At this point of time it would be appropriate to see what constituted the wealth of the temple. How this wealth was mismanaged by the management over a period of centuries even before the British set foot in India.
The wealth of the temple over the centuries consisted of Land holdings and Jewellery. Kings and other patrons donated land and also gifted Jewellery.
The famous temple of Vajreswari (Maa Taara) in Kangda, Himachal Pradesh was of such legendary wealth thet every invader worth his salt took time to sack it. Mohammed of Gazni carted off a fabulous fortune in god, silver and jewellery in 1009 A.D. In 1360 it was again plunderd by Tuglak. Still it was able to recover and in Jehangir's reign it was paved with plates of pure silver. Unfortunately the earth quake on April 4, 1905 totally destroyed the temple. It has been rebuilt.
We all know about the sacking of Somnath temple.
But one question arises in our minds. Were the temples as rich as it is written in legends? I think there has been considerable exaggeration about the wealth. However it is true that considerable wealth in Gold, Silver and Jewellery were looted. This shows that the temples had accumulated Gold, Silver and jewellery over the years.
Now we come to the crux of the matter. Temples did not have any record of the Gold, Silver and Jewellery. So any loss over a period of time went unnoticed.
To quote a recent example, in Kalighat temple, about four years back a devotee covered the four arms of the Deity with gold plates. The devotee's name was not revealed at his request. Then some of the old residents told me that these hands were covered with gold plates earlier, but no one knew when the gold plating was stripped. Temples did not have any record of the jewellery. So no one would even know if some jewellery disappeared.
Now we come to land holdings. Kings and donors gifted land to the temples. The land consisted both of irrigated/cultivated fields and uncultivated lands. The income from the cultivated lands was to go towards the maintenance of the temple. The cash collection was either non-existent or very poor.
These cultivated lands were given on lease to various persons for cultivation. Even in the case of Lands there were very few records. The only records were the inscriptions in stone.
In Tamil Nadu and other states the temples owned extensive cultivated lands and urban property. For example it was discovered some years back that almost the entire city of Vishakapatnam belonged to the Simhachala temple. In Madurai the temple owned large part of lands in Madarai town. In a place like Palakkad the entire village of Tharakad once belonged to the Tharakad temple. I was once negotiating to buy a large piece of land in rural Tamil Nadu. Then we discovered that the entire land belonged to one of the Atheenams.
The allocation of land to the tenants was done by the management of the temple. Wholesale favoritism and nepotism took place during this procedure. The community to which the management belonged were given priority. Even stone inscriptions were changed.
Now most of the tenants were paying only a nominal rent. Even that was not paid for years. Land was occupied with the help of the management with no record of any transfer.
Now there are there groups involved in the running of the temple.
1. Priests.
2. The managements. Dharmakartha and committees, Atheenams, Maths, Mahants and others.
3. The King or the government.
The Brahmin priests were not in charge of the management. They were mere employees. Many of the Maths controlling the temples and Mahants were Brahmins. Priests owned very few temples in India.
In Tamil Nadu most of the temples are owned by the Atheenams. The Sivacharyas/Kurukkals are only employees. This truth was brought home to me when I visited a famous temple of Tamil Nadu in the early 70s. The temple was one in which you could drive a car almost upto the entrance. When we got out of the car, two persons came running. One the priest of the temple and another person who was not a priest. The other person asked us whether we have come to see the atheenam. Before that he called the priest bad names and asked him to get lost.
We told the other person that we have come to visit the temple. He disappeared immediately. Then we asked the priest who he was? We were informed that he was the Driver of the Atheenam.
The Sivacharya/Gurukkal community are the priests of most of the temples in Tamil Nadu. They are the poorest of tamil Brahmins. I am shocked that in spite of knowing very well that the Sivacharya/Gurukkal community has not become rich, some of our members continue to argue that Priests of tamil nadu have robbed the temples.
It may be true of other states, but definitely not Tamil Nadu.
The management of the temple was responsible for looting the temples. and frittering away all the resources. They continue to be Trustees even now.
The Kings also did some strange things. Archeological research has revealed that the lands which were given by Raja Raja to Brahadeeswara temple, were later given by his son Rajendra to the Gangai Konda Cholapuram temple.
These web sites give some indication about these. I do not agree with all conclusions of the first article about temples.
Changing Face of the Temple,indian temples, indian architecture, art and culture of india,Indian history,devadasis, castes in india, hinduism, religion in india
The Hindu : Tamil Nadu News : Temple management and residents at loggerheads in Srirangam
Govt cuts dues of temple land tenants - Times Of India
The British stepped in to control and prevent the temples being looted.