Agamic Temples and Supreme Court’s Direction

News: On May 14, 2025, the Supreme Court asked a committee formed by the Madras High Court to identify Agamic temples in Tamil Nadu within three months. It ordered that no priest appointments be made in these temples until the process is complete. The next hearing is in September 2025. Agamic Temples and Supreme Court’s Direction

About Agamas and Agamic Temples

• Agamic temples follow the Agamas, ancient Hindu scriptures in Tamil and Sanskrit.
• These texts prescribe temple design, rituals, deity worship, and priest conduct.
• They are the spiritual and operational base for many temples in South India.

Features of the Agamas

• Agamas are post-Vedic scriptures passed down over generations.
• They cover topics like yoga, mantras, temple architecture, and daily worship.
• Three key categories: 28 Shaiva Agamas, 64 Shakta Tantras, 108 Vaishnava Agamas
• Temples must have: ,Sthala (location), Tirtha (water source), Murti (deity image)
• They include detailed rules for sculpture, materials, dimensions, lighting, and ventilation.
• These texts gained prominence during the Pallava and Chola dynasties and remain influential today.

Supreme Court’s Directions

• • No archakar appointments in Agamic temples until identification is complete.
  • The committee is headed by Justice M. Chockalingam; M.P. Sathyavel Murugan was removed.
  • Appointments in non-Agamic temples can proceed afterward.
  • The Court also directed vacant posts at Rameswaram temple be filled per customs.

Cause of Legal Dispute

• Petitioners opposed the state’s decision to open priesthood to all castes and genders.
• They argued that Agamic priesthood needs years of training, not short-term courses.
• They also alleged the appointment of non-believers, violating religious rights.

Reform and Equality Measures

• 1971: TN government ended hereditary priesthood.
• 2006: Allowed all qualified individuals to become priests.
• 2015: SC upheld Agamic traditions while ensuring constitutional protections.
• Past judgments upheld non-Brahmin and women priests, supporting Articles 15 and 51A(e) on non-discrimination and dignity.