The Kerala government filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court favouring entry of women of all ages into the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple without restriction. At present, women in the age group 10-50 are not allowed.
The affidavit was filed in response to a notice issued by the court on a petition by the Indian Young Lawyers Association and five other women advocates challenging the ban in vogue for several years.
It said: “Some scholars of ancient Kerala history say that the Sabarimala Sastha Prathishta was once a Buddhist shrine. The rituals chanted by worshippers are synonymous with the ‘Saranathrayam’ of Buddhist disciples (Budham Saranam Gachami; Dharmam Saranam Gachami; Sangham Saranam Gachami).” However, the government had no intention of creating any controversy, it said.
“The government is against any sort of discrimination towards women or any section of the public in any way. All persons are equally entitled to the freedom of conscience and the Constitution gives right to worship to everyone equally.” Hence it was not fair to bar a section of women from entering the Sabarimala temple.
The affidavit made it clear that at present the government was taking all steps to prevent women between the ages of 10 and 50 from entering the temple. It was desirable to continue the existing practice during the November-January pilgrimage season.
“It may be considered to allow a separate season for women only or allow women of all ages to have darshan of Lord Ayyappa in all seasons except Mandalapooja-Makaravilakku,” the affidavit said.
Kerala pointed out that religious practices and customs had changed during the last 50 years. When old customs prevailed, it was known that women used to visit the temple.
The Maharaja of Travancore, accompanied by the Maharani, visited the temple in the olden days. Hence allowing entry of women of all ages was not a new right to get established but only resumption of an old right.
“The government does not intend to have a new legislation on this subject and it was only waiting for the apex court’s verdict.” It wanted the court to appoint a commission of scholars to go into the issue and to arrive at a fair decision.
