The Supreme Court has appointed amici curiae to study the issue of women’s ban in Sabarimala and submit a report. If you understand Vedas and Upanishads, I don’t think there is any discrimination.
Advertisement
Appearing for the State government, senior advocate V. Giri submitted that when a man prepares to go for Sabarimala, the entire family, including women and children, “cooperate”.
“This discrimination will be tested on certain parameters-constitutional equality, right to custom and religious practices, parameters”, said the court. It said Sanatan Dharma was holistic and included one and all without discrimination of sex, caste and gender. Holding that religious bodies were free to frame rules for functioning of temples and other religious places, the bench said such rules should be within constitutional principles.
The bench observed that it will examine whether a total prohibition on the entry of women between the age of 10 and 50 is permissible and whether such discrimination is violative of right to equality under Article 14.
He, however, sought six weeks time for filing evidence including documents and ancient scriptures on the issue.
“We are not taking a narrow view”.
The Supreme Court on Friday questioned how women could be barred from entering the Ayyappa temple in Sabarimala when god did not discriminate between men and women, and referred to various scriptures, including the Gita, to drive home the point that everyone was equal before the almighty.
The Kerala government banning entry of women of menstrual age in the temple was a “matter of religion” and it was duty-bound to protect it.
Advertisement
The TDB, which manages the affairs of the temple, bars women from entering the sanctum sanctorum of the hill shrine citing age old traditions that prohibit menstruating women from offering worship at the temple since the presiding deity, Lord Ayyappa, is a perpetual bachelor (naishtika brahmachari). “In the context of Sabarimala, the administration vests with the Travancore Devaswom Board under the provisions of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950. Therefore, in matters of religion, it is the opinion of the priests that is final”, it added.
