Adi Shankara.5 Historically, there is no substantive evidence to connect Adi Shankara with the early history of any of the peethas claimed to be founded by him. These Sanskrit texts present an overview of the Dasanami order, its ten lineages and a variable number of peethas. Mathamanaya, in particular, is used by the pontiffs of the four main peethas to legitimise them—Jyotish peetha (Badrinath–Kedarnath), Sringeri peetha (Chikamagalur), Govardhan peetha (Jagannath Puri) and Dwark
a peetha (Dwarka)—to the exclusion of other claims. ‘Even in the nineteenth century the claims of the official four mathas to be the only legitimate ones were far from universally established,’ writes Matthew Clark.6 ‘Over the previous few hundred years, several other advaita mathas have also claimed legitimacy, many of the disputes being settled by royal decree or by a court case.’
This ambiguity gives rise to an unending number of claims to the position of jagat guru. According to Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati, there are over 100 shankaracharyas today. He also claimed that their numbers continue to swell. Nishchalanand Saraswati, shankaracharya of Govardhan peetha, was also of the same opinion.
Varanasi, in particular, has become a manufacturing hub of shankaracharyas. Sumeru peetha, located in this town, is claimed by the VHP and a section of Dasanami sanyasis to be the fifth peetha founded by Adi Shankara as the northern peetha, though, many theologians describe the fifth peetha as an allegorical ‘heavenly’ peetha.7 A pair of wooden sandals called paduka, believed to have been used by Shankara, is preserved here and hence it is also called Paduka matha. Sumeru peetha is no stranger to controversies either. As of March 2019, two shankaracharyas—Narendranand and Chinmayananda—claim to be its pontiff.8
Even the four main peethas, those that quite vociferously claim a direct link to Adi Shankara, are not free of controversies and rival claimants. Swaroopanand Saraswati, the shankaracharya of Jyotish peetha since 1973, became the pontiff of Dwarka peetha, too, in 1982. Till date, he shows no sign of wanting to give up his ownership of either. Meanwhile, new claimants have emerged for both the peethas. While Achyutanand Tirth had to withdraw his claim over Dwarka peetha, Rajrajeshwar Ashram, another seer who is said to have the backing of the VHP, has remained firm and has called himself ‘Shri Shri 1008 jagat guru shankaracharya of Dwarka peetha’ since 2000. Rajrajeshwar Ashram, however, lives in Haridwar because Swaroopanand Saraswati is mostly at the Dwarka peetha. Swaroopanand Saraswati’s other peetha, Jyotish Peetha, too has two claimants—Shankaracharya Vasudevanand Saraswati and Shankaracharya Madhav Ashram, both of whom have the VHP’s backing.
Similarly, Nishchalanand Saraswati has been the shankaracharya of Govardhan peetha of Puri since 1995. In July 2000, Adhokshjanand Tirth, from Varanasi, arrived in Puri, claiming that he was the ‘real’ shankaracharya, having been ordained by the previous acharya of the peetha, Niranjandev Tirth. Although he was arrested and expelled from the town, he is still fighting the case. One of the objections raised against Nishchalanand Saraswati’s appointment is that the shankaracharya of Puri should be a Tirth and not a Saraswati. According to Mathamanaya—often used in courts by shankaracharyas of the four main peethas—Tirths belong to Dwarka peetha and Saraswatis to Sringeri peetha. In practice, however, this is hardly followed. The reigning shankaracharya of Sringeri peetha is Bharati Tirth. In addition to him, there are fourteen other persons who, too, call themselves shankaracharyas of this peetha.
Shankaracharyas, particularly in the south, also question the authenticity of the so-called southern peetha supposed to have been founded by Adi Shankara. Kamakoti peetha in Kanchipuram, is the most important claimant, and is recognised as the southern peetha in some orthodox circles. Sringeri peetha in Chikamagalur vies for the title of the primary southern peetha as well. Both these peethas have issued a substantial volume of polemical literature in their favour. The argument against Kanchipuram is the absence of any reference to it in the Mathamanaya. Kanchi peetha denies the authenticity of the Mathamanaya, and around the end of the nineteenth century, the supporters of this peetha claimed to have discovered another Sanskrit text, Mathamanayasetu, that included Kanchi as the fifth amanaya,9 while Mathamanaya only has four amanayas.
As the debate stands today, Kanchi peetha claims that Adi Shankara founded five peethas, and that he himself was the first acharya of Kanchi peetha and his four disciples became the pontiffs at the four peethas recorded in Mathamanaya. Sringeri, on the other hand, asserts that Kanchipuram is its branch mutt and not an independent peetha.
Besides this dispute between Sringeri and Kanchipuram peethas, there are at least five other mutts which have claimed legitimacy in the south as being the authentic peetha of Adi Shankara—in Pushpagiri, Andhra Pradesh and in Avani, Virupaksha, Sankeshvara and Kudali in Karnataka. While the Kudali mutt in Shimoga can be traced to the twelfth century, the other mutts are from a later period.
III
While in the south a large number of mutts are claiming to be the legitimate southern Shankara peetha, in the north it is much more complex. Although a good number of shankarachayas in the north, who display their titles on even their cars, are motivated by monetary benefits to claim the title, political amibitions too fuel their proliferation. In the VHP’s quest to obtain support from religious figures, they found that the shankaracharyas of the four main peethas were largely unwilling to sacrifice their independence to the Hindutva project, and hence it had to manufacture support as well as shankaracharyas.
There have been exceptions, though. In the 1960s, during the early years of the VHP’s mobilisation efforts, the then shankaracharya of Puri, Rameshwaranand, did succumb to the charms of Hindu supremacist politics. He actively participated in the cow-protection movement of 1966–67. Rameshwaranand even went on a fast along with some other sadhus to force the government to accept their demand of cow protection, which failed. Since then, the shankaracharya of Puri has not actively participated in the VHP’s agitational programme. The present shankaracharya of Puri, Nischalanand Saraswati, has always rejected the views of the VHP, though his ideology is similar to the organisation’s. ‘The RSS and the VHP are now working as a political party, not like a social organisation,’ he told the media in December 2018.10
The various shanakaracharyas of Sringeri, considered the most prestigious Shankara peetha of all, have given their ‘blessings’ to the VHP but have never participated in any of its political programmes right since the VHP’s inception in 1964.
Swaroopanand Saraswati has had a more complex relationship with the Hindutva outfit. In the begining, before becoming shankaracharya of the two peethas, he largely shared the views of the VHP and was even present in the first conclave of sadhus organised by the RSS outfit in the 1966 Allahabad Kumbh. But after becoming shankaracharya, he took a U-turn and actively opposed the politics of the VHP, and has been the most hostile of all Hindu religious leaders to the Sangh Parivar. A few months after the demolition of Babri masjid, Swaroopanand Saraswati, with tacit support from the Congress government, organised a meeting of the shankaracharyas of the four peethas on 27 June 1993 at Sringeri. At this meeting, it was decided that an independent, apolitical and religious body would be constituted to oversee the construction of a Ram temple in Ayodhya, saying that the VHP did not have the religious authority to construct the Ram temple. Though the body—Ramalaya Trust—fell into disuse because of differences among its founders, the shankaracharyas of the four main peethas at the time continued to stay away from the VHP.
The VHP knew that it could not launch an open battle against the shankaracharyas of the four peethas without drawing the ire of the Hindu constituency. Neither could it overlook the fact that it did not have the support of the topmost seers of the Dasanami structure. Therefore, it sought to undermine the shankaracharyas of the four peethas by obtaining legitimacy from those shankaracharyas who were struggling to get their own claims to the title recognised.
It was no accident, therefore, that Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati of Kanchipuram joined the VHP bandwagon early on. He financed one of the two vehicles in which the VHP leaders toured Tamil Nadu after hundreds of Dalits converted to Islam in Meenakshipuram in 1981,11 which had made Brahminical and Hindutva organisations furious. This tour, called the ekatmata yatra or the yatra for unity, was touted as symbolising unity among Hindus and called upon Hindus of all castes to show their support. In 1983, Jayendra Saraswati joined this yatra, which was also conducted across the country and hugely strengthened the o
rganisational apparatus of the RSS outfit. The yatra was the first major attempt by the VHP to politicise Hindu religious symbols at an all-India level. Jayendra Saraswati also presided over the VHP’s Dharma Sansad held in 1989, in which the building of a Ram temple in Ayodhya was discussed. Although his activism tailed off after that, his connections with the RSS, VHP and BJP remained intact. His image, however, received a major dent in 2004, when he was arrested in a murder case that remained unsolved for a decade. Even his acquittal in 2013 did not help restore the stature of the Kanchi shankaracharya, who died on 28 February 2018.
Another shankaracharya, whose association with the VHP is rooted in his aim to strengthen the claim of his peetha as one of the original ones, is Narendranand Saraswati, the pontiff of Sumeru peetha. This peetha does not find mention in Mathamanaya and getting it recognised by the orthodox circles has remained a major challenge for Narendranand. While Swaroopanand Saraswati and other pontiffs of the four main peethas have refused to recognise Sumeru peetha, the VHP, desperate to get as many shankaracharyas as possible on board, has openly backed this Varanasi-based peetha’s claim. In return, Narendranand Saraswati has remained one of the most vocal supporters of Hindutva politics. Unlike Jayendra Saraswati, who refrained from making provocative statements despite maintaining his association with the VHP, Narendranand Saraswati is known for making controversial and outlandish statements. He asked Hindu couples to have ten children each, arguing that children were God’s gift. After Narendra Modi became the prime minister in 2014, and physical attacks on Muslims and Dalits by Hindu militia groups in the name of cow protection increased manifold, the Sumeru shankaracharya demanded that cow be declared the mother of the nation and that those who slaughtered cows be tried and beheaded. He also supported the Modi government’s demonetisation in November 2016. When the opposition parties protested the government’s decision, he argued that those who disrupted Parliament should not be paid their salaries.
Ascetic Games Page 17