![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Tuesday, Aug 02, 2005 |
| Tamil Nadu |
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Tamil Nadu
-
Others
Staff Reporter
KARUR: : The second interaction revenue and police officials had with the Kurumba and 24 Manai Telugu Chettiar communities, stakeholders in the Mahalakshmiamman temple at Mettu Mahadanapuram in Karur district, has ended inconclusively. With devotees remaining indifferent to the officials' idea of breaking coconuts on the ground after symbolically placing them on their heads and the officials unwilling to force the issue beyond a point, it seems the ritual will take place as usual on August 4. The State Human Rights Commission had urged the district administration, police and the HR&CE to counsel devotees against breaking coconuts on their head the highlight of the Adi festival to fulfil their vows. Every year more than 1,200 devotees from all communities have coconuts broken on their heads, with a few suffering minor injuries. The ritual is observed on the 19th day of the Tamil month Adi. Following the first round of talks last fortnight, S. Ganesh, Revenue Divisional Officer, Kulithalai, held discussions with devotees and community leaders on Saturday. On behalf of the Kurumba community, Vadivel and others attended, while the 24 Manai Telugu Chettiars were represented by Chandra Prakash and others. Temple chief priest Periasamy was also present. On behalf of the priest and the stakeholders, the meeting was informed that the coconuts are treated to lessen the impact of the blow. The fibre on the outer surface is taken off and the three main veins are scrapped. The coconuts are kept immersed in water for some time prior to the festival. The devotees confirmed that only treated coconuts were being used for performing the ritual. After the first meeting, the devotees had expressed resentment at the "unsolicited interference" in their tradition. One section objected to the alleged veiled threat to the priest, threatening to hold him criminally responsible for any injury to devotees. They pointed out that nothing untoward had ever happened.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |
Copyright © 2005, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|