As the final hours of the auspicious Malayalam month Mithunam (Uttarayanam) passed into the the night, a frail man of seventy years was counting the minutes he had left in this world. In fact, he knew exactly when he would go, his death was only seven hours away, he pronounced calmly, just before Mithunam gave way to the deemed inopportune month of Karkkadakam. His relatives say former ips officer T.P. Sundararajan, thrall to a high fever, had uncannily predicted his death.
Sundararajan, who moved the courts to inventory the vaults of the Sree Padmanabhaswamy temple at Thiruvanathapuram, was pivotal to the unearthing of the treasures that lie in its chambers and antechambers. A member of the Supreme Court (SC)-appointed panel, he witnessed the opening of the five kallaras (vaults). However, before the sixth vault or kallara B could be opened, he died. Was his moment of death most auspicious or a portent of things to come? Thiruvananthapuram is abuzz about how a vengeful Lord Padmanabha had claimed his first victim, and how whoever tried to open his secret vaults would die. “Nonsense,” says Sundararajan’s nephew Ananda Padmanabhan. “My uncle died a natural death. He said he felt he had done his duty.” The rumours that the panel members are afraid to open kallara B, say sources close to the panel, are totally baseless. If the SC orders the vault opened, it will be done. “We are only doing our duty. It is a national duty,” one of the members is believed to have said. But things are getting curiouser as myths and legends abound and all wait with bated breath to see what lies in kallara B.
Advertisement
Boat rocker The late T.P. Sundararajan. (Photograph by B.M. Irshad)
Of the six vaults of the Sree Padmanabhaswamy temple, kallaras A and B are the most controversial. They have not seen the light of day in the lifetime of the 89-year-old Sree Utthradom Thirunal Marthanda Varma, the patriarch of the Travancore royal family. When vault A was opened, its antechambers revealed treasures that took the worth (by weight of gold) of the temple’s treasures to over Rs 1 lakh crore. The iron door of kallara B wouldn’t yield to any key and, as we went to press, the panel is waiting for instructions from the apex court. The temple’s priests have opposed the use of equipment like gas-cutters near the sanctum sanctorum. Sundararajan would tell anyone who’d listen that kallara B would reveal much more than all the others. His knowing refrain was, “Wait and see.” Says Padmanabhan: “My uncle was very close to the last ruler of the state of Travancore, Sree Chithira Thirunal Balarama Varma, and I’m sure he knew much more about the treasures than he let on.”
Advertisement
The royal family has appealed to the SC to be wary of opening kallara B. In their petition, they state: “The opening of the last cellar, namely B, is not advisable at all because the sign of the ‘serpent’ visible at the entrance indicates that it is not auspicious to open it. However, a decision on this may be taken after conducting the traditional deva prashnam so as to not incur the displeasure of Lord Padmanabha by opening it. That is necessary because it is the belief of the devotees that opening the kallara can invite the Lord’s wrath.” There is indeed a sign of serpent at the entrance, says historian M.G. Sashibhushan. “There is a sculpture of a two-metre-long cobra on the wall of kallara B. The wall also has an undeciphered inscription. It is believed that like the warning boards of today, the skull and bones, the serpent was used to denote danger. But it could also denote highly valuable items. The serpent sign can either mean danger or vast treasures.”
Kallara B is likely to have three chambers, sources say. “The first will reveal silver, the second chamber will contain gold and the third, diamonds,” says one. As speculation mounts about whether the treasure of the temple would increase two-fold when the final vault is opened, the debate about what to do with the wealth and who it belongs to is still smouldering. Not many Hindu groups are in favour of using the temple wealth for the public good or surrendering it to the government. Many eminent Thiruvananthapuram residents are also opposed to it. “The treasure belongs to the deity. An idol of a Hindu temple is a minor and is a juristic person,” says retired district court judge Chandradas. Like the Ram lalla in Ayodhya, the deity here is a ‘juristic person’ and is interpreted by law as an imaginary or artificial person who can litigate and can in turn be sued against. The deity is a legal entity capable of owning and holding property and the interests of the deity are to be protected by the executive officer in charge. While heated debate may rage in both city and state about what to do with the treasure, it will ultimately be the Supreme Court of India that will pronounce its fate.
