So today I decided to write about an issue that most of us are not familiar with: the lifting of ban on the entry of women in Sabarimala temple. Now why I say that we are unfamiliar with it is because it has been told and portrayed from a lens with no focus. It just keeps you on the surface, with you floating above your emotions. From the time this issue came into being, people have been cleaved into two stances: those in favour of this judgement given by Supreme Court ending the ban on women between the ages of 10 and 50 from entering the temple, and those against it.
Now there can be different angles of looking at the same issue. When an object is placed on a table and people are asked to draw it from their own positions, they all draw different shapes. But the object on the table remains the same. Similarly, there are two angles to the Sabarimala issue: in one, the angle of faith declares this as deplorable, and the other, people link it to the right to equality. Now when to comes to taking sides, I had always been in dilemma. So what I did was, in order to know the crux of this issue, I probed to find out the actual reason behind barring the entry of women. Somehow seeing menstruation as unclean, and seeing women as too impure to worship Lord Ayyappa did not seem reason enough for this tradition. This was the feeble ground on the basis of which I start questioning my own faith.
Reading about the cause of the ban, it is more complicated than it seems. The reason the Supreme Court lifted the ban was this: just as a man has the right to pray, so does a woman, and our Constitution grants the right to worship to all citizens equally —seems fair to any thinking person. So, the focus was women. Now, when it comes to this tradition of ban on the entry of women in Sabarimala, the focus is Lord Ayyappa himself. This is where the contradiction begins.
Why Was The Ban Put In The First Place?
It is believed that Ayyappa was born to destroy a female demon who could only be vanquished by a child born of both Shiva and Vishnu, which is what he was. When Ayyappa defeated the demon in a battle, a beautiful woman emerged from the body. She had been cursed to live as a demon, but killing her reversed the curse. Now released from the curse, she asked Ayyappa to marry her. He refused, explaining to her that his mission is to go to Sabarimala to answer the prayers of his devotees. However, he promised her that he will marry her when kanni-swamis stop coming to Sabarimala. The woman today is worshipped as Malikapurathamma at a neighbouring temple and in the honour of her Lord Ayappa doesn’t receive any menstruating women.
And that is why women do not go to Sabarimala. It is partly out of empathy for Malikapurathamma and her eternal wait, as well as out of respect for Ayyappa’s commitment to answer the prayers of his devotees. Since he is celibate, he should not be distracted.
There is another version that claims Lord Ayappa was to be the prince of Patthanamitta, a district in Kerala, who vowed to answer the prayer to every devotee walking up to his shrine and therefore disengaged from all worldly desires, including women.
What Is This Tradition And How Is It Portrayed?
Now the tradition that prohibits the entry of women nowhere considers menstruating women as impure or unclean and therefore unworthy of worshipping the deity. It really isn’t an equality issue. Had it been about a ban on women’s entry to all temples, then it would have been an issue. Had it been about women being banned from educational institutions or offices, then it would have been an issue. But Sabarimala, my friend, is not an issue.
I am a proud feminist who believes in women’s equality, but my right cannot be defined by overriding someone’s faith. It is an issue of faith, religion, and tradition. When I say “faith”, one needs to understand that it is a contingent term. If you have it, it can be the strongest thing in your life, and if you don’t, then the most fragile.
Most people can brush away such traditions and not believe in them. But if you don’t believe in them then why do you want to worship the deity?
The women who want to enter the temple, and in fact have entered the temple, need to understand that their entry in temple does not empower them or their rights, and the erstwhile ban did not in any way consider them as unclean or impure.
You are worthy and you’ll always be.
In the end, I would like to quote the words of Justice Indu Malhotra, the only woman in the bench of Sabarimala case judgement who gave a dissenting verdict. She said: “Religious practices can’t solely be tested on the basis of the right to equality. It’s up to the worshippers, not the court, to decide what’s religion’s essential Practice.”
Today, I ask you, was this really an equality issue or an issue of faith disguised as an equality issue. Was the former an attempt to attack a religion in which women are worshipped as God? A faith that dismisses the taboos associated with menstruation and celebrates womanhood in the Kamakhya temple? And whose followers are enlightening enough to ban social evils and always will be?