Pathetic plight of Eastern Pillaiyar Temple Priest
February 13th, 2007
By D.B.S. Jeyaraj
The on going conflict between the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) has led to the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians. Though people of all communities have suffered the consequences of war – in different degrees – it is the North – Eastern Tamil civilian who has borne the brunt of it. The dastardly murder of a Hindu priest is a sad illustration of the pathetic plight that ordinary Tamil civilians are placed in as both sides pursue their dirty war.
Sixty – one year old Selliah Kurukkal Parameshwarak kurukkal was the chief poosary or priest at the Siddhi Vinayagar temple at Santhiweli in Eravur division of Batticaloa district. The temple is dedicated to Pillaiyaar or Lord Ganesha the elephant faced eldest child of Lord Shiva and consort Parvathy.
Parameshwarakkurukkal was the father of three children. Sreeranjani was the name of his young wife.
The Kurukkal’s residence was close to the army camp in Santhiveli.Many soldiers and even officers worshipped at the Pillaiyaar temple. They made vows and dashed coconuts to the “Gana Deiyo”. In such a situation it is inevitable that a cordial relationship would come to prevail between the priest and local security personnel. This amicable situation received a sudden jolt on February 3rd.
It was on that Saturday that President Mahinda Rajapakse made an unannounced “surprise” visit to Vaakarai the newly “conquered” piece of real estate in the Eastern Province. Govt propaganda had been blaring forth for many days about the people of Vaakarai being liberated from the clutches of the LTTE by our valiant security forces.It was but natural for the supreme commander of the armed forces to visit Vaakarai and see for himself the liberated people shout lustily “free at last!”
There was a hitch. Just as there were no people in Sampoor when that place was liberated from the tigers there were no people in Vaakarai too when it was freed. Tens of thousands had fled the region due to bombing, shelling ,denial of shelter and deprivation of food and medicine etc. The remaining people were also forcibly re- located on the pretext of clearing the area of landmines. So when President Rajapakse was expected to land in Vaakarai there would have been no people to greet him.
But the authorities had a brainwave. A “crowd” of about 300 people was hastily cobbled together. The question of whether these people really wanted to greet and meet a “President” for whom they did not vote for never arose. They had no choice when the local security forces wanted them to be at Vaakarai. “Their’s not to reason why; their’s but to do or die”. So the people went or rather allowed themselves to be taken.
It was also necessary for some religious rites to be observed in keeping with President Rajapakse’s image as a man of religion. Parameshwarakkurukkal of Santhively Siddhivinayagar kovil was approached by “friendly” officers. As in the case of any Tamil civilian living in army occupied areas the priest too had no choice. He could not refuse and risk incurring the wrath of the security forces. The consequences of refusal would have been terrible. In a land where death is rampant the life of the priest could have been snuffed out as easily as the camphor flame during worship rituals.
Parameshwarakkurukkal went along with others to Vaakarai. Rajapakse landed via helicopter and inspected the new conquest. The Pillaiyaar Kovil priest conducted a special pooja invoking blessings on the President. He received “dhakshina” according to custom.Parameshwarakkurukkal was also suddenly “requested” to garland the President and place the “pottu” or thilak on his forehead. This the poor priest did. Could he have dared to refuse in that situation where the slightest wish of the conqueror amounted to a command? Could a humble hindu priest defy the high and mighty and get away with it?
It was a grand photo opportunity. The “angavashtra” clad priest placing the pottu on the “Sataka” wearing President. Many pictures were taken as the cameras flashed. The President’s well – oiled propaganda machine made sure that the historic “scene”was publicised. The powerful president left Vaakarai by air while the powerless priest returned to his temple at Santhiweli by road.
It was after he returned home and talked about what had happened with his wife and other relatives, neighbours, friends and devotees that the gravity of his predicament began to sink in. Even as his act of garlanding and placing holy ash, sandal and vermillion on Rajapakse’s forehead became known to the people at large through the media the priest began to worry more. He became increasingly fearful for his life. These fears were exacerbated by the concern shown by people around him for having fallen foul of the LTTE.
The temple priest is in his own right a “professional” though this is not acknowledged in our semi – feudalistic society. Just as the doctor who has taken the hippocratic oath is required to treat any patient regardless of his or her race, religion, caste ‘ creed or political belief a simple priest too has to adhere to anyone seeking divine blessings. Priests do visit homes and foundation sites to perform specific rituals. In that context Parameshwarakkurukkal was well within his rights to have gone to Vaakarai and performed pooja for the President.
Besides what could the poor man have done in the situation he was in?. He could not have refused the security forces. He had been told that he would only have to perform pooja rites. The “order” disguised as “request” to garland the President was suddenly thrust on him. He had been taken aback but could not refuse. He was in a sense a captive of circumstances. The security forces had callously exploited the poor man and exposed him to danger by making him garland Rajapakse.
The simple act of a priest garlanding the President was politically “wrong” as far as the tigers were concerned. Vaakarai had been wrested from LTTE control after a brutal campaign that flagrantly violated international humanitarian law and war conventions . Now the “conqueror” was inspecting his conquest. Culturally, garlanding amounted to hailing the “victor”. From an LTTE perspective the action was like an endorsement of Rajapakse’s conquest. It was highly symbolic. It was like an “in your face” challenge from an LTTE point of view. Any Tamil collaborating in this “symbolic ritual” was seen as a traitor deserving the supreme penalty.
A brief excursion down memory lane would help place this puzzling phenomenon in perspective.
The armed forces took Jaffna in 1995. On December 5th a flag hoisting ceremony was conducted where the sword – bearing lion flag was raised at the Duraiappah stadium. Along with the national flag the district flag of Jaffna was also raised. That flag had the “nandhi” or crouched bull as its emblem. The “Nandhi” was the flag of the Pallava dynasty. In later years it became the flag of the Jaffna kingdom too. The Nandhi was “rolled up” only after Portuguese conquest. When the Jaffna Youth Congress protested against British colonialism the Nandhi flag was defiantly hoisted in place of the Union Jack during the 1930’s.
The Nandhi flag was also hoisted along with the Lion flag on Dec 5th as a gesture of inclusion. It was an attempt to reach out to Jaffna Tamil people and prevent them from feeling subjugated. Unfortunately the positive symbolism of hoisting the Nandhi flag was totally negated when Ratwatte and Kumaratunga played to the Sinhala gallery later. The Uncle who fancied himself to be a re- incarnated Senbagap Perumaal alias Sapumal Kumaraya took a parchment in a casket and handed it over to his niece saying “Yapapatuna” was taken.
The man who hoisted the “Nandhi” flag was a retired Govt employee named Ramalingam. His flag – raising act received wide publicity. The LTTE had been apparently vanquished. The Tamil people of Jaffna were accepting the changed situation and cooperating with reality was the image projected. Yet within a week two tiger assassins went to Ramalingam’s residence and shot him dead. The flag – raising from an LTTE perspective was a betrayal and amounted to treason. It was a symbolic act requiring symbolic reaction. The symbolism of hoisting was countered by the symbolism of death as punishment.
It is against this backdrop that Parameshwarakkurukkal’s innoccuous act of garlanding Rajapakse had to be viewed. Most people of Batticaloa that one spoke to viewed the act from a tiger prism. It was seen as wrong from a tiger perspective. From that standpoint the priest had blundered. It was widely accepted that the kurukkal had no choice in the matter. The armed forces had placed the priest in danger by making him garland Rajapakse. This act would be frowned upon by the tigers. The symbolism of garlanding would be countered by the symbolism of death it was feared .
Sadly this viewpoint was seemingly the consensus of opinion. It is one more instance of how LTTE sponsored violence has distorted and brutalised values of Tamil society. The LTTE’s way of doing things has permeated the collective consciousness of the Tamil people. Few dare to question whether the LTTE has any right to kill a person who hoists a district flag or garland a President. Few dare to question whether there was any wrong committed by garlanding which warrants death as punishment. If the LTTE perceives it as wrong then all Tamil people have to abide by that perception. To go against the LTTE is at best folly and at worst treason.
Gradually the feeling that Parameshwarakkurukkal had committed an “offence” in the eyes of the LTTE and was going to be punished for it began spreading among the community. The poor kurukkal and family members were terrified. The priest’s wife was to recount later the psychological state of her husband to the BBC Tamil Service “Thamilosai”. “For the last four days he was agitated and afraid of what would happen to him. On Tuesday (6th) night he woke up suddenly and sobbed loudly for a long , long time saying that he was going to be killed and lamenting about the fate of his wife and children after his demise”, she said in Tamil.
It was around 8. 15 pm on Wednesday, February 7th that three youths arrived at Parameshwarakkurukkal’s house. They asked the priest to come with them to the temple premises to discuss a matter. The Kurukkal’s wife said “it is night now. Why dont you come in and talk?”. The youths then said “come to the rear” and then went to the back of the house. The worried wife did not know who the youths were. Batticaloa today is the hunting ground of so many predators masquerading as liberators.
She too went to the rear compound with her husband. She stood at a distance while the youths started talking with the priest. The conversation was very cordial and there were no threats or heated words. After about ten minutes she relaxed. The youths then asked her to bring them some plain tea. Sreeranjani went inside the house and started boiling water. Barely five minutes had passed when she heard shots and screams of her husband.
Parameshwarakkurukkal’s body was found at a spot away from the place he was last seen talking to the youths. There were signs of his having been forcibly dragged a short distance. Relatives and neighbours gathered around as the wife sobbed “Ellaam Maalai Pottathaale thaan nadanthathu” (All this happened because he placed the garland). Later she was to repeat the same thing to the BBC too. This then was the “verdict” The assassins were not to be blamed for the killing but the victim was the cause of his own murder.
As news spread about the priest’s killing the Govt propaganda machinery got into action. The regime which exposed the priest to unnecessary harm for propaganda purposes now began exploiting his ghastly murder. The murder of a hindu priest was condemned. A “hartal” was conducted with the backing of the armed forces in Batticaloa north areas on Friday Feb 9th. Most Hindu temples were instructed to ring the temple bells continuously from 10. 00 am for fifteen minutes.
There was resentment among people on a mass scale over the killing. The people instinctively knew who committed the murder and why it was done. But the general feeling was that the priest should not have been killed. It was obvious that he was a helpless and unwilling person who could not defy the armed forces. The garlanding was unexpected and an act of compulsion. This had to be understood. The Catholic Bishops of Batticaloa, Mannar and Jaffna also articulated these viewpoints by condemning the killing and stating that priests should not be killed for carrying out their “professional” duties.
Realising that strong undercurrents of revulsion were rising among people the LTTE too began denying responsibility “mildly”. LTTE Defence affairs spokesperson Rasiah Illanthiraiyan told a news agency that the LTTE does not do things like this. Deputy Political commissar for Batticaloa Seeraalan told sections of the Tamil media that they were not responsible. An official LTTE denial is yet to be made.
Pro – tiger media have also been floating a theory that the armed forces and para – militaries killed the priest for two reasons. One was that he was grumbling about being taken forcibly to garland Rajapakse. The other was to make the tigers scapegoats and tarnish their name.
Meanwhile a second incident occurred on Thursday Feb 8th which did not receive enough media attention. 33 year old Mayilvaganam Ravichandran was a fisherman from Santhiveli. He was living in the neighbourhood of the murdered priest. Ravichandran was abducted around 8. 30 pm on Thursday from his house by unknown persons. He was found shot dead a few hours later in Eravoor.
It is widely believed that the three assassins who killed Parameshwarakkururukkal were hiding inside Ravichandran’s house before seeking out the priest. They had then gone to Ravichandran’s house and taken their parked motor cycles and sped away.
In that context there are two theories about the killing. One is that the tigers did not want to be identified as the priest’s killers because of growing public revulsion. So they bumped off the man who could have identified them clearly to the authorities. The other theory is that Ravichandran was killed by a state sponsored killer squad or paramilitary assassin outfit. This was retaliation for “housing” the priest’s killers.
It appears that the second theory is more plausible. If the tigers wanted to kill him there was no need to have abducted him. They could have killed him at his house itself. Secondly the state propaganda machinery has virtually ignored this killing instead of capitalising on it as in the case of Parameshwarakkurukkal. This relative “silence” is an indictment. But these are only conjectures and there is no absolute certainty about the identity of the assassins responsible for the killings.
Meanwhile the Media centre is going to town with its “breast – beating” over the Priest’s killing . There is no denying that the murder has to be condemned strongly but Government propagandists are blatantly hypocritical when they “mourn” Parameshwarakkurukkal’s murder and protest over a “priest” being killed.
It was only on January 13th this year that an evangelical Christian pastor Rev. Nallathamby Gnanaseelan was shot dead in broad daylight in Jaffna. His alleged offence was not “heeding” a whistle to stop by security personnel at a checkpost in a junction. After shooting Gnanaseelan the soldiers walked up to the injured pastor and shot him dead in cold blood. Later a grenade was “planted” and a “story” was told that the priest was about to fling the grenade at soldiers and was killed in self – defence. The media centre which sheds copious tears for the Hindu priest denigrated the Christian pastor as a tiger assassin.
The brutal murders of both priests indicate the pathetic predicament faced by the Tamil civilian in the North – East. Rev. Gnanaseelan was murdered in cold blood for failing to hear the whistle and stop at the check post. Parameshwarakkurukkal was cruelly killed for garlanding Rajapakse at the behest of the armed forces. Are these reasons to justify killing?
As stated in these columns before Tamil civilians in the North – East are like arecanuts caught in a nut cracker while contending forces clash .This is the existential reality and even priests are not exempt from this.
[Photos:TamilNet, Sandeshaya]
transCurrents feedback : editor@transcurrents.com
transCurrents feedback :Contact DBS Jeyaraj : djeyaraj2005@yahoo.com
Entry Filed under: MinorMatters
