A Jagannath temple in Digha has ignited a political and religious controversy
between Bengal and Odisha.
KOLKATA: A newly inaugurated Jagannath temple in Digha, West Bengal, built with government funds and with the active patronage of Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, has sparked a major controversy between the neighbouring eastern states of Odisha and West Bengal. At the heart of the dispute is Banerjee’s decision to call the temple “Jagannath Dham,” a title traditionally and scripturally exclusive to the historic 12th-century Jagannath Temple in Puri, Odisha—one of Hinduism’s most sacred pilgrimage sites. The Digha Jagannath Temple is a replica of the world-famous shrine in Puri and was inaugurated with much fanfare by Banerjee on the occasion of Akshaya Tritiya on April 30. In official papers, however, the temple has been referred to as the “Jagannath Dham Sanskriti Kendra.” Built over 22 acres at a cost of approximately Rs 250 crore, the temple in Digha is being promoted as both a spiritual centre and a tourist attraction. Trinamool Congress leaders, led by their supremo, have used slogans such as “No need to go to Puri to see Jagannath Dham and the sea. Now come to Digha.” Slogans and comments like these have intensified resentment. The term ‘Dham’ holds deep religious significance in Hindu theology. Adi Shankaracharya, the prominent 8thcentury Hindu philosopher, designated four key pilgrimage sites as India’s official ‘Char Dham’: Badrinath, Dwarka, Rameswaram, and Puri. Religious scholars, priests, and servitors from Odisha have strongly protested West Bengal’s usage of the term, claiming it misrepresents and undermines centuries-old traditions. The Odisha government has ordered a probe into allegations that leftover timber procured for the Nabakalebara rituals at the Jagannath Temple in Puri was used to carve the idols of the sibling deities at the new temple complex in Digha. In a letter addressed to Arabinda Padhee, Chief Administrator of the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration (SJTA) in Puri, Odisha Law Minister Prithiviraj Harichandan wrote: “Use of sacred Daru (wood procured for the Nabakalebara rituals) in making of idols in the Digha Jagannath Temple is unacceptable.” Nabakalebara, held at irregular intervals—typically every 12 to 19 years—is a sacred ritual marking the symbolic death and rebirth of Lord Jagannath. It involves the creation and installation of new wooden idols of Jagannath, Balabhadra, Subhadra, and Sudarshan, while the old ones are ritually buried within the temple premises at Koili Baikuntha. This elaborate ceremony is one of the most significant events in the Jagannath tradition. Harichandan also noted that it was improper for sevayats, the traditional priests of the Puri Jagannath Temple, to participate in the consecration ceremony of the newly constructed temple at Digha and in naming it “Jagannath Dham.” “This has hurt the sentiments of Jagannath devotees and the 4.5 crore people of Odisha. The SJTA should conduct an internal probe and bring the truth to light. If someone is found guilty or knowingly involved in wrongdoing, they should be penalised after obtaining due permission from the state government,” said the Law Minister. There are two sets of idols installed in the Digha Temple—one made of stone and another of neem timber. Ramakrushna Dasmohapatra, a prominent sevayat, admitted to attending the consecration event. “Establishment of Jagannath temples outside Puri is not new. When we were invited to the Digha temple, we raised objections to the stone-carved Jagannath idols. Sibling deities—Lord Jagannath, Lord Balabhadra, and Devi Subhadra—are always made of timber. On our advice, another set of idols was installed. The idols made from neem timber were carved in Puri and used in the Digha temple,” said Dasmohapatra. On the controversy surrounding the naming of the temple complex as “Dham,” Dasmohapatra said, “The Digha temple complex cannot be a ‘Dham,’ as the Puri Jagannath Temple is one of four sacred centres or ‘Dhams’ of Hindu religion in the country. Both states should mutually discuss the matter and erase the name ‘Dham’ from the Digha temple complex.” Sudarsan Pattnaik, a prominent international sand artist and Padma Shri awardee from Odisha, has publicly expressed concern about the situation. In a letter addressed to Majhi, Pattnaik wrote, “This statement has deeply hurt the religious sentiments of millions of Jagannath devotees worldwide. According to our sacred scriptures, there exists only one Jagannath Dham, which is located in Puri. Associating any other temple with the title may lead to confusion and contradict long-standing spiritual and Hindu cultural traditions.” Pattnaik has urged the Odisha government to engage diplomatically with its West Bengal counterpart to resolve the issue amicably. Copies of his letter were also sent to Harichandan. Adding to the dispute, promotional materials released by the West Bengal government featured imagery that closely resembled the Neelachakra and Bana—sacred symbols associated exclusively with the Puri Jagannath Temple. Critics have accused the West Bengal government of cultural appropriation, claiming that the use of these symbols blurs the distinction between the two temples. Meanwhile, West Bengal’s Leader of the Opposition and senior BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari has issued an open letter to former West Bengal Chief Secretary H. K. Dwivedi, who heads the trust that runs the complex, demanding immediate clarification. Adhikari highlighted tender documents from the West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation (HIDCO), which oversaw the construction. These documents describe the structure as the “Jagannath Dham Sanskriti Kendra,” and Adhikari questioned the conflicting public messaging. “If this is a cultural centre, why is the public being invited to a temple inauguration? The invitation card must clearly state what is being inaugurated—a temple or a centre,” Adhikari wrote. Adhikari also questioned the legal validity of using state funds for building religious structures, citing the constitutional separation of religion and state. He compared it to the construction of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, funded entirely by public donations. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, a leading lawyer and Rajya Sabha MP representing the CPI(M), said, “First of all the taxpayers’ money, according to the Constitution, cannot be spent for propagation of any religion under Article 25, 26 and 27, which are crystal clear about this. Mamata has constructed a Government temple at Digha with the taxpayers’ money. Public funds must be spent for good public purposes. She has crossed all boundaries by misusing public funds for religious purposes.”