About western people in Hindu Temples

[Eastern Mind]

The Chidambaram Temple in Tamil Nadu is Iyengar (VisiStadvaita) and they too are very orthodox; I'm not sure if they bar non-Hindus from entering however.

Vannakkam TTA: Chidambaram is controlled by the Deekshidars (or maybe the government now, s the debate rages on) , and I am not sure if they are a subsect of Iyengars. I also do not know of any barring. My entrance was easy as I was with a friend who knows many deekshidars and I am Hindu. Certainly I saw no signs anywhere. I did hear another mystical take on the reason for no photography the other day, and that is that the flash hurts the eyes of the murthy, whom many believe is looking out at us, just as we a re looking in.

Aum Namasivaya

[naga]

Hallo all Stephen knapp has done considerable research on this worth a read. http://www.stephen-knapp.com/opening...o_everyone.htm
My believe is as long as the person is respectful and appropriately dressed....the Vedas are for anyone.

[rcscwc]

What can we do besides sitting outside the temple and sulk?

I think we are very bad people for not being born in India, eh!

You are not bad being born outside India. It is the times that are bad. So many "aliens" come to temples, some of them just are not aware that they too should be respectful. In fact many such people come with an agenda of being disrespectful.

[Believer]

Hare Krishna, when I was in Puri, I tried to enter Jagannatha Temple with other western devotees, but guards stopped us, though we were in saris. So I think for western people Jagannatha Temple is closed in any case :-(

You appear to be an ISKCON devotee, and you could have found that out through the grapevine, even before you got there. Even Praphupad was not allowed to take his devotees there, and from then on he did not have many kind words about the management. Indira Gandhi, the prime minister on India was not allowed to enter the temple after she married a parsi. I am not going to judge them, but they certainly have rules which are applied uniformly. In the US, Mormon temples (churches) are off-limits to non-Mormons. While visiting Salt Lake City, I was content to see their geneology library and the concert hall.

I just wish that the Indian temple websites would state their policies clearly and boldly, so that no one would travel long distances only to see the welcome mat getting rolled up as they approach the front entrance.

[ScottMalaysia]

You appear to be an ISKCON devotee, and you could have found that out through the grapevine, even before you got there. Even Praphupad was not allowed to take his devotees there, and from then on he did not have many kind words about the management. Indira Gandhi, the prime minister on India was not allowed to enter the temple after she married a parsi. I am not going to judge them, but they certainly have rules which are applied uniformly.

So they wouldn't let a Westerner in with a conversion certificate and a passport with a Hindu name? That is pathetic. And marrying a Parsi doesn't make you not a Hindu.

It's ironic that they won't let Western Hindus in but they would let an Indian Muslim or Christian in, since they would look just like the Indian Hindus (unless they're wearing a cross or a kufi).

The way I see it, the only way that a Westerner could get in would be to have cosmetic surgery to darken his skin colour to look Indian (kind of the opposite of what Michael Jackson did).

In the US, Mormon temples (churches) are off-limits to non-Mormons. While visiting Salt Lake City, I was content to see their geneology library and the concert hall.

Mormon temples and churches are not the same thing. Churches are where congregations meet on Sundays to sing hymns and listen to a sermon. Anyone is welcome to attend a Mormon church service (I myself have been to one). Temples, on the other hand, are restricted to Mormons of good conduct who have a letter of recommendation from their bishop. Temple rites are secretive and based on Freemasonic rites (Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism, was a Freemason). Mormons have to wear special underwear to visit a temple. A Temple Marriage is necessary in Mormonism if the husband wants to become a God and rule his own world with his "spirit wife" whose job it is to produce "spirit babies" who go down and inhabit bodies in this world (this is what Mormonism teaches will happen to those who are exceptionally good in this life).

I just wish that the Indian temple websites would state their policies clearly and boldly, so that no one would travel long distances only to see the welcome mat getting rolled up as they approach the front entrance.

For a start, not all temples have websites. Secondly, many Indians have never heard of Westerners (or indeed any other races) converting to Hinduism and keeping non-Indians out of a temple may be to stop the temple, a holy site, from becoming a tourist attraction. Possibly the thought that a Westerner might follow the Hindu religion and wish to pray at a holy site has never occurred to them, so they wouldn't list it on a website.

[Believer]

The way I see it, the only way that a Westerner could get in would be to have cosmetic surgery to darken his skin colour to look Indian (kind of the opposite of what Michael Jackson did).

And the rest of your life, you would be singing, "Am I black or white?" - just like the legend.

Secondly, many Indians have never heard of Westerners (or indeed any other races) converting to Hinduism and keeping non-Indians out of a temple may be to stop the temple, a holy site, from becoming a tourist attraction. Possibly the thought that a Westerner might follow the Hindu religion and wish to pray at a holy site has never occurred to them, so they wouldn't list it on a website.

This small scale conversion of people of European extraction is a recent phenomenon, and yes, they haven't caught up with this fact yet.

As an aside, PM Tony Blair's sis-in-law just declared her conversion to Islam - Yikes!
-

[naga]

Over the last 20 years as a westerner I have been to many temples and participated in countless pujas. In India I usually wear the dhoti, have vibhuti on my forehead, I have not had a name change as feel its not yet neccesary.
If a temple devotee doesn't allow me in, in its their karma, I simply go to another. Shiva, Krishna, Jesus is everywhere remember. In villages I found its the opposite they are welcoming and sometimes invite me to the front altar. I had one devotee at a temple in Chennai who asked me to leave, but the priest was welcoming and had already offered me the vibuthi, milk, kumkum etc.
So if anyone is refused and challenged I would let them know that the Vedas are for everyone, they usually don't argue with that. The Vedic path has to spread without any restrictions.
I can see why they refuse some westerners as often they are culturely insensitive, and wouldn't understand the deeper meaning of the puja ceremony.

[Eastern Mind]

This small scale conversion of people of European extraction is a recent phenomenon, and yes, they haven't caught up with this fact yet.

-

Vannakkam: Just yesterday my wife and I were discussing the number of whites we came across on pilgrimage in India. On my two week pilgrimage about two years back, within the temples I saw a few, but not many:

Palani: One guy in a temple stall that appeared to be working and living there.
Madurai: two tourists taking pictures in the thousand pillared hall
Tiruchendur: None, nada, no English even except for one Indian Tamil chap who approached me for some conversation.
Rameswaram: One European Vaishnava 'convert' who I saw in the hotel, and later doing the wells. Two very western camera toters back at the hotel.
Trich: one camera toter at the Uchi Pillaiyar shrine
Tanjore: Two french tourists getting the guided architectural tour.
Chidambaram: Two quite western women in the hotel in the elevator.
Tiruvanamalai: A couple getting ayurveda at the hotel.
Bangalore: Nada, Zilch, except at the airport.

So it is still rare I believe. We were discussing it about Haridwar, where we will be next January. She thought there would be more, but my feeling was there would still be very few, probably none wishing to do what we will be doing, but probably more in and about doing the yoga ashram thing, but none doing "Let's find a Shiva temple and go for a dip." thing we will be doing.

In TN we can play the game of "What do you see more of, Europeans, or men without mustaches again?" Hard to spot.

Aum Namasivaya

[Maya3]

It's possible that India have had some issues with tourists and Missionaries that have been disrespectful while visiting a temple, at least I assume that may be a reason that they haven't let westerners into a temple?
There really has to be another way to make sure that people follow the rules of the temple, how about handing out a flyer to people before people enter?

Frankly I would be insulted if someone asked me to show proof of conversion before I entered a temple.
I think that it's time for everyone to understand that Hindu's come from everywhere, we live in a global world and people don't live in neat little boxes anymore.

God does not require anyone to convert to anything, Hindu's especially know this.

Maya

[sm78]

Can you please back up your statement above? It seems like you have disdain for Adi Sankara. Why?

And who said "Smartas control the temples"? The Chidambaram Temple in Tamil Nadu is Iyengar (VisiStadvaita) and they too are very orthodox; I'm not sure if they bar non-Hindus from entering however.

Of all the temples, the Guruvayoor Temple in Kerala is definitely Smarta and is very orthodox; something very good IMO ().

Smartas, rather than Vaishnavites and Shaivites, have actually been far more inclusive philosophically speaking. I am aware that many south Indian Smartas are very orthodox and are quite particular about cleanliness and so they don't want mlecchas to be allowed inside temples.

I'm curious as to why you say, "Smartas control temples". It would be certainly nice if they did so that all temples can be orthodox and make sure only the most devoted are allowed inside! Yet, this is certainly not the case.

I speak from my experience of living in India all my life and having been in many temples all accross India. The term smarta is not much strict these days, but roughly what I mean is the preists have alliance with one of the 4 maths and shankara. True smartas who follow some obscure smriti to the word are rare and only found in pockets of kerala perhaves, ironically sarrounded by mlecchas with the worst behaviours ruling that land. In rest of south india - its more "shanakara is god" type of notion what makes someone a smarta, in the rest of india its even more vague ... but alliance to shankara philosophy and the mathas is present at some level.

Yes in south india other temple traditions are also prominent, namely the vaishnava (both the ramanuja and madhva sects, later particularly strong it seems karnataka) and some saiva (siddhantika) temples. And it is true that some of these sects are more orthodox and rigid about some smartic rules than those who call themselves smarta.

Rest its smarta in the sense that alliance is with one of the 4 mathas, directly or indirectly - and historically goes back to sankara vijayams.

Neo-advatins are all inclusive no dobt, a bit over inclusive infact, they will include any body as long as it adds to their satsangs.

I do not have contempt for adi shankaracharya, I simply find the philosophy flawed and deductions from there-in (like neo-advaita and universalism) not just flawed but dangerous. On contrary, I greatly admire his work of uniting diverse sects under one sanatana dharma yet leaving their practices intact. But his dig-viajayams over hyped, and protrayal of his hand in everything hindu following his arrival is a bit zealous on the part of his followers. All this has more to do with his followers than shankara himself.

Regarding the more deeper point on the "good thing" about "orthodoxy", I simply have a different view point about it (just like validity of sankara philosophy, but this point is more serious since it directly effects how people choose to live and behave with others) - but l don't believe either of us would agree to any point of the other. Plus I don't enjoy arguments via typing - so like in the other thread I just put my point and don't see the need to argue about it much here.