WOMEN, ARE YOUR IRUMUDIKETTU READY?
Asha.Prakash@timesgroup.com 30.09.2018
When a woman entered the Shani Shingnapur Temple in Maharashtra in November 2015, the priests did a ritualistic cleansing of the temple, since women were not allowed inside till then. It was this incident which incited activist Trupti Desai to set out to break all such rules in temples across the country, and when Trupti initially campaigned for the entry of women at the Sabarimala temple, it was termed sacrilege. Slowly, but steadily, the movement gained momentum and after many twists and turns, and courtroom arguments that ranged from the physiological to the advaitic concepts, the “unthinkable’’ has finally happened, and in a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has scrapped the provision in the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965, which restricts women from entering temples during menstruation, making it possible for women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala temple. The restriction went against the Constitution, and men and women have equal right to pray, the five-judge panel bench said. From now on, women can climb the famed hill alongside men, but questions remain still — what about the lack of facilities in the temple premises? Will devout women take the leap and break the centuries-old tradition? Will the crowd become unmanageable during the mandala puja season? We listen in on the opinions:
THIS ORDER HURTS THE SENTIMENTS OF DEVOUT HINDUS
I am against women in the age group of 10 and 50 going to Sabarimala. Traditionally, we have been observing certain rituals and restrictions, and the same should continue. Unlike other temples, the Sabarimala shrine is unique in many ways and we should not be disturbing the existing practices there. I think court should not interfere in the belief systems of people. We, Hindus have always been soft-targets for politicians and I think this court order too sidelines the sentiments of devout Hindus.
APPUKUTTAN M, President, Ayyappa Baktha Samajam
Arakattalai, Ayanavaram
Devotees throng the
sannidhanam
‘INCONVENIENCE, DISCOMFORT, SAFETY OF WOMEN ARE WORRYING’
‘THIS VERDICT WILL OPEN DOORS FOR WOMEN’
We welcome the verdict whole-heartedly. Not allowing a woman between 10 and 50 years of age, just because she bleeds was quite a regressive thought. Women have always respected religious sentiments and have refrained from going to temple on those days of the month. So, why not allow them the right to worship? It was Thanthai Periyar’s dream that people of all castes become priests at a temple. Kerala set an example by appointing a Dalit priest. I hope the Kerala government accepts this verdict and makes the necessary arrangements for women to go the temple. The Indian constitution provides equal rights to men and women but in some places of worship, like that of Sabarimala, this has not been followed. This verdict will open doors for women in many other places of worship where they are not allowed to enter.
P SUGANTHI, STATE GENERAL SECRETARY OF ALL INDIA DEMOCRATIC WOMEN’S ASSOCIATION (AIDWA)
THE PATH TO THE MOUNTAIN SHRINE WILL BECOME A DEN FOR ANTISOCIAL ELEMENTS
I agree that the verdict of the Supreme Court has to be followed. But personally, more than the expected ritualistic practices, that are unique of the character of the presiding deity, the inconvenience, discomfort, issues on security and safety of women that they have to face are more worrying to me. I have been going to Sabarimala for more than a decade now, and even during the period of the monthly pujas, women devotees have to face severe accommodation problems at the sannidhanam. Sanitation issues during the climb and even at the top are beyond explanation. The miserable condition of rooms without locks, lack of proper security measures, poorly-maintained toilets are all common there. If a large number of young women start visiting the shrine, there is every chance that the place also turns out to be a den of anti-socials.
MEERA KRISHNANKUTTY, WRITER
‘IT IS NOT THE COURT WHICH SHOULD HAVE MADE SUCH DECISIONS’
Is there any problem in women entering a temple where the deity is a brahmachari? No. But the nature of the deity should be changed if women are to enter, in my opinion. It is Manikantan Ayyappan, who has been installed as the diety in Sabarimala, not Sashtavu, who has two wives. Manikantan Ayyappan is a bachelor and an avataram of Sashtavu.
I agree that there should be change; in Koratti and Tiruvalla temples, women were not allowed for long, but they are now. But, in Chengannur Sashthakulangara Temple, they are still not allowed inside the nalambalam. It might be because the swamiyars who conduct the pujas are brahmacharis.
However, it is not the court which should have made such decisions, in my view. It is true that Amma Maharani, Chithira Thirunal’s mother, had climbed Sabarimala when she was below 45 years. But she had calculated the dates of her periods and also, she was carried all the way in a doli. Also, she entered through another route by climbing down a hill, not through the famed pathinettam padi. She did it because she had taken a vow to visit the temple since her son was facing some issues. But later, her family priest condemned her act.
MG SASIBHOOSHAN, HISTORIAN
‘JUDGEMENT PROVIDES WOMEN EQUAL RIGHTS’
I have always believed that some of the biggest achievers in our civilisation — be it Avvaiyar, Meera or even Karaikal Ammaiyar — they have never been celebrated as empowered women. All these women were extremely devoted to their respective gods, but they were never recognised as the enlightened ones. I think, we as a society, have never given women their due recognition. Similarly, by denying women the right to worship, we have tried to establish the idea that women can never be great devotees.
Who placed these restrictions on women at Sabarimala? Was this diktat created by the Lord? No! We created it. The other theory is that women were not allowed inside Sabarimala as the path to the temple was extremely treacherous and were not safe for women. There was also a risk of wild animals attacking them. However, there is no proof to the argument that Lord Ayyappa won’t be pleased to see women. Today, things have changed and the roads to the temple are safer and easier than they used to be in the days of yore. The Supreme Court has given the right verdict by upholding women’s rights to worship. This should have been done by the Kerala governments itself, but it’s better late than never. Instead of looking at the verdict as Supreme Court’s intrusion in matters of religion, one should consider this a judgment that provides women equal rights.
M CHANDRA KUMAR, WRITER
‘I WILL GO TO THE TEMPLE ONLY AFTER THE PRESCRIBED AGE’
It has been the temple’s tradition to not allow young women inside the temple. Why are we suddenly questioning and changing ancient practices that we have been following for many decades? There is no question of gender bias in the temple. It is said that the deity in the temple, Lord Ayyappa, is celibate, and hence, women do not go there. If someone really wants to worship Lord Ayyappa, why can’t they go to other Ayyappa temples in the country? Though the judgment has come in favour of women, I will go to the temple only after the prescribed age.
GEETHA V, HOMEMAKER
(With inputs by Sangeetha.P@timesgroup.com and Sindhu.Vijayakumar@timesgroup.com)
Asha.Prakash@timesgroup.com 30.09.2018
When a woman entered the Shani Shingnapur Temple in Maharashtra in November 2015, the priests did a ritualistic cleansing of the temple, since women were not allowed inside till then. It was this incident which incited activist Trupti Desai to set out to break all such rules in temples across the country, and when Trupti initially campaigned for the entry of women at the Sabarimala temple, it was termed sacrilege. Slowly, but steadily, the movement gained momentum and after many twists and turns, and courtroom arguments that ranged from the physiological to the advaitic concepts, the “unthinkable’’ has finally happened, and in a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has scrapped the provision in the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965, which restricts women from entering temples during menstruation, making it possible for women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala temple. The restriction went against the Constitution, and men and women have equal right to pray, the five-judge panel bench said. From now on, women can climb the famed hill alongside men, but questions remain still — what about the lack of facilities in the temple premises? Will devout women take the leap and break the centuries-old tradition? Will the crowd become unmanageable during the mandala puja season? We listen in on the opinions:
THIS ORDER HURTS THE SENTIMENTS OF DEVOUT HINDUS
I am against women in the age group of 10 and 50 going to Sabarimala. Traditionally, we have been observing certain rituals and restrictions, and the same should continue. Unlike other temples, the Sabarimala shrine is unique in many ways and we should not be disturbing the existing practices there. I think court should not interfere in the belief systems of people. We, Hindus have always been soft-targets for politicians and I think this court order too sidelines the sentiments of devout Hindus.
APPUKUTTAN M, President, Ayyappa Baktha Samajam
Arakattalai, Ayanavaram
Devotees throng the
sannidhanam
‘INCONVENIENCE, DISCOMFORT, SAFETY OF WOMEN ARE WORRYING’
‘THIS VERDICT WILL OPEN DOORS FOR WOMEN’
We welcome the verdict whole-heartedly. Not allowing a woman between 10 and 50 years of age, just because she bleeds was quite a regressive thought. Women have always respected religious sentiments and have refrained from going to temple on those days of the month. So, why not allow them the right to worship? It was Thanthai Periyar’s dream that people of all castes become priests at a temple. Kerala set an example by appointing a Dalit priest. I hope the Kerala government accepts this verdict and makes the necessary arrangements for women to go the temple. The Indian constitution provides equal rights to men and women but in some places of worship, like that of Sabarimala, this has not been followed. This verdict will open doors for women in many other places of worship where they are not allowed to enter.
P SUGANTHI, STATE GENERAL SECRETARY OF ALL INDIA DEMOCRATIC WOMEN’S ASSOCIATION (AIDWA)
THE PATH TO THE MOUNTAIN SHRINE WILL BECOME A DEN FOR ANTISOCIAL ELEMENTS
I agree that the verdict of the Supreme Court has to be followed. But personally, more than the expected ritualistic practices, that are unique of the character of the presiding deity, the inconvenience, discomfort, issues on security and safety of women that they have to face are more worrying to me. I have been going to Sabarimala for more than a decade now, and even during the period of the monthly pujas, women devotees have to face severe accommodation problems at the sannidhanam. Sanitation issues during the climb and even at the top are beyond explanation. The miserable condition of rooms without locks, lack of proper security measures, poorly-maintained toilets are all common there. If a large number of young women start visiting the shrine, there is every chance that the place also turns out to be a den of anti-socials.
MEERA KRISHNANKUTTY, WRITER
‘IT IS NOT THE COURT WHICH SHOULD HAVE MADE SUCH DECISIONS’
Is there any problem in women entering a temple where the deity is a brahmachari? No. But the nature of the deity should be changed if women are to enter, in my opinion. It is Manikantan Ayyappan, who has been installed as the diety in Sabarimala, not Sashtavu, who has two wives. Manikantan Ayyappan is a bachelor and an avataram of Sashtavu.
I agree that there should be change; in Koratti and Tiruvalla temples, women were not allowed for long, but they are now. But, in Chengannur Sashthakulangara Temple, they are still not allowed inside the nalambalam. It might be because the swamiyars who conduct the pujas are brahmacharis.
However, it is not the court which should have made such decisions, in my view. It is true that Amma Maharani, Chithira Thirunal’s mother, had climbed Sabarimala when she was below 45 years. But she had calculated the dates of her periods and also, she was carried all the way in a doli. Also, she entered through another route by climbing down a hill, not through the famed pathinettam padi. She did it because she had taken a vow to visit the temple since her son was facing some issues. But later, her family priest condemned her act.
MG SASIBHOOSHAN, HISTORIAN
‘JUDGEMENT PROVIDES WOMEN EQUAL RIGHTS’
I have always believed that some of the biggest achievers in our civilisation — be it Avvaiyar, Meera or even Karaikal Ammaiyar — they have never been celebrated as empowered women. All these women were extremely devoted to their respective gods, but they were never recognised as the enlightened ones. I think, we as a society, have never given women their due recognition. Similarly, by denying women the right to worship, we have tried to establish the idea that women can never be great devotees.
Who placed these restrictions on women at Sabarimala? Was this diktat created by the Lord? No! We created it. The other theory is that women were not allowed inside Sabarimala as the path to the temple was extremely treacherous and were not safe for women. There was also a risk of wild animals attacking them. However, there is no proof to the argument that Lord Ayyappa won’t be pleased to see women. Today, things have changed and the roads to the temple are safer and easier than they used to be in the days of yore. The Supreme Court has given the right verdict by upholding women’s rights to worship. This should have been done by the Kerala governments itself, but it’s better late than never. Instead of looking at the verdict as Supreme Court’s intrusion in matters of religion, one should consider this a judgment that provides women equal rights.
M CHANDRA KUMAR, WRITER
‘I WILL GO TO THE TEMPLE ONLY AFTER THE PRESCRIBED AGE’
It has been the temple’s tradition to not allow young women inside the temple. Why are we suddenly questioning and changing ancient practices that we have been following for many decades? There is no question of gender bias in the temple. It is said that the deity in the temple, Lord Ayyappa, is celibate, and hence, women do not go there. If someone really wants to worship Lord Ayyappa, why can’t they go to other Ayyappa temples in the country? Though the judgment has come in favour of women, I will go to the temple only after the prescribed age.
GEETHA V, HOMEMAKER
(With inputs by Sangeetha.P@timesgroup.com and Sindhu.Vijayakumar@timesgroup.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment