Thursday, 18 October 2018

Sabarimalai has been a target for a long time

Sabarimalai has been a target because it generates tremendous faith and binds the community, specially both young and old together.

In 1980, they secretly planted an imported cross in Ayyappa's sacred garden at Nilakkal in Sabarimalai. Claimed it was a 2000 year old St. Thomas Cross. Quickly built a Church.




Man shown standing near the cross is RSS leader J Sisupalan, He led a fight to remove the #Sabarimala cross and succeeded.






He lost his State Govt job for this resistance. On the day he was dismissed, I visited him. He smilingly consoled ME😀-"Don't worry. its for a larger cause." https://t.co/16HGmYOWkJ



It is because of great soldiers of Dharma like him that Hinduism survives assault after assault. He has since passed away.



(1) Sabarimala was burnt down in the 50s

(2) The cross planting at Nilakkal happened in the 80s (3) The planned airport at Aranmula in the 200s

(4) Now women entry. It’s apparent ‘they’ want the land that belongs to Sabarimala at any cost, however long it takes


Rare facts about Sabarimala and why it also matters more to Tamilians https://www.facebook.com/muralikirishna.shari.7/videos/339006423571010/

Hypothetical scenario: Libtards, Lutyens & Commies succeed in allowing women (between 10 & 50) to go up the 18 steps & have Ayyappa’s darshan. What next you ask? Then you’ll have cases of harassment filed. Women only paths. Women only facilities i.e. clearing of the forest,
Women only hostels, widening of roads so that vehicles can go all the way up, more jungle clearing, theme parks to entertain bored city children who accompany their parents who are ‘trekking’ up the mala etc...Ayyappa has enough of all this.


Lord Ayappa is also a historical figure. He was the prince of Panthalam, a small kingdom located in the Patthanamthitta district in Kerala. The palace that he grew up in still exists and you can visit it. One of Lord Ayappa’s most loyal subjects was Vavar (Malayalam for Babar), an Arab commander, whom he defeated in battle. Vavar is today installed, not as an idol but in spirit, at a mosque in Erumeli. He protects pilgrims who make the difficult 40-km trek through the jungles to the main temple at the top of the hill. Muslims too make the journey to the mosque at Erumeli and the Vavar shrine, which faces the temple on the hill top.



Sabarimala is one of the few temples in India that welcomes men and women of every caste. Devotees dress uniformly in black. The colour signifies a renunciation of all worldly pleasures, but it also means that everyone is equal before Lord Ayappa, irrespective of caste. In fact, the hierarchy among devotees is based on how many times they have made the pilgrimage and not on caste. Pilgrims live an ascetic life for 40 days before undertaking the journey to Sabarimala. During that time , they pray in groups. A Dalit can lead the prayers and a Brahmin in the group must still touch his feet. You won't see this anywhere else.



Apart from the historical Lord Ayappa, there is a puranic legend associated with him, which says he is the son of Vishnu and Shiva. This is believed to be a union of forces, not the result of an actual physical relationship. It means he has traits of both gods and that’s what makes him a particularly potent deity in the eyes of his devotees.Any way you look at it, Sabarimala is the epitome of inclusiveness. It’s one of the few, if not only temple, that openly welcomes people of all faiths and castes. So, why restrict women?


For the answer, we need to go back to the legend. According to the puranas, Lord Ayappa was born to destroy a female demon who, thanks to a boon, could only be vanquished by a child born of both Shiva and Vishnu. When Lord Ayappa fulfils his destiny by killing her, a beautiful woman emerges from the body. She had been cursed to live as a demon, but her killing reversed the curse. Now free, she asks Ayappa to marry her. He refuses, explaining to her that his mission is to go to Sabarimala where he would answer the prayers of his devotees. However, he assures her, he will marry her when kanni-swamis stop coming to Sabarimala. She now sits and waits for him at a neighbouring shrine near the main temple and is worshipped as Malikapurathamma. With hundreds of thousands of new devotees pouring in every year, hers will be a long wait.


And that is why women do not go to Sabarimala. It is partly out of empathy for Malikapurathamma and her eternal wait and it’s also out of respect for Lord Ayappa's commitment to answer the prayers of his devotees. It has nothing to do with menstruation or being unclean. Anyone who goes to Sabarimala knows that.

This is Rehana Fatima, who wants to enter .








Rehana Fatima found carrying sanitary napkin in her irumudikettu at sabarimala. She was going to temple to offer napkin to Lord Aiyyappa?

This is the way they choose to go

Women who have attempted to enter temple- 1. Libi - Xtian, Atheist 2. Suhasini Raj - Atheist, Hindu hater 3. Kavitha Jakkal - Xtian 4. Rehana Fatima - Muslim 5. Mary Sweety - Xtian


The following information has been dedicatedly put together by Saiganesh@im_saiganesh

Read all the 38 pages of 1950 fire case and the observations in the investigation report on the Christian missionary conspiracy is truly shocking! Check this thread where I share snippets from the investigation report.

The investigation report made it sure that the fire incident was not because of any forest fires because of the absence of such incidents in nearby places. It is also observed that the door of sreekovil was broken and idol was damaged.

The investigation also dismissed that the agenda of attack was not theft as no ornaments were stolen from the temple but idol was attacked. The investigation found that the attack was done by a particular community for vested interests.

By hypothetically assuming for investigation purposes that Hindus might have done the crime, the investigation found there was no possibility of Hindu groups to do this. This was for various reasons.

Main reason is that the hills and forests were occupied by Christian groups and this crime was done by someone who knows each and every part of the hills and forests. Hindu communities were not familiar with the forests.

The report was even praising the practices of temple as it is a place where Brahmins rubbed shoulders with lower castes and visited the temple.


The report also observes that there are many events where lower caste Hindus are converted and observed into Christianity.


The report also says that temple unites Hindus and it keeps conversion by Christian missionaries under check. The investigation had clearly grasped that the Temple is a hindrance for Christian missionary's conversions.


If anyone reads full investigation report, you will find the year 1125 is used frequently. It denotes the year 1950. The Malayalam year starts at 825CE and hence 1950 is 1125th Malayalam year. Don't get confused when you read full investigation report.


The investigation analyzed the activities of various groups present in the area at the time of incident and suspected a particular Christian group to have done the crime.









This is the most shocking observation in the report. Christians were somehow conspiring to establish that there was a historical church in the place. Main reason is to counter the ayyappa devotion to convert low caste people. This in 1950!


We should link this and view with another incident in 1980 where the missionaries planted an imported cross to falsely claim that the shrine is a Christian shrine that is 2000 years old. It should be known this conspiracy was being tried from 1950s itself.

The case was not solved because it was hard to make a Christian accept the wrongdoings of co-christian. This was also said by the investigation report.



Police were unable to find any evidences because the crime was reported only after 20 days of occurence. So there were purely dependent on confessions of people and none did so that co-christians will get caught and we saw this in previous tweet. UNFORTUNATE


This is the whole crux of investigation by then inspector general. I am sharing the PDF link of the report in next tweet and those interested can read.

There is one more suspicion as pages 8,9 are missing in PDF which was found in Kerala govt site. No idea whether the pages were intentionally removed or really missing.End of the thread. Swamiye Charanam Ayappa. Link of investigation report:


SHABARIMALAI JUST AFTER IT WAS BURNED DOWN BY CHRISTIAN EVANGELISTS IN 1952 AS PER POLICE REPORTS AVAILABLE IN PUBLIC DOMAIN


please follow
IndianHistoryRealTruth
@IndianhistoryRT

The below information will be invaluable in understanding the bigger picture & the significance of Lord Ayappa

Ayyappa: A separate religious denomination
Jayasree Saranathan
17 October 2018


In a 4:1 ruling of the Constitution Bench that struck down an age old tradition at Sabarimala temple of Lord Ayyappa, the judges held that Ayyappa devotees do not constitute a separate religious denomination. The only dissenting judge Justice Indu Malhotra held that Ayyappa devotees do form a separate denomination.

This contradictory stance on religious denomination and the interpretation of the same having become vital in deciding the fate of this case, one is at a loss to understand why no thought or debate had gone into knowing what constitutes a religious denomination in the Hindu religion. During the hearing stage, the judges asked how Ayyappa devotees constituted a denomination when there is no specific Ayyappa sect. This question seemed to have been guided by the opinion that Hindu faith has only pre-established denominations with zero scope to have developed new denominations over a period of time.

Even in the United States, 35 denominations were found to be present among the followers of Christianity when a survey was taken as recently as in 2001 by The Graduate Center of City University of New York. This was a great surprise to many, but this shows the internally evolving denominations within a religion even in a modern society. Sai Deepak appearing for one of the respondents rightly pointed out that the denomination must come from within the community, implying that courts cannot decide a denomination.

Evolving Hindu denominations

A popular classification of the denominations within the Hindu community was last established by Adi Sankara which he collectively called as ‘Shanmatha’ – based on six deities namely Shiva, Vishnu, Shakti, Ganesha, Surya and Skanda. If this basis is any indication, Ayyappa followers rightfully form a denomination of their own, for their worship methods are uniquely centred on the deity, Ayyappa. 

If we further analyse the Shanmatha concept, we find that two among the six are the children of two of the six deities. As per Hindu tradition, Ganesha and Skanda are the children of Shiva and Shakti. Though all four can be clubbed together as a single family and are found installed together in most temples belonging to any of one of them as the main deity, Sankara had treated them as different denominations for the reason that worship methods and religious austerities are different from each other and distinct for each of them. On the same basis one can say that Ayyappa constitutes a separate denomination

Before Shanmatha denomination came into being there were eleven denominations in the very country of Kerala, then known as Chera land, where Adi Sankara was born. These eleven denominations are explained in a full chapter in an old Tamil text called “Manimekalai”, that was about a real life story centred around a young girl, Manimekalai, who went on to become a Buddhist monk after listening to the preceptors of the other ten sects. These eleven sects were,

1) Parinaama

2) Shaiva

3) Vaishnava

4) Brahma

5) Veda

6) Ajeevika

7) Nikanta

8) Sankhya

9) Vaisheshika

10) Bhuta (Charvaka)

11) Bauddha

After going through the precepts of these sects, Manimekalai embraced Buddhism finding it more suitable for her. (Article 25 -1 was present at that time, it seems) Of the eleven, only two (Shaiva and Vaishnava) have continued to exist till today and are part of Shanmatha. Two (Ajivika and Buddhism) were rejected by Hinduism later when they started distancing their doctrines from Vedic Thought. Parinaama, Brahma and Veda were absorbed by Shanmatha in various degrees. Sankhya and Vaisheshika are no longer in existence as separate paths. Charvakas always existed. This shows that denominations owe their existence to their followers. Some become redundant with time or are absorbed into others. There is also scope for newer denominations being born. What brings all these denominations under the Hindu Faith is their adherence to Vedas as the basis of their precepts and worship methods.

One must take note that four deities of the Shanmatha (Shakti, Surya, Ganesha and Skanda) were not treated as separate sects or denominations 2000 years ago in the Tamil lands. When they came to be followed by more people with exclusive worship methods, Sankara found it reasonable to accord a separate identity.

Further back in time, six Darshanas were the only denominations in existence. Sankhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Mimamsa and Vedanta were popular then, of which Sankhya and Vaisheshika continued in Manimekalai period. They are no longer in vogue today. The concept of religious denomination is thus a continuously evolving feature testifying the vibrancy of a religion.

Is Ayyappa worship of recent origin?

This question is heard on the basis of recent origin of Pandalam dynasty in which was born Ayyappa, now worshiped at Sabarimala. It is true that Ayyappa of Sabarimala was very much a real person who walked on this earth, like Rama or Krishna or Skanda who were also real entities. Hinduism recognises the elevation of real persons as Gods under one condition. There is a written record of this condition in the biography of Alexander by the Greek historian Plutarch.

To a question by Alexander, “How may a man become God?”, the Hindu sage Kalanos (Kalyan) replied, “By doing that which is almost impossible for a man to do.” When a person does things that no other man can do or which are beyond normal human limits, then such a person comes to be regarded as a God. Such persons have been celebrated as Gods by sages with mythical events woven around them. In course of time, they come to be recognised as incarnations of the Ultimate God Himself.

It is in this way Manikantha born in the Pandalam family was recognised as “Shasta”, the child of Shiva and Vishnu (in Mohini form). This is like how Skanda born to Meenakshi of the Pandyan dynasty was deified by the sages with a celestial birth and nursing by 6 star mothers of Krittika, thereby getting him the name Kartikeya. Similar deification found in the legend of Ayyappa born as Manikantha is proof enough that his deification at Sabarimala was a well formed cult devised by some sages of the past for the benefit of people. With worship methods unique for Himself, He does constitute a separate denomination and can be regarded as the 7th matha of the Hindu religion.

In the light of the fact that Manikantha alias Ayyappa was a real figure having given instructions for worship, the Supreme Court’s ruling is certainly a violation of the promise given to him and his oath of celibacy. The tradition set with regard to the entry by women of the post-partum period for the first feeding of their children in five days every month is proof of non-discrimination against them, and at the same time without violating the oath. Without appreciating the finer aspects of maintaining the oath, Justice Nariman commented “What happens to the celibate nature of Lord Ayyappa in those 5 days? Is it that the idol vanishes on those days?”

Shasta is an old concept

Ayyappa is known as “Dharma Shasta” – one who delivers Justice or who is an embodiment of Justice. A deity by this name in Tamilised form (Arap peyar Saatthan) is mentioned in verse 395 of Purananuru, an old Tamil text. The name Shasta (Saatthan) was common among the masses in Sangam texts. Worship of Shasta in many places was in existence from Sangam times.

A special feature of Shasta is found in two inscriptions and written by historian K.A. Nilakanta Sastri. Shasta is identified as a God of the Cheris (rural region) mentioned along with Surya and Seven Mother Goddesses (inscription no 335 of 1917 and 131 of 1892). The association with seven mothers was not indigenous to Tamil lands but had spread from Indus civilization (there is an Indus seal of seven women) with its later prevalence found in Chalukyan and Hoysala regions thousand years ago. Shasta of Sangam texts was not accompanied with the seven mothers or any associate. This establishes the olden Shasta concept as a single - with additions coming later. 

The location in rural region is repeated in “Mayamatam”, a Vaastu text containing the Vaastu principles purportedly given by Maya. After explaining the iconography of Shasta, the text describes the features of Shasta, the offspring of Mohini (female form of Vishnu) as a celibate and as a married man with two wives. Then it goes on to say that those who seek what is good, must install Shasta in villages. It also says that “Shasta, beloved of the gods, is to be installed in the haunts of lower castes, in the house of courtesans and in forts”.

The association with the downtrodden is a feature found in the astrological text “Prasna Marga” written in 1649 by a Kerala Nambhoothri. It says that those afflicted by Saturn must propitiate Shasta. Saturn also represents undeveloped and dirty regions. As such Saturn identifies Shasta as a village deity. It is a deity of all villagers. Those who have no idea of the village deity worshiped by their ancestors and those who were not initiated into any path of worship in Hinduism are also advised to worship Shasta – particularly of Sabarimala.

Even today scores of devotees going to Sabarimala are disadvantaged classes with no regular practice of religious austerities. The Vrata period is a kind of boon for them to commit themselves to religious austerities which otherwise they may not follow. The devotee is not expected to be well versed in scriptures. What is expected of him is to follow the rules of behaviour. There are other hill-deities too such as Venkateswara, Narasimha and Skanda. The first two come under one denomination and Skanda is another denomination due to varying practices in worship methods. But Sabarimala pilgrimage is different from them.

The Chief Justice refused to accept separate denomination for Ayyappa worshippers on the pretext that people of other faith also worship him. It is true that Ayyappa is worshiped by people from across all the other sects. The worshiper could come from any background, from other Hindu sects such as Shaivism or Vaishnavism or from any other religion. But every one of them must follow the rules of Vrata as applicable to Sabarimala! And that Vrata follows certain tradition of do’s and dont’s. That makes Ayyappa worship unique by itself. This in effect is a valid reason to treat Ayyappa worship a unique religious denomination. We don’t need an Adi Sankara to be born again to tell us this!




Ayyappa Swami under siege in God’s own country
Panikkath Krishnanunni
23 October 2018

Kerala has been burning for the past few days on account of to the Supreme Court verdict on Sabarimala, allowing ladies of all age groups to enter the premises of the Lord Ayyappa temple. Kerala has not yet fully recovered from the consequences of mismanagement of the recent floods of August 2018. The Sabarimala verdict shows that the judiciary seems to have succumbed to the “break India forces” and thrown caution to the winds. Recall the statement of one of the judges, “society has to undergo a perpetual shift from being the propagater of hegemonic and patriarchal notions of demanding more exacting standards of purity and chastity solely from women”.

The question arises, why do we go to temples in the first place. Answers vary from individual to individual. Most devotees visit temples with a spirit of devotion to God and reverence to the rules laid down in worship of that particular form of God. When we speak of devotion and austerity, it automatically implies within its concept, a certain set of rules to follow for the upkeep of one’s purity of body and mind. Devoid of purity and devotion, visiting any temple is useless and meaningless. The Supreme Court verdict has resulted in violations of a unique tradition and violations of the minimum required qualifications a devotee must possess.

By allowing entry of two lady activists, escorted by the Kerala police, the Supreme Court verdict has enabled the police to desecrate one of the holiest Hindu temples. Is their assertion of “rights” more important than the concepts of devotion, humility, cleanliness and moral decency?

Taking advantage of the Supreme Court verdict, many will feel entitled to go to Sabarimala, irrespective of age, without the requirement of devotion. Feminists will go not to pray but to arrogantly exercise their right by quoting the Supreme Court verdict. The apex Court has thus given freedom to diabolic characters to enter and spoil the pristine purity and holy atmosphere at Sabarimala. In the event of violence, will the Supreme Court judges who delivered this verdict feel responsible for the mess?

The media and secularists scream “we want equality”. The court succumbs and blindly agrees without examining the biological differences between males and females. It is not a lady’s menstruation impurity that is the problem; the media has distorted the real facts and reasons for their exclusion and have incorrectly interpreted as gender discrimination, misogyny, patriarchal domination and so on.

Hindu culture, the most ancient surviving culture in the world, has always welcomed diversity of traditions. Different traditions are in vogue for centuries. Hindu rituals of marriage, death, birth and temple rituals vary from village to village, and state to state. The temples of Tamil Nadu give more importance to the Vedic system, but Kerala temples give more importance to tantric systems. The Sabarimala temple follows the tantric system and demands stricter observance of rules from devotees visiting this shrine.

Tantric texts have as much validity as the Vedas; they are believed to have been propounded Shiva Mahadeo, father of Ayyappa Swami. The Supreme Court cannot assert authority over how a tanthri does his rituals and the rules laid down by him for upkeep of the purity and sanctity of the temple. Questioning his authority is tantamount to questioning the tenets of the tantric texts and Vedas, founded by thousands of ancient Rishis. Their prescriptions and proscriptions spring from meditative intuition, which is beyond logic, and hence some rules of worship may not be available as an authority from the Vedas or any other dharma shastras. It may also be noted that logic is not necessarily the only authentic source of knowledge.

The Times of India (October 18, 2018) reported “At Pamba, cops took custody of Devika Antharjanam (80), Kandaru Maheshwaru’s wife, Thazhamon tanthri family’s chief priest. Janam TV has showed police brutalities on harmless Ayyappa protesters; police shamelessly arrested a harmless 80-year old woman from a highly respectable lineage; backed by the Pinarayi Vijayan regime, the police insulted not only the caretakers of the deity, but insulted Lord Ayyappa Himself. They insulted not only womanhood but the entire Hindu society and traditions.

The media played victim card when young ladies devoid of devotion were prevented from ascending the steps to the sanctum sanctorum; but the media never showed the arrest of the 80-year old lady, wife of the chief tanthri.

Those who question the rationality of religious traditions should consider some issues concerning our political or democratic traditions. Is the system for electing representatives logical and rational? Persons with no basic education become MPs and rule the country. If the political tradition has no logical basis, why should logic be applied to faith?

Recently, the tradition of kumbasaram (confession) in Christianity was misused by Bishop Franco Mullakal and the Kerala High Court granted him bail. Has this served the cause of rationality, logic, equality, justice? How many have risen to the defence of the vulnerable ladies crying for justice in the parishes?

The Sabarimala controversy is clearly a contrived conspiracy against Hindu dharma and Hindu society. This is how the matter is being perceived by society at large and that is why the defence of tradition is uniting adherent Hindus across the country.



Sabarimala: Justice downsizes Divinity
Sandhya Jain
16 October 2018

Its inclusive character notwithstanding, Sabarimala has several characteristics consistent with a denominational temple and should have been spared the humiliation that is currently agitating Ayyappaswami devotees across the country. In hundreds of Ayyappa temples, devotees are welcomed without distinction of gender, jati or even creed. At Sabarimala, Ayyappa, born from the union of Shiva and Vishnu as Mohini, takes the form ofNaishtika Brahmachari (perennial celibate) and performs eternal tapas (meditation); hence women devotees of reproductive age (10 to 50 years) desist from disturbing him.

Hindu dharma celebrates divinity in its complex diversity. The same deity has different traits and is worshipped differently according to naama(name), rupa (form) and svarupa (essence). During the Navratras, Devi is worshipped in nine forms. At four major temples in Kerala, Ayyappa takes the form of a ‘kumar’ (teenager) at Sabarimala; a ‘balak’ (child) at Kulathupuzha; a grihastha (family man) with wives at Achankovil; and a ‘tapasvi’ (ascetic) in Aryankavu; these denote the four stages of human life.

Sabarimala is essentially a denominational temple within the Ayyappa panth (stream); it has special rules and regulations appropriate to the deity in that rupa and svarupa. These rules have been practiced without demur from time immemorial and correspond to settled usage and custom. Violation, as in 2006 when an actress in the prohibited age group entered the temple, defiles the sanctity of the temple according to the Agamas, and requires purification.

The denominational nature of the temple is established by the rigorous 41-day vrat (penance) that Ayyappa Himself prescribed when he directed a king to build the temple at the spot where his arrow landed after vanquishing a demon. This includes total abstinence, celibacy, and other forms of asceticism. A person starting tapas takes blessings from his parents, elders and Guru and dons a tulsi or rudraksha maala. The aim is to purify mind and body and establish the Oneness of all beings. On the pilgrimage, each devotee is addressed as ‘Swami’ as he has become pure. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s view that, “To suggest that women cannot undertake the 41-day vratham is to stereotype them”, mocks at the sanctity of custom. That this has caused religious hurt can be seen from the thousands of women pouring out on the streets of Kerala cities to protest the verdict.

Only those who conclude the vrat and carry the Irumudi kettu on their heads can cross the Srichakra and ascend the final 18 steps to thesannidhanam (sanctum), to the presence of Ayyappa. Irumudi is a twin bundle with offerings for the deity on one side, and the pilgrim’s humble necessities on the other. Other devotees worship through a side entrance. The 18 steps represent the stages of knowledge and consciousness, to supreme bliss at the feet of Ayyappaswami. The vrat and Irumudi distinguish Sabarimala as a religious denomination or section thereof which, under Article 26, has the right to manage its own affairs in matters of religion.

It is inexplicable why the Supreme Court refused to accept the balaka god as a minor and a juristic entity, a settled principle in Hindu Law. In the Ram Janmabhumi case, Ramlalla (infant Rama) is a minor and juristic entity entitled to the protection of the law and to be represented by a ‘best friend’. Hindu Gods own wealth and property because they are juristic entities. In 1988, recognising this principal, a London judge returned the Chola Nataraja of Pattur to India, ruling that so long as even one stone belonging to a temple built by a Chola chieftain remains in situ, the temple continues to exist in the eye of law and has the right to own property. Sabarimala is a living temple adhering to distinct agamas; it is incorrect to designate temples as ‘public spaces’ and deny the deity’s constitutional rights.

We may ask if it is wise to destroy the sanctity of Sabarimala to satisfy the iconoclastic urges (disguised as a quest for equality) of litigants whoselocus standi is suspect? The principal activists behind the Indian Young Lawyers Association & Ors Versus The State of Kerala & Ors. [Writ Petition (C) No. 373 of 2006] have admitted that they were inspired by the furore over actress Jayamala’s unlawful entry into the temple.

The erstwhile royal family of Pandalam, where Ayyappa grew up, and People for Dharma are seeking a review of the verdict, on grounds that it “has the effect of Abrahamising the core of the Hindu faith, namely diversity, and altering its identity”. The organisation laments that the court failed to enquire if the traditional practice “is essential to the identity of the Sabarimala Ayyappa Temple”. Instead, it asked if it is essential to Hindu religion, when the Sanatana Dharma has no Book or Canon with uniform beliefs and practices.

The Sabarimala restrictions have been distorted as derogatory towards women in their fertile years. Different temples run according to distinct agamas. The menstrual cycle of Assam’s Devi Kamakhya is celebrated in the Ambubachi festival; Rajo, symbolising the menstruation of Mother Earth, is a major event in Odisha. The Mahadeo temple in Chengannur celebrates women’s fertility, and transgenders have divine status in Kottankulangara.

Only Justice Indu Malhotra, the sole dissenting voice, sifted the evidence clinically and observed that the restriction on women of a certain age group was not based on misogyny or menstrual impurity, but on the celibate nature of Ayyappaswami; “what constitutes an essential religious practice is for the religious community to decide”. She questioned the locus standi of non-believers approaching the Court and claiming the right to enter the Temple, even as there was no aggrieved petitioner from Kerala. Justice Malhotra warned that in a plural and diverse country, judges must be careful before labelling a practice as discriminatory on the basis of personal morality: “issues which are matters of deep religious faith and sentiment must not ordinarily be interfered with by courts.” In fact, Courts should not interfere unless a practice is “pernicious, oppressive, or a social evil”.

The apex Court’s equation of Sabarimala customs with untouchability as defined in Article 17 of the Constitution, which refers to birth-based discrimination against some castes was unfortunate. The Kerala Government’s decision to pass The Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions (Amendment) Act, 2018 to allow appointment of non-Hindus to the Travancore Devaswom Board was the last straw.

The author is Senior Fellow, Nehru Memorial Museum and Library; the views expressed are personal
The Pioneer, 16 October 2018



Sri Lanka pilgrims protest against Sabrimala verdict
Author: Akshaya Nath
Publication: India Today.in
Date: October 16, 2018
URL: https://www.indiatoday.in/amp/india/story/sri-lanka-pilgrims-protest-against-sabrimala-
verdict-1369220-2018-10-16?__twitter_impression=true
HIGHLIGHTS
- The pilgrims raised slogans against the Supreme Court's verdict
- The pilgrims in Sri Lanka have condemned SC's decision
- Many women participated in the protest organised in Sri Lanka


Every year a minimum of hundred devotees from Vavuniya district, Sri Lanka make their way to India for paying a visit to the Sabarimala temple in Kerala.

Following the Supreme Court order which allows women of all age groups to visit the holy shrine, the pilgrims in Sri Lanka have condemned this decision and organised a protest in Sri Lanka.

The pilgrims raised slogans against the Supreme Court's verdict and marched 3-km distance demanding that the temple is allowed to follow its own rules and regulations. Surprisingly, a large group of women has opposed the decision.

Many women participated in the protest organised in Sri Lanka. The rally, however, ended with the protesters handing over a request letter to the government agent of Vavuniya asking for government intervention through the Indian Embassy, to pass on their message condemning the Supreme Court Order.


No comments:

Post a Comment