prasad1
Active member
On March 30, 2016, the Bombay High Court delivered what could be a landmark judgment. Hearing a petition demanding entry for women into the premises and sanctum sanctorum of the Shani Shingnapur temple, the court held that men and women were equal in the eyes of the law, and that the gods don’t discriminate on the basis of gender either. Not only did the Bench state that restriction of someone’s entry by temple authorities could result in six months’ imprisonment as per the Maharashtra law, but its verdict included an ironic line that vindicates the anger of the women who were forced to file this petition: The Bench held that women should not have to come to the court to fight for rights that were already theirs. This judgment is bound to set a precedent across the country, and across religions. At the moment, another Public Interest Litigation plea that challenges the ban on the entry of women into the inner sanctum of the Haji Ali Dargah is pending an outcome at the Bombay High Court. The Sabarimala Temple is fighting its share of controversies. The Supreme Court has questioned the ban on entry for women aged between 10 and 50. Just a couple of weeks ago, the Travancore Devaswom Board, which manages the temple, announced that they would regulate the “presence of women of menstrual age in and around River Pampa during the ‘aarattu’ ceremony” – the ritual bath of the deity. The Board’s reasoning was that an astrological consultation had revealed that the deity, Lord Ayyappa, “did not like” the increasing attendance of women during the ritual. When did a group of men earn the right to decide what the gods want on the basis of astrology? Isn’t it time that people stopped using “tradition” as an excuse to reinforce practices that have lost all validity, and that no one can defend using logic? Why are women of menstruating age – who are not even necessarily on their period at the time of their visits – considered a threat to the purity of a temple?
If we believe in democracy and secularism, we should not let political designs and the privilege of power overturn the law of the land. When there is no legal – or religious – statute against women entering a temple or dargah, we cannot allow men to make chauvinists of gods and saints.
Read more at: http://www.sify.com/news/when-men-make-the-gods-chauvinist-news-columns-qebkb5chdbeeb.html
If we believe in democracy and secularism, we should not let political designs and the privilege of power overturn the law of the land. When there is no legal – or religious – statute against women entering a temple or dargah, we cannot allow men to make chauvinists of gods and saints.
Read more at: http://www.sify.com/news/when-men-make-the-gods-chauvinist-news-columns-qebkb5chdbeeb.html
