Dear Editor,
I must commend Ms. Janette Bulkan for her timely and pertinent question: “Is there a certification process for pujaris?” Her inquiry arrives at a moment of profound national sorrow, and it invites us all to reflect not only on procedural societal safeguards that begin in the community, but on the very philosophical foundations of our respective spiritual traditions. Before I can properly answer her question, however, we must first disentangle a prevailing confusion born out of the adventures to “Anglo-Saxonising” our Guyanese civilization at various points in our lives. That historical voyage created fertile ground for misinterpretation of what constitutes a Hindu Priest, a Pandit, and a Pujari.
We have heard recently from the Head of the Guyana Pandits Council, Pandit Rudra Sharma, whose exposition of the deeper philosophical matters was, as usual, precisely on target. He cautioned members of the public—particularly those at their most vulnerable moments—to beware of those “individuals who misuse spiritual titles.” This caution goes to the very crux of the matter.
It is most unfortunate that over the years, following an intense period of what may be described as an attempt by the “Anglo-Saxons” to understand our practices, a gap was created. Into this gap have crept cunning “con artists”, seeking to project themselves as spiritual leaders to a sometimes, gullible minority. Let me be clear: there is nothing in our scriptures that corresponds to the Western concept of a “Hindu Priest.” The term itself is a foreign and imperialist imposition that was never part of our long-held and sacred traditions. Priest is a terminology from a different faith and has no association with Hinduism.
In Hinduism, the source language is Sanskrit and it is a very contextual language that requires scholarly interpretation. The mandir (Sanskrit word being “mandira”) is headed by a spiritual leader called a “Pandit”. In Sanskrit, the source language of Hinduism, “Paṇḍita” refers to a “wise, educated, or learned scholar”—one who possesses years of rigorous certification and training in the various scriptures, their philosophical interpretation, and their exposition at the “Vyasa Peetha,” the seat from which the scriptures are recited or “Katha” is delivered. In Hinduism, one does not simply “tek up” the Pandit work. You are trained for decades.
As an example, Pandit Rudra Sharma himself, from a very young age (in his single digits), was mentored in the deeper understanding of the scriptures, their interpretations, their meanings, their relevance to our life experiences, and most importantly, he was exposed to extensive training in the necessary oratory skills required to proficiently share that knowledge conscientiously and dutifully for the betterment of mankind. Not everyone who can sing a song or dance to a drumbeat is a Pandit.
On the other hand, a “Pujari” performs ritual worshiping at the puja, under guidance. A Pujari is not a Pandit and is not equipped to offer philosophical or religious advice officially on behalf of the Hindu community. Many pujaris in Guyana are trained through informal apprenticeship—a traditional and valued method of transmission of knowledge to perform their exact activities. But their training has nothing to do with offering spiritual advice or guidance. But let me be unequivocal: they are not Pandits.
But beyond the formal training, the community must accept you in the role of a Pandit based on how you conduct yourself within the community. In our faith, wealth or popularity does not define who a Pandit is. Character matters; training matters; wisdom matters. But what is extremely important, despite a Pujari not being a Pandit, he is also expected to maintain a high standard of cleanliness and adhere to a strict vegetarian diet.
Those who understand our religion know that what we look for most in a spiritual leader is character, the way he and his family conduct their personal lives, and most importantly, his level of emotional intelligence when dealing with the community. The relationship is not one of wanting this and wanting that, but rather a servant leader whose entire life is devoted to the growth of the community.
I recall a case from the village where I grew up, where an “imposter” arrived seeking to project himself as a Pandit without the appropriate character, attitude of mind, or training and asking for this and asking for that. The ladies of the “Lakshmi Sabha” stood up to him and banished him from the temple and the village. Most of these women never finished high school, but they know what was right with respect to the scriptures and what was wrong from the years they spent in the temple listening to trained Pandits.
There are approximately 220,000 practicing Hindus in Guyana. Why should the alleged actions of one imposter be allowed to tarnish the work of a community of hundreds of thousands of persons who are wedded to the bedrock principle of “Ahimsa”(non-violence)? As Pandit Rudra Sharma aptly stated in a social media statement issued on October 22, 2026: “Sanatana Dharma is built upon the fundamental principles of AHIMSA (non-violence), compassion, and respect for all life.” This is why it is a mandatory expectation that all real Pandits and their subordinates, the Pujaris be vegetarians. They are not expected to take life, nor even to ask anyone else to take life.
So let us fix ourselves quickly. What happened at Bath Settlement was not Hinduism. It was an alleged criminal act. I trust that the Guyana Police Force will conduct a thorough and impartial investigation, and if the perpetrators are found guilty, it is for the justice system of Guyana to act—and to act firmly on the facts. The truth matters, and justice must be had for that community and this nation.
I thank Ms. Bulkan once again for bringing this critical question to the public’s attention. Continued dialogue on how we can collectively ensure the safety and spiritual well-being of all our Guyanese families—especially our most vulnerable, our children—is a good reason for a national conversation on these matters.