Page 11 - 30NOV2019EA

FAITH

from visiting the temple.
“Also, uniqueness is soul of every
temple. Lakhs of women come eve-
ry year. There is only one limitation
which is the age and that is due to the
nature of the prathishta. This clearly not
inequality,” he adds.

nother devotee from North
Kerala, AV Arun, who is a CEO
A at a software company in
Bangalore, says even men have some
restrictions on temple entrance. For
example, if a man has had kids or his
relative dies, he cannot go to Sabari-
mala. Every deity has a nature of his
own, and accordingly the restrictions
are set. Every belief comes from a
word, called Sankalpa (imagination)
in Sanskrit. It’s the Sankalpa about a A 5-judge Constitution stepped into Sabarimala temple. In 1991,
deity that makes a deity, it’s not a piece a petition by a devotee named Mahen-
of stone. That’s what makes every bench, headed by dran led to massive protest when he
temple alive. “The Sankalpa about the pointed out that the temple manage-
Sabarimala is that the deity is a Naish- the then Chief Justice ment had played favouritism by allow-
tika Brahmachari. So, we are honouring Ranjan Gogoi, in a 3:2 ing some VVIP women into the sanc-
that Sankalpa,” says Arun. tum. The Kerala High Court then ruled
About the protest, he claims that majority verdict, had out that women of menstruating age
the protestors being outsiders (not referred to a larger between 10-50 will be forbidden from
from South India), who have no knowl- entering into Sabarimala temple.
edge of the traditions and the essence 7-judge bench the The Left-run Pinarayi Vijayan gov-
of the rituals in Sabarimala temple. pleas seeking review ernment in Kerala has been blamed
“To give you the perspective, let’s say a for vacillating between supporting
corporate built a replica of Taj Mahal, of its 2018 judgement and dithering on the demands of
will you be interested in visiting it? on Sabarimala temple the devotees. To everyone’s surprise,
Likely not, because in your mind, Taj Kerala Devaswom Minister Kadakam-
Mahal is not just a physical structure, pally Surendran said that Sabarimala
but the aggregation of history, be- to Sabarimala on the grounds of gen- is not a ground for activism and “the
lieves and experiences associated with. der and biological differences tanta- LDF government would not support
Similarly, if I change the core of Saba- mount to violation of the constitution. those who make announcements about
rimala, it won’t be the same temple The Apex Court reiterated that the ban entering the hill shrine for the sake
anymore.” violated the right to equality under Ar- of publicity.”
ticle 14 and freedom of religion under Now, all eyes will be on the Kerala
What SC says? Article 25. government since the ball is in their
The Supreme Court on November 20 Following the new review petitions court to draft a new and separate
directed the state government to draft filed in the Supreme Court, the five- legislation on Sabarimala temple, as
a separate and new legislation for judge bench headed by Chief Justice directed by the top court. Also, let’s
Sabarimala temple, for the administra- Ranjan Gogoi on November 14 had wait till January 2020 to see whether
tion and welfare of the pilgrims to the decided to refer the issue to a larger Supreme Court would go with the same
shrine located in Periyar Tiger Reserve bench in a 3:2 verdict to re-examine precedent it had set with the Ayodhya
in Kerala. The apex court gave a dead- religious issues. The bench will also judgment or will it go back to its earlier
line of the third week of January 2020 reexamine those religious issues aris- verdict of September 28, 2018, that the
to frame the new law. ing out of its 2018 verdict lifting the ban Sabarimala temple violates freedom of
In September last year, the Supreme on women of menstruating age visiting religion under Article 25.
Court had ruled in favour of the women Sabarimala.
devotees stating that disallowing entry It is not that women have never LETTERS@TEHELKA.COM

11