Pray, fast, protest and protect faith

Women of child-bearing age are not allowed to visit the Sabarimala shrine.

Forty-one days devotees fast, pray, avoid alcohol and tobacco, observe customs like celibacy (even in thoughts) and abstinence to accomplish a mission they consider the holiest of the holy.

The mission: climb the 18 sacred golden steps leading to the Sabarimala Temple, a centuries-old shrine in a dense forest in Kerala's Pathanamthitta district. However, if you are a woman of child-bearing age (defined as girls or women between the ages of 10 and 50) the mission is impossible. Because the temple's deity, Lord Ayyappa, is a celibate. So, women of child-bearing age are not allowed to visit the shrine.

On September 28, a Constitution bench of the country's highest court struck down that ban saying it violated women's right to equality and right to worship. The Supreme Court verdict triggered widespread protests across the state. The situation reached a flash point on October 17 when the temple reopened for the first time after the judgment. Soon, the pathway leading to the shrine from Nilakkal to Sannidhanam (temple premises) turned into a battle zone for faith versus law.

Devotees observe a 41-day spiritual austerity before taking the pilgrimage to Sabarimala.

Around a dozen women of the 'prohibited' age group attempted the pilgrimage during the six days the shrine was opened for public. All of them were stopped and forced to turn back by the protesters who booed and hurled stones at them.

A month after the SC decision, people in Kerala, which has 1,084 females against 1,000 males in its population and a literacy rate of over 90%, are a divided lot.

Around a dozen women of the 'prohibited' age group attempted the pilgrimage during the six days the shrine was opened for public in October.

First support for the court order came from Kerala's Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, who heads the Left Democratic Front government in the state. The CM said the verdict was as progressive and radical as the abolition of 'sati' (an obsolete funeral custom where a widow immolates herself on her husband's pyre), the rooting out of untouchability and the legislation that allowed a lower-caste woman to cover her upper body.

In a clear message to those who opposed the verdict, mainly India's ruling party BJP and Hindu organisations, he said, “If faith soars higher than even the Constitution, why can't you people stand for the construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya. The BJP has set its sights not just on Ramjanmabhoomi but on many other places in the country. If everything is to be based on faith, just imagine what our future would be”.

Supporting the Supreme Court verdict, Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan said it was as progressive and radical one as the abolition of 'sati'.

(BJP first came to power in India riding the Ramjanmabhoomi wave for building a Ram temple at Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh.)

Sections who opposed the SC decision like BJP and other Hindu organisations argued that the ban on women should be respected because it had been in effect for so long, and that the temple’s celibate deity had constitutional rights. Their demand: the government must go for a review petition in the SC.

Initially, the BJP had no idea that the Sabarimala verdict would turn out to be such a brain-twister. The party, and its extended family, had no confusion to begin with. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), parent organisation of BJP, had, back in 2016 itself, said the ban was 'improper'.

Even as thousands of women started coming out in protest against the verdict, BJP had no choice but to quickly turn politically wise and join the protests.

Initially, the BJP had no idea that the Sabarimala verdict would turn out to be such a brain-twister.

India's main Opposition party Congress also did a volte-face. After keeping silence over the verdict initially, some of its leaders in Kerala started a protest against the verdict, asking the government to go for a review plea in the court.

With the temple set to reopen for the pilgrimage season on November 17, the apex court would hear a bunch of petitions challenging its ruling on November 13.

Sabarimala temple is set to reopen for the pilgrimage season on November 17.

The Mandala season sees a sea of devotees lining up to climb the 18 holy steps to the temple. Controlling the crowd during the annual event is a huge task for the police as any small incident can lead to a big tragedy on the narrow, steep, 5-km forest trail leading to the temple.

With the traditionalists pitted against the government's determination to implement the SC order and make history, Team Onmanorama travels to Sabarimala to join the dots and find the big picture behind the controversy.

READ

Pandalam royals and Ayyappa myths

Royals game for a fight

Magical realism at Erumeli

Legal battle for Sabarimala

Mystery fire at Sabarimala in 1950

The comments posted here/below/in the given space are not on behalf of Onmanorama. The person posting the comment will be in sole ownership of its responsibility. According to the central government's IT rules, obscene or offensive statement made against a person, religion, community or nation is a punishable offense, and legal action would be taken against people who indulge in such activities.