Several of you have written to us regarding the grand opening of Canada’s Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha Shri Swaminarayan Mandir (that was fun to type!). The pictures, which you can view in a slideshow here, are gorgeous. Were any Canadian mutineers there on July 22? If so, please let us know, below.
After 18 months of construction and millions in fundraising efforts, a one-of-a-kind Hindu temple opened Sunday in Toronto.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper was on-hand to celebrate the official unveiling of the BAPS Shri Swaminarayan Mandir.
Harper said the $40 million architectural marvel represents India’s and Canada’s embracement of spiritual and ethnic pluralism.
“Canada’s accommodation of diversity is not without precedent,” Harper said, addressing a large crowd.
“There have been forerunners — and of these perhaps none is as note-worthy as India.”
Located at Hwy 427 and Finch Avenue in north-west Toronto, the temple is an architectural masterpiece. Built with Turkish limestone and Italian marble, the temple was built by artisans armed with chisels, hammers and ancient Hindu doctrine outlining how a holy place should be constructed. [CTV.ca]
By the numbers:
–24,000: the number of pieces sculpted in India, marked with a barcode and then reassembled to create the mandir.
–July 22, 2007: official opening
–$40 million: cost of construction, majority of which came from the community
–400: the number of volunteers who devoted their time to such an awesome project.
::
As giddy as such architectural perfection makes me, my inner %$#@< is wondering if Dubya would have made like Harper, had this mandir been constructed somewhere in this great nation…
yes, i was also surprised that this wasn’t spearheaded by the local SL Tamil population.
Cult? Some of the practices may indeed seem bizarre and off-putting but that hardly qualifies an organization as a cult. As someone who grew up in a community organized around an all-faiths and yogic focus, I have been on the receiving end of the cult barb more than once–it’s a specious, cowardly and intellectually lazy charge, generally leveled by people totally unaware of what really constitutes cultish practices.
And a Swami isn’t “traditional Hindu stuff”?????!!!!!! I am no fan of self-appointed god-men in general, but the concept of guru and sishya is quite old and interwoven throughout the histories of many faith traditions lumped under the Hindu umbrella.
Sigh! If only so much of this money was instead given to social causes instead of putting it into pompous grandiosity – not just BAPS, even other temples in the US. I mean if you are a true believer, would your belief get hurt if you prayed in a temple which looks a little less of a palace, especially if that trade off helps someone get a decent meal or get an education. I wonder how much of this is derived from the vanity of the devotees. The psychology behind this is understandable but still frustrating.
I am concerned that the terrorists might use the temple as a place to hide among the larger non-terrorist population and surreptitiously use the temple premises to launch mass scale attacks against Canada/West. Once Canada copies the US inspired John Doe legislation, it will make it very difficult for vigilante Canadian patriots to identify the terrorists from the non-terrorists in this temple.
Lol. Reminds me of Little Mosque on the Prairie.
GujuDude hit it right on the head.
Their monks never look at women and even when they travel, arrangements are made so that only male security officers and cabin crew etc attend to them. If they do happen to see women, then they are required to fast for a day or so. From what I have seen, they travel in cars that have window drapes or they just look at their laps.
What makes me wonder is that these same monks worship female deities such as Radha and Sita..isn’t that against their beliefs?
I happened to meet a BAPS woman when I was in college whose family never took a decision without consulting with the Guru. That struck me as weird. I mean, how can someone who has renounced the world be able to guide you through career moves etc?
What is BAPS?
BAP*S
Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha
The Pittsburgh temple has some catching up to do. It is slowly getting eclipsed by a bunch of temples all over the continent. Being from Pittsburgh originally, I would hate for it to be just another temple.
Razib,
The temple has an electrically heated floor.
It is annoying to hear this temple referred to dismissively as built by a ‘cult’. There has been nothing remotely cultish about the behaviour and approach of the community in TO which built it.
Muralimannered, the BAPS seems to meet all the characteristics of cults, and both in the everyday and the dictionary usage. The wiki article on cults is really good, do check it out. ‘Cult’ has a pejorative sense, and it can be lazily applied, but that doesn’t mean the ‘normal’ sense can’t be applied to BAPS. Nobody is making the claim (yet) that the BAPS meets the psychological definition of cult. They seem to be non-proselytizing, so that aspect can be emphasized by calling them a non-proselytizing cult, but let’s not be too PC about calling them a cult when they meet the everyday accepted meaning so obviously.
If you are a believer in this particular religion, then your objection makes sense. Judging from what’s written above, you are not. So why should you object to how others spend their money? Is it for you to tell others – presumably believers – what type of structure is appropriate for celebrating their faith? And in the whole arena of ways in which people “waste money,” is building a temple any worse? For that matter, how do you know that the people building the temple are not also helping others get a decent meal or education?
I have seen quite a few people of “Hindu origin but not believers” come up with this curious objection again and again. I don’t see the point. If you want to help people get a decent meal or education, then do it. If others want to spend their money building a temple to their faith or for that matter vanity, then that’s their call.
Just out of curiosity – given how ready you seem to be to criticize others for their failings – how many people have you helped get a decent meal or an education? It’s my observation that those who make such objections very rarely are in the forefront of social service themselves. Most times, such expressions just seem to be a way of establishing one’s “moral superiority.”
suresh.
Chachaji,
That’s like saying that the word ‘negro’ should still be applied to a black person. ‘Cult’ has pejorative connotations in its popular usage, so why use it?
Suresh in #62 – your whole argument is that if someone is not a believer, he has no right to say that ostentatiousness in religious practices is not an issue, I am not so sure is right. While I wont comment on other religions since I don’t know as much, in my own beliefs and studies of Hinduism, I have not come across instances where ostentatiousness has any bearing on the spiritual aspects. At least in Vedanta which I know a little bit as opposed to other forms, even idols are just ‘tools’ (for lack of a better word) for us as humans to focus on higher things and goals(if you may notice, I resist from using the term higher beings). Thus again I repeat, one does not need a palace to be a practicing Hindu – if anything it’s the opposite. If you have some other reasoning like socio-cultural importance of temples and why grandeur is neccessary for that, please say as much but don’t say that one has no right unless one has beliefs.
As for your second point about saying something without doing in terms of the social front, again it’s an absurd argument since it does not make one less worthy of criticizing if one has a valid point. Also, while I am with you about people saying without doing, I would resist from making generalizations for the entire spectrum. My observations have been based on personal experiences where people have been less ready to part with funds for pure social causes and even brand such form of social work as communist and despicable since it supposedly lacks spirituality. But if one approaches them under a religious umbrella, they are more than happy to donate for something like a temple.
Also, I am not saying it’s wrong for them to spend their money the way they want (afetr all it’s theirs), just that I wish it was different and I try to understand what drives them to be a certain way.
I went to the Swaminarayan Temple in Gandhinagar, Gujarat and left with a foul taste in my mouth. The place was for all intents and purposes–an amusement park. They had a “It’s a Small World”-type exhibit with motor operated dolls which told the story of Swaminarayans rise to fame, and the museum housed items such as the nail clippings of the Swami and other such “relics”.
The entire grounds were absolutely pristine and gorgeous, but if you take one step outside of the temple grounds you’re met with poverty of the lowest kind. I simply couldn’t reconcile myself with the over-the-top grandeur of the temple grounds, and the poverty I saw right outside it’s doors.
I’m currently dating someone who’s Swaminarayan and it makes me a bit nervous. He said he grew up being very involved in the movement, but slowly pushed away as a result of politics and drama (namely their push for a lot of money). He said he’d like to get back into it, but is weary.
I should also add that I went to a smaller Swaminarayan temple in Valsad, Gujarat and was turned off by the fact that the women had to stand behind a demarcated line so the priests can not see them. Does anyone know why this is? I hear it’s so they won’t be distracted, but wtf?
The alleged “amusement park” angle of all of this is the most fascinating; the segregation/not looking at women stuff…kinda depressing. My Mom is Jacobite and they sit on opposite sides of the church, but I don’t know about any separating of men and women beyond that.
Then again, don’t really Orthodox Jews do something like this– maybe I’m thinking of the Hasidim? Where’s the Jewish mutineer when you need him, damnit. 😉
(p.s. a midway thanks to all, for such a respectful discussion)
DQ, I think I meant to say ‘sect’ and wrote ‘cult’ by mistake. Apologies to anyone offended. And apologies in advance to anyone who doesn’t like the word ‘sect’. Maybe a neutral word like ‘group’ or ‘organisation’ would be best here.
Koi bhat nehi, amitabh-y…not that I spelled that right. 😀
No eggshell walking, ya heard? (that and I want to remind you that you are really cherished and respected here, so I would hope there’s no need for the disclaimers, etc)
[i]Koi bhat nehi[/i]
Sista, do you say that the way you wrote it? If so, we have to have a recoding of Anna speaking hindi uploaded somewhere. I promise I would laugh 😉
Martha Nussbaum in the excerpt Amardeep linked to a while ago, seemed to hold up the Swaminarayan sect as the vanguard of the hindu right in Gujarat.
Does anyone here know if they are really that hardcore? Esp about their views on other religions, etc? Also about their involvement (IF any), and views, on the Gujarat riots? I remember after the terrorist attack on their Akshardham temple in Gujarat, their leaders urged calm, and there was no retaliatory violence by their members.
My darling, wait ’til you hear me mangle Hum Aap Kain Houn or whatever that-mega movie was…my friends used to have me do it daily, so they could marvel at my sputtering AND the fact that I never destroyed it the same way twice! There’s a lot of room for mangling in that title. 😀
ANNA wrote:
I totally agree, although I just did a bit of a google search and came up with this link: Swaminarayan’s Uplift of Women and was slightly appeased. It says, “Bhagwan Swaminarayan proved to be the first, perhaps the only luminary, in India who rose against the shocking plight of women in society.”
In that case, enjoy these!
Thank you so much ANNA, that means a lot. Much appreciated.
Amitabh, no offence taken. These guys had a lovely way of presenting the temple – they called the temple a gift back to the nation. Then the white newscaster said ‘what an auspicious day’. It was all very Canadian, and being sentimental, I got a bit teary-eyed about it.
I dig this dude.
That is really touching– and I heart the use of “auspicious”. 🙂 If that is “all very Canadian”, then Canada is a wonderful place, indeed. I’d be snuffling along right next to you.
A quick back step…teh delhi project of BAPS is Akshardham, a MONUMENT . IT is NOT a TEMPLE, thus it does not feel like one. BAPS is very well recognized here in US, i dunno abt canada…not a cult, but a major religious faith that serves humanity at all levels
The explanation of segregation by gender I received was due to the fact that men, if they see women, might feel desire, or vice versa. At least at a temple, if they are segregated, they can focus on god. I’ve witnessed this at the ISKCON temples but it’s not meant to be oppressive. My mom and sister have never complained and it’s not strictly enforced but it’s there in spirit. Same reason I could see why the monks are not allowed to see women, they should not feel any desire for women and to prevent any risks, they try to keep them away from women. It’s kind of like the explanation I heard for why the ISKCON temple in Miami Beach was closed. The brahamachari’s couldn’t stop looking at the women and couldn’t keep sanyas.
Weeeell, Anna, I’ll amend that to ‘it was all very as most Canadians want it to be’. One of our Ontario public servants recently called a black job applicant a ‘ghetto dude’ in an email to co-workers…
$40 million can provide food and shelter for 80000 children (source : http://www.universalgiving.org ) in India. $40 million can provide dinner for 30 days for 40000 families of four. what do you get for $40 million from any religion : nothing,zero, shunya,
In my experience, the drop-out rate for sannyasins (both male and female), were pretty even. Both genders generally left due to the realization that they wanted children, spouses and at least some of the material benefits of householder life. Should also keep in mind that these sannyasins were all caucasian Americans
My family’s guru shocked his brother monks, upon their visit to America, by physically embracing all of the people that he met(devotees and strangers alike)–not just men. BAPS appears to be trapped in that antediluvian mindset, but perhaps this is their way of avoiding the inevitable swami-sex scandal that seems to pop up in other new religious movements (as I refuse to label BAPS a cult)
Chachaji,
not sure how much time, if any, that you’ve spent in the States but the popular conception of a cult here is definitely not the incredibly broad merriam-webster definition. Even when you consider that, there’s not much about BAPS that you couldn’t find in an equivalent religious movement with a longer history in India. They do, however, seem to have collected much of the more illiberal practices
When I refuse to use the word cult I am referring popular conceptions of a religious cult that do not serve to advance the discussion in any way; this pejorative conception usually takes three forms: hippie-based (Jim Jones), separatist (Branch Davidian), and Eastern Religion-based (ISKON, Osho, TM, etc).
what do you get for $40 million from any religion : nothing,zero, shunya
Toronto got a beautiful building, and considering how architecturally dire Toronto is, that ain’t nothing.
I’m from Vancouver, BC, Canada, and not East-Indian, but Chinese. I appreciate this temple for its beauty, religious and cultural significance. It makes me proud to be a Canadian to have things like this happen in our country.
Ardy,
How does one go about deciding how much expenditure is “right” for constructing a temple? I think the answer to this has to be decided by the believers. As a non-believer, you have the right to find the amount that the believers have spent unnecessary or excessive, but I don’t think you can criticize them for spending their money in the way they choose. And criticize is exactly what you are doing when you say that the people who built the temple could have spent their money in a better (to you) way – educating or feeding someone. If you think it right to criticize other people for spending their money building “ostentatious” temples, why stop there? As I said, there are a whole range of expenditures which are arguably unnecessary and could be sacrificed in favor of educating someone or feeding someone. So, where do we stop?
If, on the other hand, you are a believer, then I would be more sympathetic. Incidentally, criticism of what you call ostentatiousness in religion is not new. Check out the following vacana by Basavanna (translated by A. K. Ramanujan’s in his “Speaking of Siva”):
For an explanation, check out A. K. Ramanujan’s book.
As for my second point, well, if you criticize others for not meeting your moral standard, then you should be prepared to have them question whether you meet that standard.
Isn’t the Swaminarayan sect a part of hinduism? I went to their temple in Delhi with my parents years ago. My parents are Hindu and they didn’t seem to point out that it wasn’t their flavor of hinduism. When I went to the temple in Houston with a friend, she pointed out that though she doesn’t believe in Swaminrayan, she loves the temple (and the sweets). I was confused. I am not religious, so, to me, it all looks Hindu from the outside.
Can someone tell me how Swaminarayan is different from regular Hinduism (if there is any)?
Seeing those pics gave me goosebumps. Beautiful.
What if, Swamis/Sanyasis are distracted by seeing men 😉
ve are not the gay here. thank you. come again.
Suresh in #89
Dude, 40 million dollars is crap loads of money by any standard. I don’t think it needs quantifying to say it seems very excessive. But sure, a few numbers in #83 could help if you want. I see merits to temples and other religious centers (given the limitations of human beings) but I don’t see merit to 24000 sculptures and so much money when put in perspective. Maybe just maybe it was ok when India had 25% of the world trade, not anymore when it is 118th in the world in terms of GDP per capita.
Relax my friend, no sympathies needed. Whether I am what is defined as a ‘believer’ in your view or not is not the crux of the issue IMHO. And is it really the belief that drives this building or the justification of one’s vanity in having the ‘most beautiful’ or ‘most elaborate’ or something like that under the umbrella of spirituality.
I think in your original post there was an inherent assumption based on your tone, it definitely did not seem without prejudice. And like I said, if the point is valid why care who makes it.
Most of their donations are from American and Canadian hindus.
gulti girl said:
Actually, there is no real difference, but they do tend to separate themselves as a part of a unique sect of Hinduism. I don’t know the details, but I know growing up my parents would talk about a family and as an aside say, “They’re Swaminarayan”. I think a lot of Patel’s tend to be members.
So a beautiful building (in the name of religion) is better then feeding 40000 families!!! Being a Hindu I was always told to feed the hungry and help the poor. I see Hindus donating a ton of money to temple but won’t give $20 for Tsunami victims, won’t buy $5 tickets in a local fund raiser.
This whole logic that $40 million is a waste and should have been spent on charity, seems off to me. Why target buildings like this just because they happen to be visible symbols? Why are other relatively frivolous purchases not given the same scrutiny? How about the millions (maybe billions) people spend on popcorn at the movies? Wouldn’t that be better if given to the poor? How about the millions/billions spent on greeting cards (just to pick something off the top of my head?) The point is, money is spent on so many different things in our economy, and transfers to charity could be made at so many points within the system…this temple does not stand out in that regard.
maybe you should ask those 40,000 people if they would rather get meals handed to them, or work that goes towards a temple.
Maybe you should ask them if all the money people spent on popcorn at movies went to meals for them instead. Maybe you should ask them if all the money that goes into buying People Magazine (for example) should go to their meals instead. Why single out the temple?