Damodar Rout and the Puri Shankaracharya

The controversy surrounding the issue of debarring devotees to climb the chariots and subsequent events leading to Puri Shankaracharya’s non-participation in the car festival, refuses to die down.

States co-operation minister and senior leader Damodar Rout today joined the issue and blamed the Jagannath temple administration “of not being fair in its treatment to the seer”.

Talking to a private news channel, Rout said the temple administration should have had no role in stipulating the number of followers accompanying either the Shankaracharya or Puri king to the chariots.

“The duty of the administration is to ensure smooth conduct of the festival without interfering in any of the rituals performed during the festival,” said Rout.

Shankaracharya had departed from the practice of offering prayers at the chariots after the temple administration had written to him to come to the chariots alone according to the high court’s direction.

The seer apparently wanted his followers to accompany him while offering prayers to the deities on the chariots. Terming the incident as an “unfortunate one”, Rout, however, said that he would not say that the act of the temple administration “was wrong”.

In order to ensure a peaceful car festival, he was of the view that the temple administration should have rushed to him and sorted out the differences. “Writing of letters does not solve the problems,” he added.

Aware of the fact that his statement could invite criticism, Rout said: “Being the guru of 120 crore Hindus, the seer should have come and offered his prayer to the Lord without breaking the age-old tradition. By taking part in the rath yatra, he should have shown magnanimity.”

Daitapati Niyog (the association of servitors) has also expressed its concern over Shankaracharya’s skipping the rath yatra. Niyog president Ramkrushna Das Mohapatra said: “We are against breaking of any tradition. Had he come, we would have certainly welcomed him.”

However, the law minister Arun Sahu and the temple administration refused to make any comments on this issue.