The glee with which some opposition politicians and “secular” commentators have received news about “chanda chori” at the Ayodhya Ram Mandir is nauseating. The theft has also prompted many other people to suggest a direct government role in running temples. While genetically Hinduphobic people are rubbing their hands in anticipation of potential fallout on the BJP, those who think that such theft needs a stronger government role in its prevention are barking up the wrong tree (See this oped in The Times of India by a former government secretary). Bringing in the government whenever something goes wrong is a bad solution, and not in tune with the basic idea that religious affairs are not the business of the state.
The assumption that thefts happen only in Hindu temples is, of course, nonsense. From the Vatican to mosques and churches in multiple countries, including India, there has been no dearth of incidents involving not just theft, but also wrongdoing of several kinds, including paedophilia by priests. If these did not prompt governments to start running non-Hindu places of worship, one wonders what the logic is in suggesting that temples where thefts have happened somehow can never govern themselves without state nannying.There are several reasons why bringing in the government whenever something goes wrong is bad in principle. The last reason given below is the most important of them all – from the Hindu point of view.
