Why hasn't Rav Dunner made a full written accounting of what he claims to have seen, so that other Rabbonim could be in a better position to critically evaluate this for themselves?

The hair offering puja can be done anytime from 9:45 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. during weekdays. During weekends, hair-offering cannot be performed between 10:45 a.m. to 1:30 p.m., because of Abhishekam. At the time of puja, three strands of hair are removed. If full tonsure is required after the puja, you may have to go Tony’s Barber Shop which is 2 miles from the temple. The direction for the shop is available at the temple office. Please note that the barber shop is closed on Sundays and Mondays. The puja charges are $31, and Tony charges about $10. If you need his services on Sunday or Monday, please call him at 412-856-6223 (Shop) or 724-726-5754 for an appointment. He charges $20 on Sundays and Mondays.

End quote.

No, the tonsure does NOT have to be done in or at a temple, not by a priest, nor by a hindu, nor is it, in and of itself, an act of worship.

Q: I understand from what you told me that the tonsure hair cutting practice is absolutely not a sacrifice to the gods. Last week a someone I know was in Tirupati and asked some pilgrims explicitly what they mean when they say the hair is an “offering”, and they said that they mean the hair is an offering to the god, and even when asked a few times they insisted that it is indeed an offering to the god and by that they mean a real offering, that the hair is going to the god.

A: There are twenty languages spoken by the pilgrims, they come form India, from various places, and to Westerners the meaning of “offer” is different, no matter how you explain it a westerner won’t understand it the way it really means. The meaning of “offer” is not the same in the ancient languages and in Indian – “offer” means “surrender” “renunciation” so they are saying yes they surrender to the gods and the gods “receive” the surrender, but that means that the gods are happy with it, like you may say someone “got the meaning” of what you say it doesn’t mean he physically gets it, it means he understands it. The same thing when a pilgrim says they “offer” to the gods it means they surrender their inner selves to the gods and the gods understand and accept their surrender – “accept” meaning agree …

If you want to call it an offering it makes sense but what it means in the Hindu religion is different.

Q: Like we might say G-d “accepts” our repentance
A: Yes, yes. It is like that. There is no parallel word in the West for “offering” in this sense. It means “we surrender our ego”. The pilgrims they don’t know English well, they say it the way they can.

Everything they do, it’s an “offering” to god. By worshipping god you become one with god so you give up your ego to god in that sense. The first prayer is SHIVA – “we become one with you”.

The haircutting is done outside, then they take a bath and go inside and then they offer coconuts and fruits to the god, but the haircut is nothing holy it is nothing sacred, not at all, my wife took my daughter when she was 6 months old to Tirupati, and the hair was offered, and if you talk to these pilgrims they will say whatever they say but what they mean is that they are renunciation their prized possession and the gods accept their renunciation, meaning the gods agree and are happy about it.

Q: Is it possible anything changed in the procedure in the past 15 years?
A: No, no, nothing has changed at all. It is all the same way it was always done. Nothing has changed.

1) No. The cutting takes place outside of the Temples, and not in front of any god-images.

2) In Tirupati, the barbers are employees of the tmeples, and lisenced, but there is no law that a barber has to be anything. Tehre doesnt even have to be a barber - the woman can cut the hair herself, or, she can go to Tony or Pete's barber shop and accomplish the same thing. The lisence is not "smicha" or anything like that, but somply a barbers lisence to do the haircut. Rabbi Dunner had not a shred of evidence that the barber has anything in mind at all.

Shmuel,

The original documents that Rav Elyashev saw are not publicly available, and I do not know whether Rav Eyashev himslef still has them. But ... here they are. The following post is the exact transcript of Dr. Mohan that Rav Elyashev used originally in the heter; Dr Eck's letter will follow shortly, iy"h. (I have to get someoen to type it up).

Q: I need to know about the custom prevalent among the Dravidian Hindus mostly in Southern India in the Madras region, where on certain occasions they cut off their hair and bring it to the temple. Are you familiar with such a custom?
A: They don’t cut off the hair and bring it to the temple; they usually cut it at the temple itself, and offer the hair.

Q: They offer the hair?
A: Yes.

Q: They offer the hair to whom? Do they offer it to the god or to the priest or what?
A: Well, they don’t really offer it to anybody in that sense. I mean, the offering, the redeeming, they offer a vow to do away with something they consider most precious, most valuable, and if they have beautiful hair, if that is the most valuable thing they have, so they take a vow that if whatever happens, they will give away this most prized possession. So you just go there and get rid of the hair. It’s not a question of offering it physically in a tangible way to somebody or the other.

Q: I see. And the cutting of the hair is not a way of worshipping the god or something like that?
A: No, no, it’s just the redeeming of a pledge.

Q: I see. And the cutting of the hair is not a way of worshipping the god or something like that?
A: No, no, it’s just the redeeming of a pledge.

Q: I see. And the cutting off of the hair – does that have to be done in the temple?
A: Ah, well, usually they go to the temple, you know, there is a large amount of land around the temple.

Q: So they go to the temples and cut off the hair there?
A: Yes.

Q: And does the hair get cut off by the priest or by the barber?
A: No, by the barber.
Q: There are barbers in the temples?
A: Right, not in the temples, outside the temples.

Q: You mean the temple owns a barbershop on its grounds?
A: No, its not a barber shop, it’s just, you cut.

Q: You cut outside the temple. What do they do with the hair?
A: Ah, the hair is then cleaned, and then exported to America.

Q: Really?
A: Sure, what do you think?

Q: I don’t know, but…
A: They all come as wigs.

Q: And what about when a child gets his first haircut?
A: Same thing.

Q: Same thing. It’s also not a sacrifice.
A: Ah, well, I can’t get the thrust of your [questions].

Q: You see, I’m doing research about the Hindu religion, about their customs, and I must know if the Hindus believe that they sacrifice their hair to the god, or they offer it up to the god, and I want to know about the cutting of the hair, if the cutting is a way they worship the god, because . . .
A: No, no, no, no.

Q: There are certain religions that would cut their hair, and the cutting of the hair itself was an act of worship to the god, such as bowing down or slaughtering an animal.
A: No, nothing like that.

Q: Nothing like that.
A: Somebody else may come and throw in a diamond earring in an offer, or a gold bangle, or a gold chain. There are numerous ways which you can offer what you consider very valuable [to] a person. But for somebody whose most precious thing is long, silken hair, that’s what they offer.

Q: Let’s take the gold and the diamonds. Where does that go?
A: There’s a huge collection of boxes, or deposits.

Q: The temple keeps it?
A: Well, the temple keeps it, invests it, uses it as money, you know.

Q: And probably the money that the hair is sold for also goes to the temple.
A: It also goes to the temple, yes.

Q: So in other words, this is a way of donating money to the temple.
A: In effect, yes.

Q: But it’s not like an offering to a god in the sense of a sacrifice, like in the Bible they made sacrifices, you know, where they would take an animal and slaughter it on an alter.
A: No, no, no, no.

Q: They don’t put the hair on any sort of an alter?
A: No, no, no.

Q: The just give it to the priest and the priest sends it to the importer.
A: Right. In fact, barberry is considered unclean. That’s why it’s done outside in the precinct of the temple . . . not in the temple, but on the temple grounds. And then, one goes and has a bath to cleanse yourself.

Q: It’s like a ritual bath?
A: Yeah, well, it’s a regular bath, it’s nothing. Then after you take your bath and you are clean then you can go inside the temple.

Q: And they just give the hair to the priest? Do they say any prayers?
A: No, they don’t give it to the priest. It’s all collected outside the temple.

Q: So the hair never goes into the temple?
A: Never, never.

Q: Let me ask you something. Why do the priests get the money for this? Why can’t the people themselves sell it? Is there any law . . .
A: No, the priests don’t sell it!

Q: The priests don’t sell it?
A: No. The priests have no function in the administrative office of the temple. The trustees do that.

Q: The trustees sell it. Is there nay law that the profits for the hair have to accrue to the benefit of the temple?
A: Well, insofar as they are offered within the temple precinct on the temple grounds, on temple property . . .

Q: But is there any law that it has to be offered within the temple property?
A: No, no, there is no law at all. Nothing like it.

Q: Why would the people agree to give the money to the temple as opposed to taking it themselves?
A: Well, what’s the point of it then? You aren’t giving it away; you are making a profit out of it then. What is the sanctity of saying, “Well, if this happens, I’ll offer my hair,” and then you want to profit form that!

Q: Okay, then why can’t they just cut to off and throw it in the garbage?
A: Well, because you say you are offering to the presiding deity at that particular temple, so there’s no point in throwing it in the garbage!

Q: I see. They do offer it to accrue to the benefit of the temple.
A: Of course, but in the olden days nobody did that. Okay, a hundred years ago or a couple of hundred years ago you would just throw it in the garbage.

Q: They used to throw it in the garbage.
A: Of course. That’s because it had no use. Then some smart Americans must have gotten there and said, Ah, there’s a lot of money!”

Q: The temples used to throw it in the garbage.
A: Yes.

Q: Then some smart Americans started importing it. Because I do know there are some exporters in Bombay and Madras that export temple hair.
A: Of course! I am not kidding – it’s a fact! They have made beautiful expensive wigs. And they are exported to the United States.

Q: And do the people who offer up the hair know where it eventually ends up?
A: No.

Q: They don’t know?
A: They just come there . . .

Q: So in other words the exporters know, and the people in America know, but the ones giving the hair don’t know where their hair is going.
A: They don’t have to. Their function is done when they are leaving the pledge. The yare not interested . . .

But what Rabbi Dunner did nto realize is the language disparity and nuances such that they were telling him something using their syntax and he understood it in ours. Rav ELyashev did reportedly ask him to find out if they think they are sacrificing to the gods, and he did ask them that, and he did report that back. But he did not understand the maeaning of their remarks.

And this particular factor - the language nuances - was not made avialable to Rav Elyashev back then, sine it was not an issue. Teh research that was done then wa more thorough than that which was done now, and so the meaning of the statements were clarified, and those clarificaitons were presented to Rav ELyashev as part of the Hindu;s testimony - as per Dr. Mohan above. It was not necessary then to explain to Rav Elyashev that they use these words differently than we do, and their understanding of "offering" is not the same as ours, because the Hindus that were contacted then knew English well and explained it according so that we would understand it. The Hindus that were quesitoned now did not know how to explain themselves except the way Hindus usually do. And that led to the language problem.