Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:46:56.699Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gurus and Gifting: Dana, the math reform campaign, and competing visions of Hindu sangathan in twentieth-century India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 March 2018

MALAVIKA KASTURI
MALAVIKA KASTURI*
Affiliation:
Department of History, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

From the early twentieth century, Hindu socio-religious and political bodies debated the use that maths (monastic establishments) made of their wealth, amassed in large part through dana (socio religious gifts). From the early nineteenth century, Anglo Hindu law on inheritance, and thereafter the Religious and Charitable Endowments Acts, had enabled the autonomy of maths by classifying them as private religious corporations, not charitable endowments. This article suggests that the math reform campaign between 1920 and 1940 in north India was impelled by the preoccupations of heterogeneous Hindu political and socio-religious organizations with dana and its potential to fund cultural and political projects regenerating an imagined Hindu socio-religious community. Specifically, the Hindu Mahasabha yoked dana to its Hindu sangathan (unity) campaign to strategically craft an integrated ‘Hindu public’ transcending sampraday (religious traditions) to protect its interests from ‘external enemies’. My discussion probes how the Hindu Mahasabha and its ‘reformist’ allies urged the conversion of maths into public charitable trusts, or endowments accountable to an ephemeral ‘Hindu public’ and the regulation of their expenditure. Monastic orders, guru-based associations like the Bharat Dharma Mahamandala, and the majority of orthodox Hindus successfully opposed this campaign, defending the interests of maths and sampraday before and after independence. In so doing, they challenged Hindu sangathan by articulating alternative visions of the socio-religious publics and communities to be revitalized through philanthropy. Through this discussion, the article charts the uneasy relationship between monasticism and an emerging Hindu nationalist cultural and political consciousness that remained fractured and internally contested.

Type
Research Article
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 52 , Special Issue 1: Charity and Philanthropy in South Asia , January 2018 , pp. 99 - 131
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

I would like to thank Sumathi Ramaswamy, Filippo Osella, and the anonymous referees of Modern Asian Studies for their invaluable feedback on earlier drafts of this article. The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New Delhi funded the research conducted for this article.

References

1 Burghart, R., ‘The Founding of the Ramanandi Sect’, Ethnohistory 25:2 (1978), pp. 121–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pinch, W., Warrior Ascetics and Indian Empires (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006)Google Scholar; Chatterjee, I., Forgotten Friends, Monks, Marriages and Memories of North East India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Datta, R., From Hagiographies to Biographies Ramanuja in Tradition and History (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Kasturi, M., ‘All Gifting is Sacred: the Sanatana Dharma Sabha Movement, Civil Society and the Reform of Dana in Late Colonial India’, Indian Economic and Social History Review (IESHR) 14:1 (2010), pp. 107–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Appadurai, A., ed., The Social Life of Things, Commodities in Cultural Perspective (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the gift economy see Kasturi, ‘All Gifting is Sacred’, p. 110.

4 Gold, D., The Lord as Guru, Hindu Sants as North Indian Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996)Google Scholar; White, D. G., The Alchemical Body, Siddha Traditions in Medieval India (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Hawley, J., ‘The Four Sampradays: Ordering the Religious Past in Mughal North India’, South Asian History and Culture 2:2 (2011), pp. 160–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Meyer, B., Morgan, D., Paine, C., and Plate, S., ‘The Origin and Mission of Material Religion’, Religion 40:3 (2010), pp. 207–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Kasturi, ‘All Gifting is Sacred’, pp. 107–23.

8 Pinch, W., Peasants and Monks in British India (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988)Google Scholar.

9 Kasturi, M., ‘Asceticising Monastic Families, Ascetic Genealogies, Property Feuds and Anglo-Hindu Law in Late Colonial India’, Modern Asian Studies 43:5 (2009), pp. 1039–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kasturi, M., ‘“This Land is Mine”, Mahants, Civil Law and Political Articulations of Hinduism in Twentieth Century North India’, in Filing Religion, State, Hinduism and Courts of Law, ed. Berti, D., Tarrabout, G., and Voix, R. (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 230–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 For a discussion of Hindutva, and the early history of the Hindu Mahasabha and RSS see amongst others Jaffrelot, C., Hindu Nationalist Movement in Indian Politics (New Delhi: Penguin Press, 1993)Google Scholar; Gould, W., Hindu Nationalism and the Language of Politics in Late Colonial India (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005)Google Scholar; Bapu, P., Hindu Mahasabha in North India, 1915–1930, Constructing Nation and History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011)Google Scholar.

11 My analysis primarily focuses on the Hindu Mahasabha's engagement with math reform, not on the RSS and its associated bodies. Hence, while it charts the position of the Mahasabha in relation to such Hindu nationalist bodies, an extended discussion of the Sangh Parivar is beyond the scope of this article.

12 Jones, K., Arya Dharm, Hindu Consciousness in Nineteenth Century Punjab (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976)Google Scholar.

13 Lutgendorf, P., The Life of a Text, Performing the Ramcharitmanas of Tulsidas (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1991)Google Scholar; Hawley, J. S., ‘Sanatana Dharma as the Twentieth Century Began: Two Textbooks Two Languages’, in Religion, Ancient to Modern, Religion, Power and Community in India, ed. Dube, S. (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009), pp. 312–36Google Scholar; Mukul, A., Gita Press and the Making of Hindu India (New Delhi: Permanent Black Press, 2015)Google Scholar.

14 For sampraday and modern Hinduism see Pinch, Peasants and Monks; Dalmia, V., The Nationalisation of Hindu Traditions, Bharatendu Harishchandra and Nineteenth Century Banaras (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1997)Google Scholar.

15 Saraswati, Dayanand, Satyarth Prakash, XL-63 (New Delhi: Subodh Pocket Books, 2011)Google Scholar.

16 M. Kasturi, ‘Sadhus, Sampradayas and Hindu Nationalism; The Dasnamis and the Sri Bharat Dharma Mahamandala in the Early Twentieth Century’, New Delhi: Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML) Occasional Paper, History and Society, New Series, 79, 2015.

17 Novetzske, C., History, Bhakti and Public Memory, Namdev in Religious and Secular Traditions (New Delhi: Permanent Black Press, 2009)Google Scholar; Orsini, F., ‘Booklets and Sants, Religious Publics and Literary History’, South Asia: The Journal of South Asian Studies 38:3 (2015), pp. 435–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 My findings, building on the work of William Pinch, suggest that gurus were vibrant political, social, and cultural actors in the British period, rather than in post-colonial India as suggested by Aya Ikegame. In this context see Pinch, Peasants and Monks, pp. 23–47 and Ikegame, A., ‘The Governing Guru, Hindu Mathas in Liberalising India’, in The Guru in South Asia, New Interdisciplinary Perspectives, ed. Ikegame, A. and Copeman, J. (London: Routledge, 2012), pp. 47–57Google Scholar.

19 Chakraborthy, C., Masculinity, Asceticism, Hinduism, Past and Present Imaginings in India (New Delhi: Permanent Black, 2011)Google Scholar; Scott, B. S., Spiritual Despots, Modern Hinduism and the Genealogies of Self Rule (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Berkerlegge, W., Swami Vivekananda and the Legacy of Service, A Study of the Ramakrishna Math and Mission (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2006)Google Scholar.

21 Agreement Executed by Gosain Tole Ram, 11 March 1880, and Judgment of Sub-Judge of Agra, 14 September 1884, Krishna Das vs. Gosain Tole Ram, First Appeal (F.A) 44/1885, Allahabad High Court Decided Civil Cases Record Room (AHCDCCRC).

22 Faizabad, a Gazetteer, District Gazetteers of Agra and Oudh, Vol. 43 (Allahabad: United Provinces Government Press, 1910), p. 62.

23 Collector, Mirzapur, to Officiating Assistant Secretary to Government, 29 October 1858, Commissioner's Office, Banaras, List 2, Box 2, sl. 14, File 9/1858, Uttar Pradesh Regional Archives, Banaras (UPRAB).

24 Gonda, a Gazetteer, District Gazetteers of Agra and Oudh, Vol. 44 (Allahabad: United Provinces Government Press: 1910), p. 175.

25 See The Societies Registration Act, 1860 at http://bdlaws.minlaw.gov.bd/print_sections_all.php?id=10, [accessed on 28 December 2017].

26 Parsotam Gir vs. Narbarda Gir (Privy Council, Feb 1899), Allahabad Law Journal Report 21 (1900), p. 508.

27 Mayanand Gir vs. Parshottamanand Gir, F.A of 8 January 1943, Allahabad Law Journal Report (1943), pp. 401–11.

28 Ikrarnama of Gangat Gir, quoted in ibid., p. 402.

29 Ikrarnama of Pem Gir, 2 December 1839, quoted in ibid., p. 403.

30 Will of Sheodutt Gir, dated 16 June 1887, quoted in ibid., p. 404.

31 Ibid.

32 Gauri Shankar Jati vs. Raghubans Jati, F.A. 28/1906, AHCCCDRR; Mahadeo Bharti vs. Madho Rai and Others, F. A. 133/1929, AHCCCDRR.

33 Extract from the Riwaz–i-Am of Pergunna Haveli, Awadh, and District Faizabad Relating to the Bairagis. Annexure to Case 13/1916, Central India Agency Records (Judicial), Bundelkhand, File 323 B/1917, National Archives of India (NAI).

34 Kasturi, ‘Asceticising Monastic Families’, pp. 1070–79.

35 Mayanand Gir vs. Parshottamanand Gir, Allahabad Law Journal Report, pp. 404–5.

36 United Provinces Government Gazette, 13 January 1934 (Allahabad: United Provinces Government Press, 1934), p. 70.

37 Leader, 26 January 1930, p. 12.

38 DrTripathi, Triveni Datt and Maharaj, Swami Devanand, Dharmic Matho Ka Sangathan Tatha Karya (Varanasi, 1988), pp. 99–171Google Scholar.

39 ‘Swagatadhyakshya Shri Devdas Thakurdas Ka Bhashan’, Vaishnav Vaibhav 3:1 (Sambat 1982), pp. 16–19. On early twentieth century descriptions of the Yogi Mahasabha see Briggs, G. W., Gorakhnath and the Kanphata Yogis, Indian edition (New Delhi: Motilal Banararsidas Publishers, 2009)Google Scholar.

40 ‘Sri Vaishnav Samaroh, Kashi’, Mahasabha Patra ki Nitia’, Vaidic Sarvasra 4:12 (Allahabad: Triveni Printing Works, Sambat 1973), pp. 283–90.

41 Pinch, Peasants and Monks; Agrawal, P., ‘In Search of Ramanand, The Guru of Kabir and Others’, in Ancient to Modern, Religion, Power and Community in India, ed. Banerjee-Dube, I. and Dube, S. (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009), pp. 152–67Google Scholar.

42 Dugvekar, Pandit Govindshastri, Bhagwat Pujyapad Maharishi Swami Gyananandji Maharaj Ka Jiwanvrith (Kashi: Shri Bharat Dharma Mahamandala Shastra Prakash Vibhag, 1963), pp. 1–7Google Scholar.

43 Ibid., p. 166.

44 Ibid., pp. 154–205.

45 The World's Eternal Religion, Publication Department, Shree Bharat Dharma Mahamandala (Lucknow: Nawal Kishore Press, 1920), pp. 1–2.

46 ‘Bharat Dharma Mahamandala’, Vaidic Sarvasra, 5:1 (Allahabad: Triveni Printing Works, Sambat 1972), p. 193.

47 Appendix A, Appeal Issued on Behalf of the BDMM issued by President, All India Prathinidhi Sabha, BDMM, Foreign and Political Department, Notes, Secret-G, March 1915, No. 1–5, NAI.

48 Report of BDMM for 1915, p. 75, Bharat Dharma Mahamandala Private Institutional Collection, Banaras (BDMMPIC).

49 ‘Notes for the Guidance of Dharma Pracharaks of the Samaj Hitakari Kosh’, The Mahamandala Magazine, January 1925, p. 14.

50 Ibid., pp. 28–31.

51 All India Sanatana Dharma Mahasammelana Third Session at Lahore, Reception Committee, 19 March 1917, 20 February 1916, Subject File (SF) 4, Din Dayal Sharma Papers (DDSP), NMML.

52 Letter from Raja of Narsinghgarh to Maharaja of Indore, 22 February 1914, Foreign and Political Department, Notes, Secret-G, March 1915, 1–5, NAI.

53 Report of BDMM for 1917, p. 17, BDMMPIC.

54 ‘Opening Address of the Maharaja of Darbhanga at the Oriental Conference Held at Banaras, 31 December 1943’, Jha, Hetukar ed., Courage and Benevolence: The Youngest Legislator of India, the Biography of the Honourable Maharajadhiraja Sir Kameshwar Singh Bahadur of Darbhanga 1906–1962 (Darbhangha: Maharajadhiraja Kameshwar Singh Kalyani Foundation, 2007), p. 325Google Scholar.

55 Prime Minister, Faridkot State, to the Secretary, Provincial Committee, BDMM, Mathura, 3 March 1903, PCF, BDMMPIC.

56 Report of BDMM for 1916, Home, Political, B (HP-B), August 1917, No 190-91, NAI, p. 9.

57 Ibid.

56 Ibid.

57 Ibid., pp. 28–31.

60 United Provinces Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Committee Report (Allahabad: United Provinces Government Press, 1930), pp. 18–20 (RECR).

58 Ibid.

59 Letter of Din Dayal Sharma to Swami Gyanananda, quoted in Swaroop Sharma, Harihar, Vyakharan Vachaspati Pandit Din Dayalu Sharma Ki Smarak Granth (New Delhi: 1988), pp. 185–7Google Scholar, 291–5.

60 Letter from Members of Managing Committee Present at the Conference to Members of the BDMM, 20/1/1917, SF 1D, DDSP, NMML.

61 ‘Sachha Sadhu’, Nigamagam Chandrika, (NC), 24:8, p. 192, August 1919.

62 ‘Narpati Ke Sadhu Updesh’, NC, 7:4, pp. 101–2, 1920.

63 ‘Sachha Sadhu’, pp. 191–2; Also see ‘Sadhu Jiwan’, NC, 26:7, pp. 186–192, July 1921.

64 Report of BDMM for 1916, HP-B, August 1917, No 190–91, NAI.

65 Report of BDMM for 1917, pp. 130–31, BDMMPIC.

66 Notes Regarding the Improvement of the BDMM, Majaraja of Narsinghgarh, 5 February 1914, PCF, BDMMPIC; Assistant Manager of the Raja of Darbhanga to the Secretary, BDMM, 23/24 May 1904, PCF, BDMMPIC.

67 Report of BDMM for 1916, HP-B, August 1917, No 190–91, NAI.

68 World's Eternal Religion, p. iii.

69 ‘Mahamandala News’, Suryodaya, The Trilingual Special Quarterly Edition, p. 158, March 1942.

70 ‘Samachar Sangraha: Kashi, Note on Religious Bills (including Advice to the Religious Endowments Committee)’, Kavindra Narain Singh, General Secretary, BDMM, Bharatdharm, p. 28, October 1924.

71 Police Abstracts of Intelligence, United Provinces (PAI), 30/7/1917.

72 Petition of Hanuman Puri in Mussumat Ghasiti Bibi vs. Gosain Rampuri, F. A. 79/1929, AHCCCDRR.

73 ‘Bhahishkaar’ Vaishnava Panch (Sampadak Aur Prakashak, Sri Bhagwandas Khaki, Shri Mahant, Ramanandiya Khaki Akhara, Sri Ayodhya, Vikram 1990) 1:1, pp. 7–8.

74 Shri Sadhu Mahasabha Ki Niyamvalli, 1918, File 10, Printed Material, Harihar Swaroop Sharma Papers (HHSP), NMML.

75 Notice, Sukhbir Sinha, General Secretary, All India Hindu Mahasabha to Announce a Meeting in Dehra Dun on 16 May 1919, SF 5, DDSP, NMML.

76 Ibid.

77 Summary of Resolutions Passed at the Seventh Session of the Hindu Mahasabha held at Banaras on 19, 20, 21 and 22 August 1923 under the Presidentship of Madan Mohan Malaviya, SF 51, HHSSP, NMML.

78 PAI/2/2/1924.

79 ‘Hindu Mahasabha, Banaras’, Leader, 20 August 1923 in F/214/1921, Box 138, GAD, UPSA.

80 Oberoi, H., The Construction of Religious Boundaries, Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 305–76Google Scholar.

81 See the Bharatji satyagraha below.

82 Ramchandra Naik to Chief Magistrate, Banaras, undated, July 1926, Banaras Collectorate Records, List 7, Department 10, File 80/1926, UPRAB.

83 Lakshminarayan Sudhar, Advocate, to Din Dayal Sharma, 10 April 1934, SF 1C, DDSP, NMML.

84 Kasturi, ‘All Gifting is Sacred’, pp. 126–7.

85 Claim for Muafi and Mahantship of Bharatji Temple, Political Department (PD), F/185/1915, Box 360, UPSA.

86 Note on Bharatji Temple Rishikesh, PD in ibid.

87 Mahant Paras Ram, to Superintendent of the Dun, F/8/3/1921, Box 26, Dehra Dun Commissioners Post Mutiny Records (DDCPMR), 1927–28, File 2, Uttarakhand State Regional Archives, Dehra Dun (USADD).

88 Swami Balkrishnadas, Secretary, All India Vaishnava Sammelan, and Vaishnava Dharma Mahamandal Satyug Kuti, Ayodhya (followed by 270 signatures of Bairagis and Mahants from Ballia, Ayodhya, and other districts) to Commissioner, Dehra Dun, 19 February 1930, DDCPMR, Department 15, File 90, USADD. For details of the Bharatji satyagraha see Kasturi, ‘This Land is Mine’, pp. 230–57.

89 PAI/30/8/1924.

90 Singh, Raja Rampal, Sri Bharat Mandir Rishikesh Ke Sambandh Mein Hindu Bhaiyo Ke Brati Avashyak Nivedan (Lucknow: Dharm Rakshana Sabha, 1923)Google Scholar, Jhabarmal Sharma Papers, Printed Material, NMML.

91 ‘Sampadikiya Vichar, Tarakeshwar Satyagraha’, Brahman Sarvasra, p. 204, May 1924.

92 ‘Vividh Vichar, Dharmic Sthaan’ NC, 29, p. 356, July 1924: ‘Mandir Mein Sudhar, Bharatdharm, p. 1, September 1924.

93 ‘Shri Mahamandala Samvad’, NC, pp. 187–8, December 1920.

94 PAI/30/4/1927.

95 Leader, 11 April 1927.

96 Opinion of Tej Bahadur Sapru on Hindu Religious and Charitable Bill of Hari Singh Gour, 16 June 1924, Tej Bahadur Sapru Papers, SF 8, NMML.

97 RECR, p. 1.

98 Ibid.

99 Ibid., p. 50.

100 ‘Samachar Sangraha: Kashi’, l, Varnasram, Banaras 17/3/28, Public Health Department, F/335/1928, Box 24, UPSA.

101 RECR, p. 6. For an assessment of the Endowments Committee, also see ‘Statement of Objects and Reasons’, The Dharmadaya Bill, J P Srivastava, United Provinces Legislative Assembly Debates, 19 April 1938, pp. 325–7.

102 RECR, p. 6.

103 Notes for Drawing up Objections to the Bihar Religious Endowments Bill (1938) in the Form of a Memorial of Mahant Harihar Giri, Mahant of Buddha Gaya, to His Excellency the Governor of the Province of Bihar, undated, SF 12, M. S. Aney Papers, NMML.

104 Petition to Viceroy of India, (Lord Chelmsford) from Krishna Gopal Das, Udasi Samaj, Bara Panchaiti, 25 February 1920, HD, Judicial-B, April 1920, No 319, NAI.

105 PAI/2/2/1925; PAI/25/8/1928.

106 See Trevithick, A., The Revival of Buddhist Pilgrimage at Bodh Gaya (1811–1949); Anagarika Dharmapala and the Mahabodhi Temple (New Delhi: Motilal Bararsidass Publishers, 2006)Google Scholar. For a sustained discussion of how monastic orders and orthodox Hindus engaged with the Buddha Gaya ‘affair’ see M. Kasturi, ‘Producing Hindu Publics, Sadhus, Sampraday and Hindu Nationalism in Twentieth Century India’, chapter on Sampraday and Sangathan (unpublished book manuscript).

107 RECR, p. 123.

108 Ibid., pp. 91, 102, 208.

109 Ibid., p. 123.

110 Ibid., pp. 110A–114A.

111 Swami Dayananda, BDMM, to Harihar Swaroop Sharma, 17 December 1929, SF 5A, HHSSP, NMML.

112 Circular of the Raksha Department, BDMM, 28 November 1932, No 438, M. R. Jayakar Papers, NAI.

113 Authoritative Opinion of Shri Shancharacharya of Karva Peeth, to Viceroy of India (Chelsmford) on the Anti Religious Bills Now Pending before the Legislative Assembly, 1934, LP/J/7/1937, Asian and African Collections, British Library.

114 See for example the Representation to the Cabinet Mission on Behalf of the Sanatanists or Orthodox Hindus sent by J. B. Durkhal, President, Indian Constitution Committee, Dharm Sangh, and President Gujarat Provincial Sanatani Dal, to President and Members of the Cabinet Mission, 8 April 1946, All India Hindu Mahasabha Papers, Miscellaneous SF M-16, NMML.

115 Kasturi, ‘Producing Hindu Publics’, chapter on Swami Karpatri and the Dharm Sangh.

119 Petition of Shri Dharm Sangh Shikshamandal, to Local Government, 15 May 1950, in Mahal Bhadauni Case 39 of 1955, Banaras Collectorate Civil Cases Record Room.

116 Memorandum of Association of Shri Bharat Dharm Sangh Shikshamandal, enclosed in the Petition of Ramnarain Tripathi, Chottelal Kanoria et al, Members of Dharm Sangh, undated, in ibid.

117 D. Gold, ‘Continuities as Gurus Change’, in The Guru in South Asia, pp. 240–52; J. Nair, ‘A Matha Court in Karnataka and the Demand for Legality’, New Delhi: NMML Occasional Paper, History and Society, New Series, 75, 2014. On the Vishva Hindu Parishad see Katju, M., The Vishva Hindu Parishad and Indian Politics (New Delhi: Orient Blackswan Press, 2003)Google Scholar.

118 Brijlal Tripathy, Principal, Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Dakshinamurti math, Banaras, interviewed on 28 February 2015.

119 Swami Ranchor Ashram, Mahant, Machlibandar math, Banaras, Kotwal Kashi interviewed on 28 February 2015.

120 Yogi Chetainath. Mahamantri, Akhil Bharatavarshiya Avadhuta Bhesh Barah Panth Yogi Mahasabha, Haridwar, interviewed on 6 January 2015. Also see www.guruvilasnathji.com/about-us/ (accessed on 13 February 2018).

121 For information on these institutions I am indebted to Narendra Giri, Mahant, Baghambari math, Allahabad, interviewed on 23 March 2015 and Viswanathanand Puri, Librarian, Dakshinamurti math, Banaras, interviewed on 28 February 2015.

122 Interview with Pratab Rao, Principal, Maharana Pratab Mahavidyalaya, Jungle Ghusad, Gorakhpur, 2 April 2015. For the math's charitable institutions see http://www.gorakhnathmandir.in/chitksha.html, [accessed on 28 December 2016]. On the Gorakhnath math, see S. Chaturvedi, ‘Religion, Culture and Power: A Study of Everyday Politics in Gorakhpur’, (unpublished PhD dissertation, Centre For Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University 2016); M. Kasturi, ‘Negotiating the Sacred in Twentieth Century Gorakhpur, the Nath Yogis, the Gorakhnath Math and Contested Urban Space', in Urban Spaces in India, ed. P. Datta and N. Gupta (New Delhi: Secretary of the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla, in press), pp. 189–206; Kasturi, ‘Producing Hindu Publics’, chapter on Baba Digvijaynath and the Gorakhnath math.