While Sabarimala issue remained in headlines throughout 2018, eyebrows were raised yet again in the very beginning of 2019 when two women sought entry in the sanctum sanctorum of the holy shrine. A few days later another woman from Sri Lanka committed the same ‘sin’. These entries were followed by the so-called purification ritual by the temple priests. What disturbs me is the fact that despite the landmark judgement given by the highest court of land only three could make it to the temple. The more shocking thing to witness is how the whole issue has been politicised over the time with the greater question of gender discrimination being left behind. While everyday we hear about issues like feminism, gender equality and so on when it really comes to giving proper voice to these concepts – we falter. Let me tell you why.
The whole clash revolves around the custom of restricting menstruating women between the age group of 10-50 years from entering the temple. The raison d’etre is that the women between the age group of 10-50 years are considered to be impure, as they are menstruating. Those who second this stand to forget the fact that the ban was only legalised by the Kerela High Court only in 1991 as before this there was an ample number of examples of women entering into the temple belonging to the so-called banned age group. The point raised by the Ayyappans regarding the entry of women in Sabarimala was that it will destroy the celibacy of god and the devotees are wrong as brahmacharya refers to complete abstinence of an individual from all sorts of sexual activities and sexual behavior. The point here to be noticed is that nowhere in any of the historical tales or ancient text it is being mentioned that women cannot observe Naishtika Brahmacharya. Women can also observe 41 days penance, menstruating doesn’t mean that there exists some sexual thoughts or presence of sexual activity; in fact, menstruation can be referred to as the sole source of procreation.
If we talk in legal context every citizen in India has the Right to equality as a Fundamental Right conferred under Part III of the Indian Constitution which is being denied to women in case of Sabarimala temple. If the classification was not based on gender, it should not have excluded women only. But the obvious fact is that classifying on the basis of menstruation will end up being a default classification on the basis of biological sex and this is a perfect example of a typical patriarchal mindset.
Hence, it is high time that we understand that the age old notion that menstruating women are impure and untouchable needs to be scraped off. Let us ensure the verdict doesn’t remain only on paper, let us rise above narrow fundamentalism and question ourselves – can natural ever be disgraceful?
I believe the answer might help many other women to achieve their right to practice religion freely.