I arrived rather late last night to my hotel. Overlooking the seven hills upon which the major Venkateshwarar (Vishnu) temple was built, I am staying about 12km from lower Tirupati in a town called Renigunta. Today’s trip into the city was mostly to get my bearings, scope out the transportation situation, and plan my visits to the local religious and heritage sites. Lower Tirupati also houses a number of temples, a museum, and doll shops, but I decided to take the bus to the neighboring Shiva Temple called SriKalahasti, approximately 50km from Tirupati. I wanted to get a feel for the landscape and areas surrounding Tirupati before I began my interviews within the city. This temple was particularly unique and was an important pilgrimage destination for all Hindus. Two years ago, this temple suffered an unfortunate disaster – the main temple goburam collapsed due to unregulated construction in the surrounding areas. Even so, I was able to see the resurrected 3 goburams through a special viewing spot from within the temple complex. Situated at the foot of hills, this temple was said to have been constructed during the Pallava Dynasty and then restored during the Chola’s reign in the area too. I was told by one person on my one-hour bus journey that animals had performed worship to the Shiva linga there from which the temple derived its fame. Having been praised by Shiva for their devotion, the animals received liberation from their births. This is a popular trope, one I have heard before. In many a tale, Lord Shiva is notorious for being pleased by his devotees, and as it seems, animals too. In return, a boon or liberation is always promised by Shiva. Needless to say this temple’s linga was particularly unique. It is also considered a temple which has the vayu (wind manifestation) of Shiva. This particular point was also noted on posters within the temple complex in Tamil, praising the sacred capacity of the temple.

     The mula devata (root/major deity) of this temple is untouched by even Brahmin priests, another unique facet of this shrine. I watched as the priests performed puja in a room in front of the shrine, placing sandal paste and offerings upon a large steel table. Since the element represented by this form is wind, one can witness, in front of the linga, a series of flames that waver in the main sanctorum room, with no access to wind or open sky. Inside a room where most flames would remain still, I saw a semi-circle of little flames encircling a lamp in the center, all lightly wavering in a breeze. There were several shrines within the temple that were common to most Shiva temples. The circumambulation begins with the linga and then one is led through the several Nayannar Saiva saints. Surrounding the major shrine there is a row of lingas lining the inner grounds of the complex. The goddess consort of Shiva, Parvati/ Durga also has a shrine to herself. The final deity, a favorite of Shiva too, appears on the right whenever one has completed circumambulating a Shivalinga’s sanctum. This deity is Dakshinamoorthy, a favorite to students as well, as he is said to bequeath good memory to those who study intently. Kalahasti had a large and fancy alankaram (adornment) for him today. 

      As I was leaving the temple complex, a little light caught my eye on my left. This light shone through a linga completely made of alum stone (spatikum). At the very end of the line of lingas in the inner circle, this one shone like a gem. It was a little cloudy, murky like the materiality of the Shiva linga itself. Did the alum crystal represent a deity or was the deity represented as the spatikum? I wasn’t sure. But trying to understand the materiality of an object like a linga, one has to ask such a basic question.  Before I go any further I must preface myself – these are concerns of a scholar who is faced with not only the burden of translation and articulation, but also with the special burden of speaking about one community to the ears of audience unfamiliar to these practices, sometimes seeking a legitimization for another’s beliefs. A devotee may not wonder about the relationship between Shiva and his icon.

     Does the irrelevance of the question to a devotee imply that Shiva and the icon are one and the same? Could one equate Shiva with the stone itself, as it silently watches the world around ebb and flow? Stone, like Shiva who resides in the temple as wind, also witnesses the churning of the world, the rebuilding and collapses of the temple and township through history.  In other words, when one is worshipping a linga, are they worshipping Shiva, the geological nature of a stone, or both? I am not trying to disprove or prove that one answer is correct. Instead I wish to nuance the relationship between the material and what it represents. We could allow for an object to be two things at once, a stone in all that it represents and a deity in all that he/she represents. Moreover, what does the way people treat an object tell us about these objects themselves?

       Over the years, it has become harder to say many things about Hinduism, so much so, Hindus themselves have borrowed western and scholarly interpretations to offer justifications for what their practices and what their gods signify. One man Gopal told me today that, Hindus only worship the principals and ideals represented through names like Shiva and the linga. This is an old argument, one articulated even by the Vedantists who privileged knowledge over practice.  Is his answer just a regurgitation of an iconoclastic view, where knowledge of the divine is placed as superior to material manifestations of the divine? But Gopal’s articulation does not iron out the practices surrounding this material object – one that is very real and recognizes the material nature of the object itself. This is particularly pronounced in the alankaram/ adornment of Dakshinamoorthy or the goddess Durga. If the representation of the divine is all that mattered, then why is it important to dress, bathe, and feed the image? Afterall the image itself is there for a reason and its form must have a purpose, which cannot be explained away. Its sustained appearance throughout history is not an indication of a primitive way of thinking, but perhaps of practices reflecting a deeper understanding of the nature of the universe.  

        My search has led me one step closer, even though it hasn’t yet revealed much. It is only the first day, and some people have given me cookie-cutter answers, ones borrowed from a misunderstanding of materiality, where materiality is equated to idolatry. Are Hindus just trying to justify their faith to non-Hindus? The questions we ask of our own faith, only seem to tell me more about the society they live in. Acting like he was faced with the humiliation that idolatry was somehow unfashionable, Gopal chose to place knowledge about god as superior to the material manifestation of god. My advisor and fellow ethnographers have cautioned me that it would take many more meetings before people reveal more than just token responses. Tomorrow is another day.