September 28, 2018 — the day will be marked in golden letters in the annals of Kerala. The coming generation will remember it as the day when the Supreme Court made the landmark judgement of lifting the decades-old ban on the entry of women into the famous Sabarimala Temple. In fact, this verdict by the five-judge Constitution bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice Indu Malhotra, has rewritten the history of Kerala and women just like how The 1936-Temple Entry Proclamation, which annulled the ban on lower-caste people from entering temples, gave a new life to devotees then.
However, the verdict received mixed responses. While those who are ‘happytobleed’ rejoiced in the historic achievement and considered it as the success of the democracy and women, those who are ‘readytowait’ were angry and said that the verdict hurt the sentiments of devotees. A few others were of opinion that the equality should be spread across all religions and some opined that the concern of the court should have been the forest where the temple is located, not the entry of women. What do they have to say more about it? We ask them.
Ready for a Hindu Awakening
The Hindu religion so far had autonomy over its rituals and beliefs. With this verdict, that has ended. For long, our deities have been considered as living entities with rights, and sadly, the deity, in this case Lord Ayyappa, has lost its Constitutional rights, including that to privacy. True devotees of the lord do not suffer any loss because our status quo doesn’t change; we plan to visit the shrine only after turning 50. Personally, I am hurt as I feel that I have failed in protecting the sanctity of our temple. However, the bright side is that this will have widespread consequences. We are about to witness a ‘Great Hindu Awakening’. Discussions are on regarding the next legal step. It’s a democratic nation with an amendable Constitution. Let’s see what can be done and how our politicians will take it forward? As election time is nearing, we are quite hopeful.
— Padma Pillai, #Readytowait campaigner
‘A step towards changing mentality’
I am really happy with the verdict and consider it as a milestone in the journey towards equality. The reason stated behind restricting women from entering Sabarimala Temple is menstruation. I think that it is unconstitutional. The verdict is therefore the victory of our Constitution and the fundamental rights it ensures. In other words, I would say that the verdict is the first step towards changing the mindset of society, which is mandatory in terms of the acceptance such verdicts are going to receive. A woman is an integral part of a house. If a man can go to a pilgrimage center from the same house, why can’t women do the same?
— Trupti Desai, Gender-equality activist, who campaigned for women’s entry into temples in Maharashtra
‘A welcome verdict’
I’m definitely happy about it and it’s wonderful that the apex court has destigmatised menstruation, which will have a wide-ranging impact on women’s lives. Our right to equality and mobility has been acknowledged but we’ve a long way to go because the fight is not limited to temples; it’s about destigmatising menstruation in public and private spaces and making menstrual health a public health issue so that women can have access to menstrual care products.
— Nikita Azad, #Happytobleed campaign founder
‘Need entry at mosques too’
I have a dual opinion. In view of women’s rights, I strongly voice that all humans equally have the right to enter a place of worship, be it a temple, mosque or church. What the Supreme Court has said should have been dealt with even without it reaching the apex body. The common man should have had the thought of imparting equal rights rather than narrowing their thoughts to keep women deprived of their basic right to pray at a place of worship. Not only selective temples, but a few mosques too don’t let women in. When no holy scripture or the Constitution supports such barrier, how can a few persons bar entry on gender grounds? If women can enter other places of worship without ‘maligning’ anything there, there’s no harm in a woman offering prayers at a place of her choice. Having said this, I am concerned that this order might lead to a riot-like situation from the end of extremists on communal grounds, which is why I feel this should not have gone to the SC and should have been sorted out at the temple authority level. However, that doesn’t justify denying women entry.
— Amathul Wardha, homemaker
E-notifications
After the disastrous flood in #pamba , the river needs time to restore . What SC should have told is to restrict the entry to Sabarimala in the coming months and years and fix the numbers based on a study. Human rights is in conflict with #riverrights and #environmentalrights here. There was no emergency to decide now about the entry of women. Instead of discussing the Sabarimala development issue it is very unfortunate that this decision of SC will destroy the forest and river systems more in the coming days. Sad that we are not learning from disasters
Usha Soolapani
It's a black day for Hinduism! Destroying traditions and rituals in the name of gender equality???????? Together we shall overturn this verdict, who is willing to join me to preserve the celibacy method of Ayyappa?
Ranjini
Women, If you do not want to enter, don't. If you want to, do as you please. But you must not tell another woman what to do and what not to do. Please. We have been living on others' terms for centuries.
Sowmya Vidyadhar
If a young woman strongly believes in #LordAyyappa, she will not enter#Sabarimala. The Sabarimala Pilgrimage is based on a very long line of tradition and entry of woman into the temple is infringing upon the rights of the Hindus to practise their faith I believe. Barring of young woman fromSabarimala is not like sati or other practices for everyone to go gung ho about. There are other evils out there amongst #Muslims, #Christians &#Hindus to act against. Lastly, I feel for the believers. Let better sense prevail everywhere. God Speed
Ahmed Sidhique
A moment for celebration: Jayamala
Almost 32 years after she had claimed to have entered the sanctum sanctorum of Lord Ayyappa Swamy Temple at Sabarimala, Kannada actress and now Karnataka Minister for Kannada, Culture and Women and Child Development, Jayamala has hailed the Supreme Court verdict, which has upheld the right of women of all ages to worship in places of their choice.
Soon after the SC verdict, she said, “It is a historical judgement. It is a day for every woman and those who support the cause of women to celebrate the verdict. I have time and again reiterated that there is no such thing as separate God for men and women. He is equal to one and all, and the same has been stressed in our Constitution too. Now that the judiciary has upheld the rights of women, it is a moment for celebration.”
Further, she adds that it was never a matter of religion but a matter of rights. “Women have all the right to visit the temple and pray to the Almighty.” Jayamala went public about her entry in 2006 when a team led by noted astrologer P. Unnikrishna Panicker performed a devaprasnam at the temple and claimed to have received revelations about women getting entry into the temple. Later, Jayamala said that she was at the temple in 1986 to seek Lord Ayyappa’s blessings as she was going through a tough time in her life. A complaint had been filed in the Kerala High Court against her. She later revealed that she was accidentally pushed inside the sanctum sanctorum. However, the High Court quashed the chargesheet in 2012.
Inputs: Elizabeth Thomas, Vandana Mohandas, Shashi Prasad S.M.
