Temples: 10 Principles for Self-governance

…(There is) need for non-western cultures to define their own future in terms of their own categories and concepts and to articulate their vision in a language that is true to their own Self… - Ashis Nandy

Why do India's largest and most celebrated temples continue to face controversies? The Ram Mandir, inaugurated in 2024, is already under investigation. In Tirupati (TTD), the SIT chargesheet found that suppliers delivered adulterated ghee for making laddus. In Sabarimala, allegations surfaced that several kilograms of temple gold had been replaced with gold-plated copper.

These incidents cannot be explained simply by differences in governance models. Tirupati functions under close government control, the Ram Mandir follows a light-touch governance model, and Sabarimala operates under a relatively loose institutional framework. Yet controversies have emerged in all three.

Part of the answer lies in India's unique institutional context. Nobel Laureate Elinor Ostrom distinguishes between "rules in form" and "rules in use." Rules in form are the formal rules created by governments and institutions. Rules in use are the informal norms and practices that people rely on in their everyday lives.

I first observed this distinction during my childhood in Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh. Our ancestral home stood between two temples - Ganga Mandir and Chaurasi Ghanta (84 Bells) Temple in Kisrol Mohalla. Frequent visits revealed that these temples operated according to a distinct set of practices rather than the orderly, rule-bound systems that formal governance models assume.

This pattern continues across temples, pilgrimage centres, and guru lineages. Formal rules and informal practices constantly interact in both visible and invisible ways. As a result, religion becomes much more than a matter of faith. It becomes the language through which local communities negotiate authority, influence, resources, and legitimacy.

In such settings, textbook models of governance rarely work. The interaction between rules in form and rules in use makes formal rules inherently open to interpretation. Individuals, groups, and vested interests use this flexibility to pursue their own objectives through whatever means they believe will succeed.

This interaction creates what may be called a liminal space. Simply adding more laws or regulations cannot fully resolve the challenges within this space because those very laws also shape and reproduce the conditions that create it.

We often view informal systems as operating outside the law. In India, however, that description is incomplete. Informal institutions neither exist entirely within formal regulation nor entirely outside it. Instead, they function through their own internal logic. 

They represent a form of deregulation - neither regulated nor unregulated—guided by purposive action, local knowledge, and practical adaptation.

Localized self-governance offers one way to manage this unique institutional reality. Communities naturally possess the ability to organize themselves. The following ten principles build on that capacity to create a practical framework for temple self-governance.

1. Declare the Temple a "Devotee Commons"

Declare every temple and its assets as a Devotee Commons.

Recognize as stakeholders all registered devotees living within a 5-kilometre radius, all priests, and annual donors contributing more than ₹1,000.

Clearly define and notify the boundaries of the temple's core ritual area, land, hundi, and commercial properties.

Purpose: Prevent external capture of temple resources and clearly identify who has the authority to make rules.

2. Establish an 11-Member Devotee Sabha

Create an eleven-member Devotee Sabha consisting of:

• Four elected devotees

• Two hereditary priests

• One woman representative

• One SC/ST representative

• One donor representative

• One local Panchayat nominee

• One Government or ASI observer without voting rights

Rotate fifty percent of the membership every term, and prohibit anyone from serving more than two consecutive terms.

Purpose: Replace monopoly control with plural representation while ensuring social inclusion.

3. Hold an Annual General Sabha

Conduct an Annual General Sabha every January.

Require a two-thirds majority to approve the annual budget, audit reports, and contracts exceeding ₹5 lakh.

Allow the Priest Council to decide ritual matters, while the Sabha governs financial and land-related issues.

Permit emergency decisions but require ratification within thirty days.

Purpose: Allow local institutions to design rules that suit local realities.

4. Create a Triple Audit System

Introduce three independent audits:

• Internal audit by three devotees

• External audit by a Chartered Accountant

• Ritual audit by senior priests

Secure the hundi with CCTV surveillance and a three-key lock jointly controlled by a trustee, priest, and devotee representative.

Publish quarterly income and expenditure statements on the temple noticeboard, website, and WhatsApp group.

Purpose: Increase transparency and prevent institutional capture.

5. Strengthen Financial Accountability

Accept donations through digital channels with mandatory receipts.

Count cash collections from the hundi daily under CCTV surveillance.

Require at least two quotations and Sabha approval for all land transactions, leases, or contracts exceeding ₹10 lakh.

Allocate temple income as follows:

• 70% for temple administration and maintenance

• 20% for community welfare

• 10% for a reserve fund

Purpose: Reduce opportunities for financial misuse.

6. Introduce Graduated Sanctions

Adopt a clear code of conduct with graduated penalties:

• First violation: Written warning

• Second violation: Fine and suspension

• Third violation: Removal from office and legal action

Apply these penalties equally to trustees, priests, and staff in cases of misappropriation, financial misconduct, or ritual malpractice.

Provide both physical complaint boxes and an online grievance portal.

Purpose: Discourage misconduct while ensuring proportional accountability.

7. Establish a Dharmic Sabha

Constitute a Dharmic Sabha consisting of five respected elders and one retired judge or advocate.

Require the Sabha to resolve disputes within forty-five days.

Authorize it to hear disputes involving priests, donors, caste-related access, and contractual matters.

Allow parties to approach civil courts only after exhausting this mechanism.

Purpose: Deliver affordable and timely dispute resolution while reducing prolonged litigation.

8. Promote Inclusion

Allow every Hindu, irrespective of caste or gender, to enter the temple for darshan and participate in the Sabha.

Open priestly education and training to all qualified candidates.

Respect hereditary traditions without allowing them to become exclusive privileges.

Purpose: Create institutions that remain rooted in tradition while expanding participation.

9. Preserve Heritage and Strengthen Community

Allow the Priest Council and the Sabha to jointly determine the ritual calendar.

Allocate at least twenty percent of the annual budget to annadanam, education, health camps, and heritage conservation.

Recognize the temple not only as a sacred place but also as an institution that serves the wider community.

Purpose: Strengthen the temple's religious, social, cultural, and economic role.

10. Provide Legal Recognition within a Nested Governance Structure

Register every Devotee Sabha under the relevant State Societies or Trusts Act.

Prevent the State from dissolving the Sabha unless two-thirds of its members approve the decision and the High Court confirms it.

Allow smaller temples to form Block Temple Councils for shared procurement, training, legal assistance, and administrative support.

Require a two-thirds majority of the Sabha and ratification at the next Annual General Meeting to amend any by-law.

Purpose: Protect local autonomy while enabling cooperation and economies of scale.

Conclusion

In this framework, formal rules continue to address the predictable aspects of local governance. The ten principles of self-governance complement these rules by addressing the uncertainties that arise from the continuous interaction between rules in form and rules in use. Together, they create a governance model that reflects India's institutional realities rather than imposing solutions designed for fundamentally different social contexts.