--- layout: default title: "Against the Sacred Abodes of Untouchability" permalink: /amaa/swami-anand-thirth-against-sacred-abodes-untouchability/ categories: [A. M. A. Ayrookuzhiel, Swami Anand Thirth] description: "The fifth chapter of A. M. A. Ayrookuzhiel's 1987 study of Swami Anand Thirth, examining his campaigns against untouchability and caste discrimination in temples across Kerala." authors: A. M. A. Ayrookuzhiel created: 2026-07-17 homepage_featured: true --- The **fifth chapter of *Swami Anand Thirth: Untouchability, Gandhian Solution on Trial*** examines Swami Anand Thirth's campaigns against untouchability and caste discrimination in temples. Beginning with the temple entry movement, the chapter follows his efforts to challenge restrictions on worship, discriminatory practices that persisted after legal reforms, and the exclusion of Scheduled Castes from temple spaces and rituals. Ayrookuzhiel traces these struggles through campaigns, court cases and individual acts of protest spanning several decades. The chapter covers the Mulki Temple case, Swami Anand Thirth's later campaigns against continuing forms of discrimination, and incidents at temples including those at Cherai, Kuzhithura, Agalpadi, Nadacherrikavu, Tellicherry and Guruvayur. The text of the *"Against the Sacred Abodes of Untouchability"* section is reproduced below. **Note:** Obvious OCR recognition errors have been silently corrected. Apparent errors in the original publication have generally been preserved, with editorial notes added where clarification is necessary. ## Contents {#contents} 1. [Against the Sacred Abodes of Untouchability](#sacred-abodes) 2. [Temple Entry Campaign Makes Gains](#temple-entry) 3. [The Mulki Temple Case](#mulki-temple) 4. [Struggling Alone](#struggling) 5. [Persisting Forms of Discrimination](#persisting-forms) 1. [Siva Temple, Kuzhithura](#kuzhithura) 2. [Durga Parameswari Temple in Agalpadi](#agalpadi) 3. [Nadacherrikavu](#nadacherrikavu) 4. [Satyagraha in Jagannath Temple](#satyagraha) 5. [Exclusive Feeding of Brahmins in Guruvayur Temple](#exclusive-feeding) 6. [Notes](#notes) ## Against the Sacred Abodes of Untouchability {#sacred-abodes} The historic battle against what was described by the Kerala Congress Committee (1931) as "the last ramparts" of untouchability began in the thirties with the Guruvayur Temple Entry Satyagraha. The inspiration and context of this reform movement was the Indian Freedom Movement. The abolition of caste and untouchability was often seen more as a condition and a requirement for success in the struggle for freedom than as a religious concern. In Kerala, the problem assumed a certain urgency with the threat of the mass conversion by the Ezhavas to Christianity.1 Prominent Ezhava leaders like K. Ayyappan and C. Krishnan embraced Buddhism. K. Ayyappan gave the clarion call, "Let us say no to the decayed, evil-smelling Hindu religion. Let us embrace the religion of Buddha." The "decayed evil-smelling Hindu religion" of Kerala in the thirties of this century is described by one of the great champions of reform as follows: > Temples, believed to be the abodes of the omnipresent Lord of the Universe, were the refuge for all kinds of ignorant and superstitious practices. To begin with, the temple devotees were divided into two, even those who were entitled to enter the walls of the temple had to queue up according to their rank in the caste hierarchy. The form of worship varied according to the caste order. Nairs were the Sudras among the *jatis* who were allowed inside.... of those who were standing outside the walls, the Ezhavas were the dominant community both numerically and in social status. They not only had to be outside but the order was that they stand twelve feet away from the wall. Harijans, Panchamas, were at the furthest end. The prescribed distance for them was sixty-four feet. People of each *jati* were happy and proud that they were above some other *jati* by three feet. The distance between them had only increased over the period, it was never reduced by even an inch. These Hindu believers not only could not go inside the temple for the *darshan* of the Lord but could not even pass through the road near the temple which was open even to the people of other religions. On all the four corners of the big temples, there were boards 'Untouchables stop here', put up by the government and specifying the distance of so many feet to maintained away from them.2 Congressmen were divided as to the method to be adopted for temple entry. One group held that since the caste system was enforced by the old feudal States, the State should enact laws throwing open caste Hindu temples, so that depressed classes could enter them by right. Swami Anand Thirth, P. Sankunni Menon, Kelappan, Madhava Menon and Vaidyanatha Iyer, among others, subscribed to this view. The others led by Sri Rajagopalachari, were of the view that throwing open temples by force of law would not produce the necessary results. They wanted the Congress to work towards a change of heart among the caste Hindus so that they would voluntarily open their temples to the depressed classes. They advocated holding referendums among caste Hindus of an area before their temples could be opened to all. ### Temple Entry Campaign Makes Gains {#temple-entry} When both the Guruvayur Satyagraha and the referendum conducted among the caste Hindus of Ponnani Taluk in 1932 failed to evoke any response from the temple and State authorities, Swami Anand Thirth and friends took a more militant line in North Malabar. The irony of the situation was that though Harijans were not allowed entry into the temples of other castes, they were forced to bring offerings to these temples. Swami Anand Thirth and his friends organised the Harijans to boycott such temples. In a pamphlet published in 1934 they said: > You are buying insult by giving offerings standing outside the temple wall. This contemptible practice does not go with one's self-respect. God does not need our money, paddy or cocks. What is needed is *bhakti*. It is sinful to worship a god who likes animal sacrifice. We shouldn't go near such temples. > > We should not allow ourselves to be exploited in the name of religion and God. God will be more pleased if we buy sweetmeats for our children rather than give offerings to these temples where untouchability is observed. > > It is now eight years since the struggle for temple entry began. Even now Harijans cannot go anywhere near the temples. The best way to protest against this is to refuse offerings. It is a movement to protect the self-respect of Harijans.3 The leaflet mentioned the names of places where Harijans had successfully refused offerings in the previous years. It assured people that no curse of the goddess had fallen over those who refused. Most humiliating was the practice which forced Harijans to stand outside the walls and offer money, paddy and cocks and in return be given a small measure of *prasadam* even in temples belonging to backward castes such as those of Tiyyas who were not allowed entry in the temples of the higher castes and who were fighting for such entry. In Ezhom near Peyyanur, the Swamiji successfully organised a boycott of the temple festival. Harijans remained at home without taking their usual offerings. Angered by this, the caste Hindus let loose a ferocious attack on the poor Harijan houses and beat up both men and women. Sri Keraliyan described this incident in the press as "the murderous human hunt." Despite the publicity, the police refused to register a case against caste Hindus. Swamiji represented the matter to Mr. Thorne, the Collector. He visited Ezhom on horseback and only then was a criminal assault case made against the attackers.4 Following the incident at Ezhom some Congressmen along with K.P.R. Gopalan and Swamiji visited the place. A relative of KPR, Sri Parangadan Nambiar, who was a landlord of the place, invited the Congressmen to tea. On their arrival Nambiar found that there was a Harijan named Sumukhan with them. Though the Harijan was made to leave immediately, Nambiar imposed on KPR and Swamiji a fine of hundred rupees for polluting the house. In the end KPR was made to apologise and give a promissory note for the amount. Swami Anand Thirth never believed that temple entry was the cure of all Harijan problems. But he was emphatic that unless untouchability was attacked in its most sacred abodes, the temples, the social bondage of Harijans would continue. "There is no question," he writes that temple entry alone will be the final solution to the problem. "That alone will mean the burial of the Satan of untouchability in Hindu society."5 With this view Swami Anand Thirth organised many attempts at temple entry in North Malabar in the 'thirties and 'forties. But in many places like Aneekarakavu, Kunhiman-galam, Pattuvam, Parssini he had to face attacks by caste Hindus and Ezhavas. The result was a general awakening among the Harijans in regard to the nature of their oppression.6 For Swami Anand Thirth, their freedom was integral to the struggle for national freedom, though he received very little support from the local Congress leaders. He wrote: "Our leaders appear to be more absorbed in politics, and the public enthusiasm for the Harijan cause has dwindled. But I believe that all our attempts for freedom will fail till we have made amendments for our sin of untouchability. Our neglect and indifference towards the lower communities has been so great that destiny works out the nemesis in all fields of life, political as well as social."7 The Malabar Temple Entry bill was passed by the Congress Government in 1938. After Independence, the Madras Temple Entry (Authorisation) Act (MTEA) was passed, enabling the entry of Harijans to all temples used by Hindus in general. Private temples did not come under the purview of these Acts. It was a serious limitation, as several denominational and sectional temples claimed private status and closed their doors to Harijans. Harijans were thus denied entry in a Thiyya temple at Ramavillam near Payyanur. To protest against this, Swami Anand Thirth undertook a three-day fast during the festival in 1948 in which a number of youth from Payyanur joined him. The news received due publicity in the daily papers including the *Harijan*. The Government thereafter amended the Act in 1950 thereby bringing sectional or denominational temples also under the scope of the Act.8 ### The Mulki Temple Case {#mulki-temple} All the same, many temples continued to claim private status and refused entry to Harijans. Out of these the Venkataramana Temple, Mulki, in South Kanara, deserves special mention as the case has set a precedent, and was fought from the lowest to the highest court in the country over a period of ten years. The Harijans tried to enter this temple on 8th October 1947 but found the temple closed. The trustees held that the temple belonged exclusively to the Gowda Saraswat Brahmin residents of the three villages of Manampally, Karad and Bappnad and as the temple was not used as of right by the Hindu public in general it could not be deemed to be a public temple as per the Act. It was a case in which Swamiji took special interest as it belonged to his community and he made sure that the Government fought the case against the trustees. The Subordinate Judge of South Kanara dismissed the case on 31st March 1951, finding that the temple, though founded by the Chieftain of the Seventh dynasty for the benefit of certain families whom he had settled at Mulki, was a temple as defined in the Temple Entry Authorisation Act and, as such, was a place of public worship dedicated to the Hindu community in general. The trustees of the temple filed a suit against the findings of the Sub-judge, South Kanara, in the High Court of Madras. On April 11th 1936,A the High Court Bench consisting of Justice P. Govinda Menon and Justice P.N. Ramaswamy held that the above temple, claimed to be a denominational temple belonging to the Gowda Saraswat Brahmin community, and was a temple to which the provisions of the MTEA Act 1949 would apply. Their Worships observed that it was possible to have a private trust as distinguished from a public place of worship, limited to the members of a particular family or group. The right to manage its own affairs given to a religious denomination under article 26 of the Constitution, they said, was in relation to the business of managing the property etc., and could have no reference to depriving certain classes or sections of Hindus of their fundamental right conferred unequivocally by Article 25 (1) of the Constitution. The prohibition of untouchables from entering into a denominational temple is not a right of that denomination to manage its own affairs in matters of religion. Further the judges observed, "The practice of untouchability cannot be protected under the guise of freedom to manage affairs in matters of religion."9 In the context of this verdict the Harijans wanted to enter the temple in 1956. But the Gowda Saraswat Brahmins brought a stay order from the Supreme Court in Delhi. The Supreme Court on 8th November 1957 confirmed the High Court decision conditional upon certain restrictive clauses. The temple entry has to be granted in full even in denominational temples but the GS Brahmins are free to refuse entry to non-GS Brahmins when they observe ceremonies which are specific to their community.10 ### Struggling Alone {#struggling} Around 1957, Swami Anand Thirth started an almost single-handed fight against untouchability in temples, since Congressmen lost all interest in the temple entry programme as the political compulsions of the pre-Independence period did not exist. Though appropriate laws were passed, many denominational temples11 of the Gowda Saraswat Brahmins, Nambudiris, Vanians and Kudumbis, especially in Travancore-Cochin areas, continued to refuse entry to Harijans. Even in temples where entry was permitted, including some of the Devaswom Board temples, Harijans were not allowed into the Nalambalam-the inner sanctum-within which exists the shrine of the chief deity. We see at this time the Swamiji travelling from town to town, village to village, organising meetings, meeting the concerned authorities of the temple, trying to persuade them, taking Harijans to bathe in temple tanks and to attempt entry into temples. He was particularly determined to get the temples of the Gowda Saraswat Brahmins, his own community, opened to the Harijans. Sri Varaha temple, Cherai, of the Gowda Saraswat Brahmins refused admission to Ezhavas and Harijans even to its outer courtyard. A sign board stating "No admission to untouchable communities," had been put up at the entrance of the temple. When all peaceful methods of persuasion failed, Swami Anand Thirth organised a group of Harijans and Ezhavas and attempted entry on 1st January 1958. As they were stopped at the outer gate of the temple, a complaint was given to the Maunbam Police Station. The Sub-Inspector refused to register the case and the temple gate remained closed for 50 days. Only when Swami Anand Thirth threatened to fast and represented the matter to the government, the police registered the case and a suit was filed against the temple authorities.12 On receiving a favourable judgement from the Sub-magistrate, Parur, another entry was organised on 2nd October 1958, Gandhi Jayanti day, by Swami Anand Thirth and his supporters. This time they were stopped at the gate of the Nalambalam, the inner sanctum. Meanwhile the temple authorities got a stay order preventing non-Gowda Saraswat Brahmins' entry into Nalambalam. This suit was taken to the High Court in Kerala, which gave a retrograde verdict thereby greatly blunting the Harijans temple entry movement, spearheaded by Swami Anand Thirth. The High Court in its judgement13 declared that "the non-admission of Harijans and Ezhavas into the Nalambalam where the Gowda Saraswat Brahmins alone are admitted, does not constitute an offence under section 3 of the Untouchability (Offences) Act 1955 as the persons obstructed do not belong to the same section as the persons admitted therein. Several lower courts quoted this judgement and acquitted the accused in cases brought up by Swami Anand Thirth and others."14 Swami Anand Thirth was deeply agitated over this issue. The Cherai temple was one case he fought with all his resoluteness. He wrote of it to Shivam: "I did not go home even on the death of my mother as I had taken a resolve that the temple entry problem must be settled." With great anguish he represented the matter to a number of ministers, parliamentarians, and public men who were known for their Harijan sympathy, pointing out to them the conflicting character of the Cherai case judgement with that of the Mulki case given by the Supreme Court. It was not a personal defeat that bothered him. The nation was sliding back from its sacred duty. "Temple entry for Harijans," he wrote, "was a cause so dear to Mahatmaji, the father of the nation. The great soul can never be at peace as long as untouchability is observed in any place of worship in our country. It is now twelve years since Mahatmaji departed. It is therefore our sacred duty to see that all temples are thrown open to Harijans. Mahatmaji's words: 'Hinduism would die if untouchability lives' should stir every Hindu to do away with the curse of untouchability in our religion and society." Swami Anand Thirth was not a man to take failure lying down. Besides, the cause was too sacred for him as well as for the nation to stop at this temporary setback. Swami Anand Thirth was a member of the State Harijan Welfare Committee. At his initiative, the committee authorised a sub-committee to study the problem of untouchability and report on the progress of its eradication. The sub-committee of which Swami Anand Thirth was a member passed the following resolution at its meeting held on 19th March 1960B at the office of the Director of Harijan Welfare, Trivandrum. > All the members felt the necessity for a new legislation, particularly in the light of the judgement of the Kerala High Court in "State of Kerala vs Venkeiteswara Prabu and others (1960 KLT 599)." The Untouchability (Offences) Act 1955 has in effect only restricted applicability as it does not authorise the throwing open to all sections or classes of Hindus, such temples as are open to a particular section of the Hindus. There is therefore the necessity for a new legislation which should provide that if a place of public worship is opened to Hindus generally or any section or sub-section of class thereof, it shall be open to all classes, sections and sub-sections of Hindus and that no Hindu of whatever section or class shall be prevented or discouraged from entering and worshipping such places of worship.15 At the suggestion of Swami Anand Thirth, the resolution further stated that in the new legislation, among other things, words like "Shrines, Mutts, Devasthanams, Namaskaramandapam, Nalambalam" excluding "Sri Kovil" should be included in the definition of the places of public worship. The explicit mention of "Namaskaramandapam" and "Nalambalam," was made because in several temples the entry of the Scheduled Castes into these places continued to be forbidden. Swami Anand Thirth's proposal for enhanced punishment for a second offence under this Act was also accepted by the Committee.16 This proposal was finally accepted and became a law in 1965 known as the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Entry Authorisation) Act of 1965. Despite all these legislations and court cases, untouchability persisted in temples in subtle forms. Swami Anand Thirth took upon himself the invidious and thankless task of exposing them to the public and fighting them in the courts of law, often at great risk to his life, throughout the State of Kerala from Kasargod in the North to Kuzhithurai in the South. ### Persisting Forms of Discrimination {#persisting-forms} The following discriminating practices persisted: 1. Even when the temples were opened for all, the Scheduled Caste and Backward Classes were refused entry into Nalambalam.17 The Backward Classes (Ezhavas and Tiyyas) themselves deny Scheduled Castes entry to their traditional temples known as Arapura, Madam and Kavu.18 Similar practices were found among Scheduled Castes against other Scheduled Castes. 2. The temple priest throws the *prasadam* on the steps and refuses to give it in the hands of Harijans and Tiyyas - a practice described by Swami Anand Thirth as repugnant to our sentiments and sense of decency. 3. Paid receipts and vessels brought by the Harijans and Tiyyas to receive *thirtham* or *prasadam* were not received directly from their hands nor returned to them directly. They were asked to be kept on the steps of the Nalambalam and were picked up from there by the priest and put back in the same place. 4. *Namaskaramandapam* — a raised platform in front of the shrine of the deity — was open only to the Brahmins, and others were refused entry. 5. In temples, cooked food were not accepted from Scheduled Castes while such food offerings were accepted from other castes. Scheduled Castes were made to bring unhusked paddy while others could offer cooked rice. 6. Offerings made by Scheduled Castes like coconuts and bananas were not offered to the deity.19 7. Temples were closed for the purpose of purification after Harijan entry as advised by the Tantri.20 8. Exclusive feeding of caste Hindus in temples continued.21 If Harijans were allowed to take part, they were made to clean the place and wash it with cowdung while the general practice is that temple servants do it once the caste Hindus are fed.22 9. Harijans were excluded from religious processions carrying offerings to the deity. I give below some examples which illustrate the existing forms of untouchability and Swamiji's fight against them: #### 1. Siva Temple, Kuzhithura {#kuzhithura} The manner in which the caste Hindus try to prevent the Scheduled Castes from establishing equal religious rights often takes ridiculous forms. There is a raised platform called *Namaskaramandapam* in front of the *sanctum* facing the deity. Brahmins have the exclusive right to worship from there. Swami Anand Thirth visited the Siva temple in Kuzhithura on 4th March 1962. He got on to the *Namaskaramandapam* as he saw Brahmin men, women and children worshipping there. As he wore no sacred thread, the watchman pulled him down and assaulted him. Swami Anand Thirth represented the matter to the Devaswom secretary. He upheld the watchman's action. According to the Devaswom board, the exclusive right of Brahmins to enter the *Namaskaramandapam* is a long established custom. The Board is bound to maintain it as it had entered into an agreement with the Maharaja of Travancore. A case was filed in the additional First Class Magistrate's court at Kuzhithura. The Devaswom board defended its employees. When the court convicted the employees, the Hindu religious and Charitable Endowment Department instructed the board to put an end to all forms of discrimination. The Devaswom board in response closed the *Namaskaramandapam* for all classes of people instead of letting Harijans enter there. Notices are now seen in many other temples restricting entry to *Namaskaramandapam* to priests and temple officials. #### 2. Durga Parameswari Temple in Agalpadi {#agalpadi} Swamiji's ceaseless campaign against the practice of untouchability in caste Hindu temples made him a hated man among caste-conscious Hindus. Numerous times he fell a victim to their revenge and anger. One incident Swamiji narrates in the following words: > Taking some Harijans with me, I went to the Durga Parameswari temple in Agalpadi. It was 30th January 1971, Gandhi's death anniversary. I was known to the temple employees. They allowed us to go inside the temple. A week later I happened to go there again during the festival. This time I was alone. A huge crowd of caste Hindus were milling around the temple. As I was returning from the temple some Brahmin youths attacked me. I was severely beaten up.23 They had a grudge against me because I had taken two Harijans to this temple a few days ago.24 When I fell on the ground unconscious, they returned to the temple to fetch petrol. They wanted to set fire to me and destroy all the evidence against them. As they were approaching me with petrol, I lay there in great despair trembling for my life. Fortunately a passing car reached the spot first. They picked me up and drove me to the police station. Later on I came to know that many of those youth were college students. Police instead arrested some innocent people. When it came to the court, it got compounded.25 This incident made him sad and bitter. He wrote: > I did not receive a single blow from the police during the Salt Satyagraha or Freedom Movement because they had a great regard for my social work. During the political struggle, I was trying to court martyrdom. Now, though I do not court assault or beating, death itself faces me when I fight untouchability in temples. The caste Hindu devils and demons are still at large and they are hunting the temples, particularly in Kasargod area.26 #### 3. Nadacherrikavu {#nadacherrikavu} Srimathi Lakshmi, teacher, in the Lower Primary School, Pappinassari, was one of the voluntary organisers of the Thalappi procession to Nadacherrikavu on 2nd March 1974. Among the girls chosen by her there were two, Pulaya girls, Ajitha and Vanaja both reading in V Class. Srimathi Lakshmi asked the girls to get new, white dresses made for the occasion, and also to bring 20 paise each for the flowers to be bought for their hair. But two days before the Thalapoli procession, on 28th February 1974 evening, when the girls had already arranged for their white dresses, Srimathi Lakshmi called the Pulaya girls aside and told them that Pulaya pupils could not be taken in the procession to the Kavu and so they had been dropped, and she returned the money taken from them for the flowers. The Pulaya girls felt insulted. But their parents, being ignorant and poor, kept quiet. On investigation by Swami Anand Thirth it became known that some members of the festival committee objected to the Pulaya girls being taken to the Kavu and the teacher was forced to drop them.27 #### 4. Satyagraha in Jagannath Temple {#satyagraha} The Jagannath temple in Tellicherry was founded by Sri Narayana Guru. In contrast to the caste Hindu temples where untouchability was observed, he wanted the temples founded by him to be "exemplary places where all men assembled in the spirit of brotherhood regardless of differences in caste and religious hatred."28 In tune with the spirit of Sri Narayana Guru, the annual festival celebration in 1977 was addressed by a very distinguished lady - a Muslim Professor by name Naffeesa Ummal, whose talk had impressed the youth of the temple, by her erudition and delivery.29 The meeting was also attended by the Bishop of Tellicherry. But certain interested persons in an association called Gnanodaya Yogam Temple Protection Committee, under the influence of the RSS, did not share the spirit of the celebration. In the following year, before the festival, the Temple Protection Committee put up a sign board at the gate of the temple which read "Entrance to Hindus Only." They justified their action with the claim that there was a sign board some years ago with the inscription "No Entry to Mohammedans." Swami Anand Thirth saw in this a great affront and challenge to his beloved Guru's teaching. He rightly declared that the Sri Narayana Guru temples are "quite distinct from Hindu temples where entry is restricted." He made it known that he would undertake a fast to protest against this insult to his Guru. In his letter to Sri Brahmananda Swamy, president of the Sri Narayana Dharma Sangham Trust, Swami Anand Thirth pointed out that "people who oppose the teaching of Gurudevar are trying to enforce even in temples of Gurudevar Hindu caste practices. They want to perpetuate caste and untouchability in Hindu religion. These reactionary forces appear in organisations such as RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh)."30 Sri Brahmananda Swamy, who had jurisdiction over priestly functions (*tantravasakam*) in the temple according to the Trust deed, had come to Tellicherry when the move to put up the sign board was being discussed. In a public meeting in the temple he declared that "it was open to all who would come to pray and worship."31 A youth organisation called Sri Narayana Yuva Sakti, in a beautifully written leaflet, strongly condemned the action of the Gnanodaya Yogam. It reminded the temple authorities of the Guru's teachings that "religion is not something to be protected by anyone"; that "the purpose of a religious organisation should never be to create a particular community made up of a section of the people"; that "he never wanted his temples to be the citadels of caste"; that his "temples were symbols of a social revolution and not places where idle praises of deities are sung."32 The press had given publicity to Swami Anand Thirth's fast in protest against the sign board.33 *Pradeepam*, a local paper, criticised the temple committee in its editorial. It said that the Committee would do well to bury Narayana Guru's statue in the temple in front of the sign board. As the temple committee did not yield to all these appeals, Swami Anand Thirth fasted from 23rd to 26th February 1978 in front of the temple, praying for a change of heart on the part of the temple committee. Swami Anand Thirth won this battle for his Guru's vision, and the sign board 'Entry to Hindus only' appeared for the last time in 1978. #### 5. Exclusive Feeding of Brahmins in Guruvayur Temple {#exclusive-feeding} On 1 November 1982, Swami Anand Thirth went to take part in the Golden Jubilee Celebration of the historic Guruvayur Satyagraha organised by the Kerala Harijan Sevak Sangh. On the following day, after the worship in the temple, Swamiji went to the dining hall. He was offered a seat by some of the people there, while others told him that only Brahmins were fed there. The *Hoyma*, who was distributing plantain leaves, asked him if he was a Brahmin. He also asked him to remove his shawl. As Swamiji refused to oblige, he did not give him any leaf and had the matter reported to the temple manager. After a short while, the security officer, Sri Balakrishna Pisharadi, appeared on the scene and ordered Swamiji to remove the shawl. Swamiji removed and put it on his shoulder. As he found that Swamiji had no thread, he told him that only Brahmins were allowed to sit there. He ordered him to follow him to the office of the temple manager. What followed is better described in Swamiji's own words: > When I had come out of the dining hall, they showered me with severe blows on my head and shoulders. Accusing me of breaking the gold chain on his neck, he started beating me. He hit me on my chest with his fists. I suffered severe pain. I could not talk. In the office of the manager I was ordered to sit down on the ground. When I continued to stand, he hit me again, pushing me to the wall. Only then he asked me who I was. I showed him my visiting card. "I know you; aren't you the trouble maker who organised anti-untouchability work in Kasargod? Do you remember me; I was the Sub-Inspector of the Special Mobile Squad in Kasargod."34 Swamiji was kept there some more time under the pretext that there was a complaint against him from a devotee that Swamiji took Rs. 10 from him promising to heal him of some illness. On the following day Swamiji got admitted in the Government Hospital, Chavakad. When the news spread, there were unanimous condemnations from all sides. Newspapers in the State followed it up with detailed reports by special correspondents.35 For once it appeared that people finally accorded him the recognition long overdue. Scheduled Caste organisations took up the challenge. Under the leadership of Kellara Sukumaran, the Kerala Harijan Federation vowed that they would enter the dining hall of the temple, if necessary by force. Brahmins are fed in Guruvayur as part of the ritual worship. According to a report in a daily paper, there are 3875 endowments to feed the Brahmins, amounting to a staggering sum of Rs. 10 lakhs.36 The Harijan Federation organised a *padayatra* from Sri Padmanabha Temple in Trivandrum to march throughout the length of the State, and finally enter the dining hall. Swami Anand Thirth inaugurated the *padayatra* with his blessings in Trivandrum. Realising the political danger of alienating the Scheduled Castes, Hindu associations such as Vishala Hindu Sammelan, the RSS, Sarvodaya, and others proclaimed their support to the padayatra. On its reaching Guruvayur, the *Jatha* was received by these organisations and were fed in a specially erected hall at the temple. The Guruvayur Devaswom Board promised to consider the question of allowing non-Brahmins into the dining hall. It is now known that they have opened the dining hall to all Hindus, irrespective of their caste. But it is not yet clear whether they have done away with *Namaskara sadya*, the exclusive Brahmin feeding which according to custom has to be done before offerings are made to the deity. Certainly Swami Anand Thirth brought about a significant socio-religious change which further strengthens the struggle of the Scheduled Castes for social equality. ## Notes {#notes}
  1. Cf. Ch. I, pp. 7-8 above (A short note on Temple Entry Movement in Kerala) by SAT, 1965, p. 2. ↩
  2. Mannath Padmanabhan, The Revolutionary Sri Narayana Guru Anthology, Kottayam, Sahitya Pravartaka Cooperative Society, 1945, pp. 336-337. Trans. by the author. ↩
  3. Notice published by Swami Anand Thirth, Payyannur; K. Kunnunni, Cannanore; Araban Govindan, Kannapuram; T. Sekharan, Puttuvam; P. Gopalan, Kunhimangalam; K. Balakrishnan Nair, Cherukunnj; T.C. Narayan Nambiar, Kannadiparamb; M.P. Kunhiraman Nambiar, Azhikode, in 1934. ↩
  4. SAT, Memoir, p. 23. ↩
  5. SAT, "Disabilities of the Harijans," a short paper, 1937. ↩
  6. SAT, Memoir, p. 24. ↩
  7. SAT, to someone he addressed as "Dear Sir," 5 October 1940. ↩
  8. SAT to the Chairman, the Parliament Committee on Untouchability, "Economic and Educational Development of Scheduled Castes," 19 December 1965. ↩
  9. Sri Venkataramana Devaru and others vs. State of Madras in Appeal Nos. 145 and 146 of 1952 dated 11 April 1956 in the High Court Madras State, against decree of Senior Judge of South Kanara district on March 31, 1951, AIR February 1954, Madras 85-V45-C22. ↩
  10. Sri Venkataramana Devaru and other vs. the State of Mysore in Civil Appeal No. 403 of 1956 with petition for special leave to appeal No. 237 of 1957, November 1957, in the Supreme Court. AIR March and April 1958 Supreme Court 225 - V45 - C22. ↩
  11. SAT, Temple Entry problem in Kerala No. 1. The Kudumbi temple in some places, the Mukkot, Mankayil and Ramaswamy temples in Thripunithura are not open to the Harijans and Avarnas' - SAT to Director of Harijan Welfare, 24 May 1961. ↩
  12. "Temple Entry problem in Kerala (Gowda Saraswat Brahmin temples)" by SAT, an undated short article but written around 1960. ↩
  13. Criminal Appeal No. 314/59. ↩
  14. C.C. No. 1313/59 II Class, Magistrate Parur, Criminal Appeal No. 951/1959 District Magistrate Ernakulam. ↩
  15. Minutes of the Sub-Committee of the State Anti-Untouchability Committee held on 19th March 1961. ↩
  16. Ibid., Cherrai, 2 October 1958.
    Quilon, 21 June 1959.
    Vair, 8 April 1960.
    Alwaye, 25 July 1979. ↩
  17. Mandapam, 14 October 1976. ↩
  18. Dathatreya temple case 18 March 1976. Vishnu temple, Manathila, 4 February 1977. ↩
  19. Alakoda temple case: SAT's letter to Station House officer, Bekkal, 10 November 1974. ↩
  20. SAT to Sub-Inspector, Hosadurga, 8 August 1974. ↩
  21. SAT to S.I. Kasargod, 30 September 1975. ↩
  22. 1974 Cheruvattur Virabhadra temple, Durga Parameswari temple. ↩
  23. Memoirs, p. 39. ↩
  24. SAT's letter to G. Ramachandran, 30 September 1972. ↩
  25. Memoirs, p. 39. ↩
  26. Ibid. ↩
  27. 17 January 1975, SAT to Sub-Inspector Baliapatnam. ↩
  28. Sri Narayana Guru wrote these words on the walls of Sruvipuram Temple, the first he founded. ↩
  29. Sri Narayana Yuva Sakti, Tellicherry leaflet, 22 February 1978. ↩
  30. SAT to Brahmananda Swamy, 10 March 1978. ↩
  31. Sri Brahmananda Swamy's letter to Dr. P.K. Narayana, 24 February 1978, to SAT 12 March 1978. ↩
  32. Sri Narayana Yuva Sakti, Tellicherry, leaflet 22 February 1978. ↩
  33. Statement by Swami Anand Thirth on Jagannath temple incident. ↩
  34. Statement by Swami Anand Thirth on Guruvayur incident. ↩
  35. Mathrubhumi, 8 January 1982, E.K. Nayanar, Desabhimani 13 November 1882 [C], Veskshanam, 15 November 1982. ↩
  36. Mathrubhumi, 14 February 1982. ↩

TSAP Editorial Notes

  1. The date 11 April 1936 is reproduced from the original publication. The case record identifies the Madras High Court judgment in Appeals Nos. 145 and 146 of 1952 as having been delivered on 11 April 1956. The subsequent Supreme Court judgment also records the High Court judgment as dated 11 April 1956. ↩
  2. The main text gives the date of the meeting as 19 March 1960, while note 15 in the original publication gives 19 March 1961. Both dates are reproduced as published. ↩
  3. The year 1882 is reproduced from the original publication and is also found in the 1987 edition. In context, this appears to be a typographical error for 1982. ↩
{% include navbox-amaa.html %}