Un
certain regard – SC verdict on women’s entry in Sabarimala shrine
It is a cruel irony that
Hinduism should be faulted for gender discrimination
Of all the major religions
in the world today, Hinduism is the only religion, with the extinction of Greek
and Roman civilizations, that has Goddesses,. Islam has no room for worship of
women while the other Abrahmic religion says it only ‘venerates’ mother Mary
and does not worship her.
The issue, not being
temporal, is not judicable. It remains entirely outside the microscope of
judicial system, being an essentially religious belief, just as the belief of immaculate
conception or resurrection. No judicial body ever tampers with these.
Even with due respect to the
Supreme Court, one cannot help wondering if you can ever see it ruling that
women should be allowed into the mosques for Friday prayers or directing the
Church to appoint women priests and Bishops.
Arthanareeswara is not just
about equality of genders, an exultant Fritjof Capra (Tao of Physcis) explicates it as the unity of
opposites in modern science.
The ruling deity of all arts
is Saraswathi, wealth and well being is Lakshmi. Slayer of evil is Shakthi.
All rivers in India bear
woman’s names, except Krishna.. There are temples where women are the priestess
and men devotees bow before them.
The status of women in Hindu
religion should be considered in a holistic manner. In a religion that worships
Goddesses, if there is a qualified restriction on women’s entry in a particular
shrine, there ought to be special reasons. This is common sense, as barring of
entry of certain age group is an exception not a rule in Hindu temples.
Besides, every temple is a
distinct entity. Just as you have the right to decide who can enter your house
and who cannot, the agamas governing the temple, centuries-old practices and the
temple tantris have the last word on the subject. The practices at temples too
widely differ, even temples of the same sect. The priest at Thiruvanaikaval in
Tiruchirappalli, for instance, wraps himself in a sari during the afternoon
feeding of the cow, a practice not prevalent in other Shaivite temples.
The case’s staple support comes
from the ruling Marxist dispensation in Kerala. In all fairness, in the
interests of justice, the Marxists, avowed (but selective) atheists, anti
opiate-religions (read anti Hinduism alone), should have recused themselves
from the case as they are an interested, a prejudiced party ab initio. They
cannot, for obvious reasons, be trusted to take a balanced view in a religious
issue, that too one concerning Hindus. In deference to the sentiments of the
masses, if it’s a people’s Government, it should have filed a review petition.
The pilgrimage to Sabarmala
has always been an eyesore for the predatory religions. People of all castes,
languages, regions congregate as a mass of humanity chanting chorus of a single
Mantra. This unifying factor unnerves them so much they even once tried to halt
the pilgrimage on its tracks claiming there was unearthed on the traditional
route a cross of St. Thomas era. The cross turned out to be of very recent
origin and their lie laid to rest.
There are distinct possibilities
that sooner than later you will hear about cases of misconduct and molestation.
Given the difficult terrain, the inevitable jostling, the passage through
woods, planted agents will leave no stone unturned in wreaking blemish on the
yatra. Like piranha they would chip away relentlessly till the yatra itself comes
under a cloud.
Hindus were slaves for a
millennium. They suffered the ignominy of paying tax to practice their religion
in their own land. Even after attainment of independence, they still do not
have say over their own religious affairs.
And how can the Government of a secular state control the religious affairs of only Hindus?. Why the case filed by Swami Dayanand Saraswatrii questioning the
legality of secular Governments controlling the Hindu temples is yet to be
dusted off?.
