18 Shades of Black: The Indian women using fashion to challenge tradition

Black, which has ruled the global fashion landscape for decades, has never been dominant in traditional Indian clothing. But now Indian sari designer Sharmila Nair is using the colour to make a forceful political and feminist statement, writes the BBC's Geeta Pandey in Delhi.

Ms Nair's campaign, 18 Shades of Black, has 18 women, draped in beautiful black saris designed by her, talking about the subtle gender discrimination they face in their daily lives.

Ms Nair calls these "unseen restrictions" because they are made to feel so normal, so natural, that quite often women start to place these limitations on themselves.

Sowmya Radha Vidyadhar is a poet and writer MIDHUN DIVAKAR

The campaign, Ms Nair told the BBC, was inspired by last year's protests in the southern state of Kerala after the Supreme Court revoked a ban on women of menstruating age from entering the Sabarimala temple, one of the holiest Hindu shrines.

Hinduism regards menstruating women as unclean and so they were historically banned from entering the temple.

Ms Nair said she was "shocked" by the large number of women who joined the protests.

Thus was born 18 Shades of Black - 18 because there are that many steps in the Sabarimala shrine, and black because that's the colour all devotees wear.

Indu Jayaram says she realised much later in life that your skin colour can be behind discrimination

"We are told we are impure during our periods, and we buy into these ideas. Even now I have friends who would voluntarily stay away from visiting a temple or participating in religious rituals during their periods," says Ms Nair.

"So I thought if so many women can fight for the rights of a deity, why can't they fight for the rights of women? And I thought if so many women came together, imagine the kind of changes they can bring about."

This subtle conditioning of the mind, she says, starts in early childhood.

"We are told boys and girls are different, girls don't talk or laugh loudly. In villages, even today, girls are encouraged to study humanities, not medicine or engineering.

"There is a lot of emphasis on marriage and having children. For instance, in many parts of India, the moment you turn 18, your family will start talking about fixing your marriage. And once you're married, they'll start asking when you're going to have a child. And once you have a child, they'll start asking when you're going to have the next one.

"We internalise these restrictions. We talk about women's empowerment, but in our daily lives we submit to these curbs unquestioningly," she says, adding: "I'm trying to address these unseen restrictions."

Interior designer Smitha Naik says the campaign uses clothes to talk about issues that are important to the wider population. MIDHUN DIVAKAR

Actor and dancer Anumol says she fought her family to pursue a career in dance MIDHUN DIVAKAR

The campaign uses fashion to challenge faith, questioning outdated beliefs that are perpetuated by a society steeped in patriarchy.

It tackles issues like body shaming, discrimination on the basis of skin colour, early marriage, stigma around menstruation, caste discrimination, patriarchy and even a lack of clean toilets for women.

Finding women to participate in the campaign, says Ms Nair, was not easy.

"I spoke to 80-90 women and I heard very compelling personal stories, but most were not willing to go on record. They were worried because of the controversy over the Sabarimala issue. They told me they were afraid how it would be moulded, how it would be received by the larger society."

But then these "18 wonderful women" came forward, willing to talk about the restrictions they faced and how they stood up to them.

Her models are "women of substance", they include a lawyer, an actor, a poet, a psychologist, writers and office workers, a homemaker and a techie.

Writer Lekshmy Rajeev says society places a huge burden on women to always be good MIDHUN DIVAKAR 

In the videos that Ms Nair has uploaded on social media, we hear powerful personal stories.

Remya Saseendran, a writer and development communications specialist, says she was brought up to believe that motherhood was non-negotiable, and that there was something wrong with her because she didn't want to be a mother.

"But as I grew older, I realised that a lot of these expectations were imposed from outside... and I realised that motherhood really doesn't at all have to be the identity of a woman. Motherhood is a choice, just as not being a mother is a choice," she says.

Psychologist and lactation consultant Swati Jagadeesh talks about the "toxic relationship" she had with her mother and how she found it difficult to share anything with her.

"So I want my child to trust me. She should have the confidence to tell me anything under the sky," she says, and adds: "My mother taught me how not to be a mother."

Remya Saseendran says she was brought up to believe that there was something wrong with her because she didn't want to be a mother MIDHUN DIVAKAR

Interior designer Smitha Naik, who is featured in one of the videos, tells the BBC that the campaign uses clothes to talk about issues that are important to the wider population.

In her video, Ms Naik is seen talking about the unflattering way in which women drivers are perceived and the bullying they face on the roads and says that these are issues that need to be talked about continuously.

"It doesn't end with one campaign or one protest."

Fashion and creative art, she says, can be effectively used to convey important messages, the sort that 18 Shades of Black is trying to do.

"There's a popular saying that when you draw a line, you're not just drawing a line, you're changing the universe. By wearing black, we are trying to send a message that just like the Sabarimala pilgrims, it is our colour too. We are also entitled to it. We are also an equal part of this society. We are also part of this sea of black."

(Source: BBC)

They entered a forbidden Hindu temple in the name of women’s rights - now they’re in hiding

Two women slump low in the backseat of an SUV, as a friend drives them to a third safehouse in three days. “You can’t be tracked on the move, so you can use your phones on the way,” he says, turning into a dark, winding road in the southern Indian state of Kerala.The women quickly switch their phones on and call home. It is the first time in over a week that they can speak to their families — a week in which they find themselves on the front line of a gender-equality battle raging in southern India.

On Jan. 2, 40-year-old law professor Bindu and 39-year-old government supplies officer Kanakadurga (per South Indian custom, both go by their first names only) entered the Lord Ayyappa temple in Sabarimala, southern Kerala. They became the first women to officially do so since the Supreme Court overturned a longstanding ban in September that prevented women of “menstruating age” — defined as between the ages of 10 and 50 — from entering the temple complex.

Believed to have been established before the 12th century, the Hindu temple receives more than 5 million visitors a year, making it one of the largest annual pilgrimages in the world. (The Supreme Court filing mentions 20 million pilgrims a year). The presiding deity is Lord Ayyappa, who is believed to have taken an oath of celibacy. Before they make the steep barefoot trek to the temple, pilgrims — until now men of all ages, children, and women over the age of 50 — prepare for Sabarimala by practicing celibacy and avoiding meat and leather.

Bindu Ammini, left, and Kanakadurga, became the first women to officially enter the
Sabarimala temple since a Supreme Court ruling in September overturned a longstanding
ban on women visiting the temple. Kerala, India. Sameer Raichur for TIME

Since the Supreme Court verdict, the Kerala government says that about 4,200 women have booked online for a visit, although local police say that only about 20 women have tried to enter the temple. (There are unconfirmed reports that eight other women have entered the temple since Jan. 1, including three Malaysian women of Tamil origin who are said to have entered the day before Bindu and Kanakadurga.)

Outraged male protesters surrounding the temple have chased and abused the women, and threatened to beat them up. After Bindu and Kanakadurga entered, the head priest shut the temple doors for an hour-long “purification ceremony.” Across Kerala, mobs claiming to be offended devotees are going on a rampage, damaging buses, burning effigies and throwing stones and crude bombs in the streets. One man has died, and hundreds have been injured. The Kerala police have arrested more than 5,700 people.

Many Hindus believe that the energy or chaitanya of a woman’s body is polluted during menstruation. Most temples allow women to enter as long as they are not on their period, but the Sabarimala temple is one of the few banning women of childbearing age altogether. In response to a 2006 petition spearheaded by women lawyers, the highest court of India declared that the Sabarimala rule is a violation of the right to equality, guaranteed in the Indian Constitution. The Kerala state government led by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) now hails Bindu and Kanakadurga as heroes, while the protesters say they have defiled the temple.

In India, the fight for women’s equality exists on several fronts. In 2012 after a young medical student was brutally raped and murdered in Delhi, a massive uprising focused on women’s safety, and public opposition to stronger rape laws. In the last year, the #MeToo movement came to India as women in media, entertainment and academia named their aggressors and demanded safer workplaces. Recognizing the climate, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s central government has been pro-actively advertising programs for women’s education and menstrual health. But with a high-profile case of a Kerala nun accusing a Catholic priest of rape, and now Sabarimala, women’s-rights activists in India are facing one of its toughest battlefields: religion.

With national elections set to take place in April and May, the protests have turned into an ideological battle between the right and the left. The most vocal protesters are affiliated with Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which historically had little political sway in Kerala, a highly literate, fertile region of the country with large Hindu, Muslim and Christian populations. But now, the BJP has found a way to enter Kerala politics by taking a stand against the women entering the temple in Sabarimala. The BJP officials argued their entry was a violation of Hindu tradition.

Meanwhile, communist state leader Pinarayi Vijayan has assured that his government would uphold the court verdict and provide police protection for women devotees visiting the temple. Parties in his left coalition — also often criticized for being male bastions — are espousing feminist values like never before. They led 5 million women, many of them state employees, in standing shoulder to shoulder on Jan. 1, forming a “women’s wall for renaissance.” They’re now planning a two-day celebration of menstruation as “not impure, but pure.”

At the center of the politicking, the two women who first entered the temple have been forced into hiding. On the evening of Jan. 4, the night they are allowed to turn their phones on, Bindu calls her 12-year-old daughter, Olga, named for the revolutionary Olga Benario Prestes killed in the Holocaust. As protesters and the media surrounded their home in Kozhikode, a district in north Kerala, Olga has had to move in with her mother’s friend. She is unfazed. “Amma, you don’t forget the aravana payasam, okay?” the girl says chirpily, reminding Bindu about the sacred rice and molasses sweet Sabarimala devotees always bring back after prayers. “I’m so proud of my wife, and of Kanakadurga,” Bindu’s husband Hariharan tells TIME over the phone. “They have paved a way for many other women to express their faith.”

Kanakadurga has no such support. Her family have not spoken to her since Dec. 24, when the pair made their first, failed attempt to enter Sabarimala. A police officer in her home district says her family received several death threats and have left to an undisclosed relatives’ house. In the car, Kanakadurga sends rapid voice messages on Whatsapp to friends and neighbors, letting them know she is fine, and if they can find out where her family is. “They’re angry with me because I risked my life, and now, theirs,” she says. “But I know that when I return home, we will sort things out.” Bindu touches her friend’s knee; the women who met just two weeks earlier now finish each other’s’ sentences.

“People will always spit at those trying to push for social change,” Kanakadurga says, noting that she and Bindu do not regret what they did. “We’ll be asked what’s the hurry to become equal, why us two, why today, why not tomorrow, or why this way. It’s part of any transition. I just appeal to my brothers on the streets to find some tolerance within them, and stop the violence in our name.”

Hindu devotees at the Lord Ayyappa temple at Sabarimala, in the southern state of Kerala, on Oct. 18, 2018. Arun Sankar—AFP/Getty Images

In videos released to the media after their 3 a.m. visit to the temple on Jan. 2, Bindu and Kanakadurga wear black clothes, like most pilgrims to Sabarimala. In one short clip, the two rush down the back stairs after their visit; in another, they walk down the hill, past other devotees. Bindu pauses and beams at the phone camera. She asks the person holding the phone — a psychologist friend who helped them stay calm — to shoot her statement “to avoid fake news.”

“We just worshipped Ayyappan in Sabarimala and are going back,” she says in the local language, Malayalam. “As you can see, the real devotees of Sabarimala are not stopping us. Our visit has been very smooth.” A visibly nervous Kanakadurga smiles but refuses to say anything.

Bindu and Kanakadurga tell TIME they are two entirely divergent souls thrown together by a single common “vaashi,” or resolve. Bindu is a Dalit, a community formerly considered “untouchable,” who grew up in the district near the temple. The youngest of five children, she was raised by her illiterate mother after her parents separated. Throughout school, she accompanied her mother as she labored in paddy fields, plastic factories, and hotel kitchens. In 2001, she became the first in her family to go to college; she became a lawyer because her headmistress said it suited “stubborn girls.”

At the age of 18, Bindu met her future husband, Hariharan, at a leftist students’ group. In law college, Bindu took her baby daughter to class. She also joined the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist), and eventually became its youngest female state coordinator. “My political awareness makes me stronger, but the media is trying to use it to tarnish my image,” she says, after the third television reporter in one evening asks her if she is a Maoist (an extreme leftist who believes in armed revolution to overthrow the state). Speaking in Malayalam, peppered with English she has taught herself, she clarifies that the party she was in is state-recognized and that she has never believed in armed rebellion. Eight years ago, Bindu says she tired of raging against the glass ceiling in communist parties, and quit. She now teaches in the School of Legal Studies in the coastal city of Thalassery, and runs a grocery shop with her husband. “I am agnostic. If I believe in something powerful, it is subaltern feminism,” she says, referring to the rights of women in the most oppressed classes.

Kanakadurga’s life has been more privileged. Descriptions of her childhood conjure up an ancestral home with a wide foyer and fat wooden pillars, games amid paddy fields, and a family temple in the backyard. She does not hide her pride when she says she is a high-caste Nair. Her left-leaning father was a clerk in the district court, and mother, a homemaker. But the house rules were set by her elderly, orthodox grandmother, the matriarch who read Hindu mythology and scriptures to Kanakadurga and her five siblings every evening.

“In such a family, it’s common for a lower caste servant to be served in a different plate in the backyard, and for no Muslim or Christian to ever enter our gates,” Kanakadurga says. She rebelled in her own quiet ways, sneaking in a Muslim best friend for a meal by planting a bindi on her forehead, writing romantic poetry, and bagging a government job soon after her arranged marriage. “My husband and I live a conservative life, we don’t want to challenge society or anything,” she says. “I am god-fearing, but I pick my battles.”

After the Supreme Court verdict, both Bindu and Kanakadurga voiced their desire to go to Sabarimala. Curious, they joined a few groups on Facebook and Whatsapp formed by secular activists and women who wanted to go to Sabarimala. Some planned to go in late December, an auspicious time. But as they watched protesters and police turning women devotees away from the temple, and threatening them, more and more women withdrew from the plan. On Dec. 22, Bindu and Kanakadurga, along with two other women, met for the first time in Thrissur, a town a 125 mile drive from Pamba, the base of Sabarimala. Bindu’s husband had dropped her to the railway station, and wished her luck. But Kanakadurga, whose husband had said her desire to go to Sabarimala was a “disgrace,” had told her family she had official work out of town. “If I had said where I was actually going, they would have locked me up in a room,” she says.

Strangers with a single mission, the four women made their journey to Sabarimala. On the way, the two other women received imploring calls from their families and decided to go home. On Dec. 24, as Bindu and Kanakadurga reached the base of the hill, protesters stopped them, and police removed them to avoid a potential riot. Angry and determined to continue their journey, Bindu and Kanakadurga went on hunger strike there until the police guaranteed them protection in line with the state government’s promise. As the police tried to find a safe way to help the women enter the temple, Bindu and Kanakadurga say they argued with each other — over whether they could count on the police, whether they should abort the plan, which route they should take, and several other details.

“Without Kanaka, I would probably have gone in hurriedly and gotten killed,” Bindu says. Kanakadurga adds, “Without Bindu, I would have returned home! Now, I have the satisfaction of having opened the door for any woman devotee to enter Sabarimala.” Her voice softens as she describes the lamp-lit idol of the seated Lord Ayyappa. She says it brought her more peace than any shrine she had seen before.

Women stand shoulder to shoulder as part of a "women's wall" in Thiruvananthapuram, in the southern Indian state of Kerala, on Jan. 1, 2019. R.S. Iyer—AP

Hindus opposed to women entering the Sabarimala temple offer several reasons. “They can go to any other temple, can’t they?” says Sandeep Vachaspati, the BJP’s media coordinator for Kerala, and a member of the Save Sabarimala movement. He believes the temple entry movement is a ploy by activists to “put an end to Hindu values.” Modi has explained his party’s war on Indian Muslims’ practice of “triple talaq” or instant divorce, as a matter of Muslim women’s rights, but Sabarimala as tradition.

Many women in Kerala seem to want the status quo, where they get to go only after the age of 50. Padma Pillai, from Ready to Wait, a group of women who believe in waiting for menopause before going to Sabarimala, says that the courts shouldn’t intervene on this kind of religious matter, since not being allowed into Sabarimala doesn’t cause “any harm to the body, mind or even spiritual goals of a woman.” The Chennai-based People for Dharma is one of many groups who have filed petitions asking for a review of the judgement, which the Supreme Court will hear on Jan. 22.

The debate is being held not only in television studios and the parliament, but also in buses, trains, and living rooms in Kerala. Women repeatedly mention that Kanakadurga’s husband might leave her as punishment. (He has not said this). In the same breath, the pair are asked why they want to risk their lives for women’s rights, and why they did not dare to use the front entrance and walk among thousands of devotees and protestors. They’re called tools of the communist government. Their motives are questioned, their sanity doubted.

The demand for equal entry into religious spaces has historically been important to many larger struggles for social reform in India. Initially a pre-independence movement seeking equality for Dalits with upper-caste Hindus, in the past few years it has started to include women who seek parity with men. Sabarimala is not the first instance of women seeking entry into temples on par with men. In 2016, in response to a petition by women led by activist Trupti Desai, the Bombay High Court ended a 400-year-old custom by opening the Shani Shingnapur temple in the western state of Maharashtra to women. The same year, after a nationwide campaign called “Right to Pray” led by Muslim women and activists, the court lifted a ban on women entering the inner sanctum of the iconic Haji Ali Dargah in Mumbai. Across India, women are pushing the boundaries — in social struggles and, more often, through court battles.

When Kanakadurga and Bindu turn their phones off for another 24 hours to avoid tracking, all they want is to go home, resume their jobs, and wait for other women to pick up where they left off. “In a democratic country like India, the idea that men and women are not equal – even if sometimes, in some spaces, or some situations — is so dangerous,” says Kanakadurga. “My sons — all our kids — are watching this. I need to go home. They need to listen to my side of the story.”

(Source: TIME)

Modi referred to temples where men are denied entrance - here are some

Years of debate on the Sabarimala Temple took a sudden turn when two women below the age of 50 entered the Hindu shrine before sunrise earlier this week. Kerala is now battling the furious protests this act has led to.

A day before this, on an interview with ANI the PM was asked about his opinion on the Sabarimala row, and he offered, every temple has its own traditions and so does this pilgrimage site in Kerala. Later, in a tweet sent out from the PMO’s official handle, he made references of how some temples do not allow men.

In fact, not only temples, but there are many traditional rituals that restricts male participation for religious reasons. Without getting into much details, let’s list out 8 such instances.

Attukal Temple, Kerala

The Hindu religious temple located in Trivandrum, Kerala is dedicated to goddess Kali in her benevolent form, and is hence worshipped as Bhadrakali. The temple has made it to the Guinness World Records for hosting the largest festival of women participation, the Attukal Pongala Festival. Because of this large gathering of women, men are not allowed in here.

Devi Kanya Kumari Temple, Kanyakumari

In this Kanyakumari temple dedicated to Goddess Durga, she is worshipped as the Goddess of Sanyasa. That being the reason, while sanyasi men walk till the gate of the Bhagavathy Maa temple and married men are denied entrance into the premises.

Linga Bhairavi Temple, Coimbatore

Another temple in southern India that has laid down some serious restrictions for men. Male devotees are not allowed to enter the sanctum sanctorum of this temple which is dedicated to the female Goddess manifested as an eight feet tall Devi consecrated by Sadhguru. They are also forbidden participation in multiple rituals that are performed at the Linga Bhairavi Temple.

Chakkulathukavu Temple, Kerala

The next temple in Kerala that puts forward some strict gender-based restrictions is this Durga temple located in Neerattupuram, Alappuzha district. Sitting at the banks of the Pampa river, the temple attracts huge number of pilgrims regularly and some of the biggest festivals celebrated in this temple that restricts male participation are Naari Pooja and Pongala.

Lord Brahma Temple, Pushkar

In the entire universe, Lord Brahma has only one temple dedicated to him and it is in Pushkar, Rajasthan. But even in that lone temple, men, if married, are prohibited from entering.

Kamrup Kamakhya Temple, Assam

The Kamakya temple is one of the shakti peethas were, it is believed, that the private parts of Goddess Sati had fallen after her dead body was severed by Lord Vishnu. The temple is noted for rituals followed during Ambuvachi and only the women can worship the bleeding Goddess.

Santoshi Maa ‘Vrat’

The Santoshi Mata vrat is only for women or unmarried girls. The devotee observing this fast is prohibited from offering sour fruits to the goddess or consuming anything sour themselves. Men are forbidden from entering the Santoshi Mata temples on Fridays.

(Source: Yahoo News)

Meet the women who made history by entering Sabarimala

Bindu Ammini and Kanakadurga, both from Kerala, prayed at the shrine early on Wednesday, three months after the Supreme Court lifted the ban on women’s entry.

Bindu Ammini, 42, and Kanakadurga, 41, made history on Wednesday when they became the first women of menstruating age to enter Kerala’s Sabarimala temple since the Supreme Court in September lifted the traditional ban on women under 50 praying at the shrine.

Setting out from Ernakulam on Tuesday night, they reached Pampa, the entry point to Sabarimala, in the early hours and asked for a police escort. Then they trekked up the hill to the shrine and offered prayers in the sanctum sanctorum at around 3.45 am on Wednesday.

Kanakadurga and Bindu Ammini made history by becoming the first women
under 50 to pray at the Sabarimala temple, three months after the
Supreme Court in September struck down a traditional ban on
menstruating-age women entering the shrine. | Via Facebook

“Police gave us protection after we stood firm on our decision to offer prayers at the temple,” Bindu, as she is popularly known, told Manorama News TV channel. “We began our trek through the hilly terrain at 2.30 am and offered prayers at 3.30 am. The devotees who were present there did not trouble us.”

Thus ended the three-month wait for women aged 10 to 50 to enter the Sabarimala shrine. In a landmark ruling on September 28, the Supreme Court had struck down the ban on the entry of menstruating-age women into the temple. By the end of 2018, at least 17 women had attempted to enter the shrine, only to be thwarted by workers of the Sangh Parivar and Hindutva organisations aligned to it. They have been agitating against the Supreme Court order, claiming the presence of menstruating-age women would defile the shrine.

Bindu and Kanakadurga had first tried to enter Sabarimala on December 24 but had to abandon their trek following protests by the Hindutva agitators. Undeterred, they bided their time, staying in a secret location for a week, away from media glare and police surveillance. Finally, a day after Kerala’s women formed a 620-km human wall to express their support for gender justice, Bindu and Kanakadurga managed to enter the shrine. Even mediapersons stationed near the sanctum sanctorum were unaware about them.

Gender justice activist
In her younger days, Bindu was active in student politics. She served as a leader of the Kerala Vidyarthi Sanghatana, a leftist student organisation. She took to teaching after completing a Master’s in Law from Kerala University, and currently teaches at the School of Legal Studies, Kannur University.

Bindu is also a Dalit activist. She is known among her friends and students as someone with unflinching commitment to ensuring gender and social justice.

Ashbin Krishna, a lawyer who studied under her, said she is “a darling of her students”. “She has got strong political views. She always supported students’ politics,” he said.

Bindu’s students “love her lectures on gender justice”, Krishna added. “She is an expert on the subject.”

Bindu is married to the political activist Hariharan. They have an 11-year-old daughter named Olga and live in Pookkad, Kozhikode district.

‘A devout Hindu’
Kanakadurga got acquainted with Bindu through a Facebook page called Navothana Keralam Sabarimalayilekku, or Renaissance Kerala marches to Sabarimala. The page is basically an online meeting place for women who wish to go to Sabarimala.

Kanakadurga works as a manager with the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation, a government enterprise. She is married to Krishnanunni, an engineer, and is mother to two children. The family lives in Malappuram.

She belongs to the upper caste Nair community. Her brother Bharath Bhushan described Kanakadurga as a devout Hindu and said he does not know why she decided to go to Sabarimala.

Bhushan’s family filed a missing persons complaint last week after Kanakadurga did not return home following her aborted attempt to enter Sabarimala. They even called a press conference to highlight her disappearance. Kanakadurga responded through a video in which she said she was under police protection: “I will return home after a couple of days. For security reasons, I cannot divulge details about my whereabouts now.”

(Source: Scroll)

Why Justice Indu Malhotra, only woman on bench, dissented on Sabarimala

In a four-one verdict, the Supreme Court ended a centuries-old ban on women aged 10 to 50 from entering Kerala's Sabarimala Temple.

Justice Indu Malhotra, the only woman in the five-judge bench of the Supreme Court that ruled today that women of all ages must be allowed in Kerala's renowned Sabarimala temple, gave a dissenting judgment, disagreeing with her peers.

"The practice of age restriction on women entry to Sabrimala temple can't be treated as an essential religious practice," said the court in a majority four-one judgment, ending a ban on the entry of women between 10 and 50 years.

Justice Indu Malhotra, however, said that issues which have deep religious connotation should not be tinkered with to maintain secular atmosphere in the country.

"It is not for court to interfere in religious practices even if it appears discriminatory. Notions of rationality cannot be brought into matters of religion," she said.

Justice Indu Malhotra on Friday said religious customs
were protected by the constitution. (File)

She was of the view that it is not for courts to determine which religious practices are to be struck down except in issues of social evil like 'Sati'.

"An equality doctrine cannot override the fundamental right to worship under Article 25. Notions of rationality cannot be brought into matters of religion," Justice Malhotra said.

She added that the issue in this case not limited to Sabarimala only. It will have far reaching implications for other places of worships, she said.

Reacting to the dissenting view, senior lawyer Indira Jaising said, "While I disagree with Justice Indu Malhotra, she has an opinion which must be read, I am sad though that a dissent in Shabrimalai came from a woman judge."

For centuries, women of menstrual age were restricted from entering the temple as its presiding deity, Lord Ayyappa, is considered to be a celibate. A number of petitions had challenged the restrictions on the entry of women.

The head priest of Sabarimala, Kandaru Rajeevaru, said: "We are disappointed but accept the Supreme Court verdict on women entry."

(Source: NDTV)

Legend of Sabarimala: Love story that kept women from Lord Ayyappa

Lord Ayyappa set a woman free from a curse that had her living the life of a demon. After having been set free, she wanted to marry Lord Ayyappa. The woman is said to be still waiting for him near Sabarimala Temple.

Women of all age can now visit, worship and offer prayer to Lord Ayyappa at the Sabarimala Temple that is surrounded by 18 hills in the Periyar Tiger Reserve in Kerala. The temple is believed to have been founded by Sage Parshuram.

Lord Ayyappa is the presiding deity at Sabarimala residing in the hilly forest in Naishtik Brahmachari (eternal celibate) state. Till the Supreme Court today struck down Rule 3 (b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965 declaring it unconstitutional, women of menstruating age (10-50 years) were not allowed to enter the temple.

There are different versions as to why menstruating women were not allowed to enter the Sabarimala Temple. According to puranic and oral traditions, Lord Ayyappa was born out of the union of Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu, when the latter was in Mohini form.

Lord Vishnu took the form of Mohini to have destroyed a deadly demon Bhashmasur and acquire the elixir (amrut) for the gods during the great churning of oceans. Legend has it that Lord Shiva got swayed by the charm of Mohini and Lord Ayyappa was born of their union.

Sabarimala Temple: An estimated 3-4 crore devotees visit the shrine to offer prayer to Lord Ayyappa every year. Now, menstruating women can also worship at the temple. (Photo: PTI)

While Lord Ayyappa was still a minor, a lady-demon had created havoc in the down south. She had got a boon from gods that she could only be defeated by the son born out of the union of Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu. As it happened, Lord Ayyappa defeated her in a battle.

Upon her defeat, it was revealed that the demon was actually a beautiful young woman who had been cursed to live the life of a demon. The defeat set the woman free who, in turn, proposed to Lord Ayyappa.

He refused saying that he had been ordained to go to forest and answer the prayers of devotees. But, the young woman was persistent. So, Lord Ayyappa promised to marry her the day kanni-swamis (new devotees) stop visiting him with their prayers at Sabarimala.

The woman agreed to wait for him at a neighbouring temple. The woman is also worshipped today as Malikapurathamma at a neighbouring temple. The legend goes further saying that in honour of Malikapurathamma, Lord Ayyappa does not receive any menstruating woman. Also, the women chose not to visit Lord Ayyappa for it would be an insult to Malikapurathamma's love and sacrifice.

There is another story.

According to the other version, Lord Ayyappa is a historical figure. He was born in the royal family of Panthalam, a small kingdom located in Patthanamthitta district of Kerala. Sabarimala Temple is located in the same district.

He grew up in the palace of Panthalam. The relics of the palace still exist. Ayyappa is said to have grown up into a lovable prince for his subjects for he cared for the well being of the people living in his kingdom.

A small continent of intruders led by an Arab commander called Babar or Vavar attacked the kingdom during the time. Ayyappa defeated Vavar, who thereafter turned into his devout follower.

As Lord Ayyappa resides at Sabarimala, Vavar lives in spirit in a shrine at Erumeli, a place situated on the 40 km trek to Sabarimala temple. Vavar is said to protect pilgrims going to visit Lord Ayyappa.

As per this legend claiming historicity of Lord Ayyappa, the presiding deity of Sabarimala Temple took a vow to answer prayers to every devotee walking up to his shrine.

Given the arduous task that he undertook, Lord Ayyappa shunned all worldly desires including contact with women. Many believe this was the reason why menstruating women were barred from visiting Sabarimala Temple.

(Source: India Today)

Devotion not subject to gender discrimination, Sabarimala temple open for all: Supreme Court

Today's verdict is the latest in a recent series of landmark Supreme Court decisions, including the decriminalisation of gay sex and adultery.

The Supreme Court on Friday removed a ban that prevented women between 10 and 50 years of age from entering Kerala's Sabarimala temple -- the latest in a recent series of landmark decisions, including the decriminalisation of gay sex and adultery.

The Sabarimala shrine, located northeast of Pathanamthitta in a tiger reserve, is dedicated to the Hindu deity Ayyappan. Devotees consider Ayyappan to be an eternal celibate.

Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice AM Khanwilkar, who delivered one of four judgments, said devotion can't be subject to gender discrimination.

Justices Rohinton F Nariman and Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud concurred with Misra and Khanwilkar. Justice Indu Malhotra dissented.

Chandrachud said religion can't be used as a cover to deny women the right to worship, and that to treat women as the children of a lesser God was to blink at constitutional morality.

The Sabarimala shrine, located northeast of Pathanamthitta in a tiger reserve, is dedicated to the Hindu deity Ayyappan. (Photo: Facebook/SabarimalaOfficial)

Union Women and Child Development Minister Maneka Gandhi said the "wonderful" judgment "opens up the way forward for Hinduism to become even more inclusive and not a property of one caste or one sex."

Kandararu Rajeevaru, the head priest at Sabarimala, said the verdict was "disappointing" -- -- but that the 'Tantri [head priest] family' would accept it.

The Congress, currently an Opposition party in Kerala, said it welcomed the verdict.

We welcome the historic Supreme Court judgement allowing entry of women of all ages into the #SabarimalaTemple
#SabarimalaVerdict

— Congress (@INCIndia) September 28, 2018

JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA DISSENTS
Justice Indu Malhotra, the lone woman on the bench, said it wasn't for courts to determine which religious practices should be struck down -- except in issues of social evil, like Sati.

Issues which have a deep religious connotation, she said, shouldn't be tinkered with to maintain a secular atmosphere in the country.

HISTORIC DECISIONS
In recent weeks, the Supreme Court has delivered a series of historic judgments. It partially struck down one colonial-era law and scrapped another to decriminalise sex between consenting adults of the same sex and adultery.

In another verdict, it said Aadhaar -- a biometric database on more than 122 crore Indians -- was valid, but imposed curbs.

(Source: India Today)

Should Sabarimala temple open its doors to women? The arguments heard in court

The court is hearing a petition to allow all women between the ages of 10 and 50 to enter the premises of Sabarimala temple.

A five-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra is set to deliver its verdict on Friday on a batch of petitions challenging restrictions on the entry of women between the ages of 10 and 50 inside Kerala’s Sabarimala temple. Following an eight-day hearing in July, the Supreme Court initially reserved its verdict on August 1.

The top court is hearing a PIL filed by the non-profit body Indian Lawyers Association seeking the entry of all women and girls to the temple dedicated to Lord Ayyappan. The temple bars girls and women of menstruating age – 10 to 50 – from entering its premises.

While it first came up for hearing in August 2006, over the years it has seen a number of judges in various combinations taking up the matter. With 24 respondents in the case, the issue of allowing women entry to the temple is one of religious freedom, gender equality and female autonomy.

To decide the merits of the case, the Constitution Bench will consider five questions framed by the top court. This includes whether the restrictions on women based on biological factors is discriminatory and as a result violates Articles 14 (right to equality), 15 (prohibition of discrimination), 17 (untouchability), and cannot be protected by “morality” based on Articles 25 (freedom to practice and propagation of religion), 26 (Freedom to manage religious affairs).

It will also look into whether the practice of excluding women constitutes an “essential religious practice” under Article 25; whether the devotees of the Ayyappa temple form a separate religious denomination, thereby being allowed to preserve its own practices and rituals among other questions.

TNM summarises the main arguments put forth by some of the key parties in the case.

Indian Young Lawyers Association
Represented by advocate Ravi Prakash Gupta, the non-profit body argued that the bar on entry of women in Sabarimala temple is not the essence of their religious affairs, observing that it is “neither a ritual nor a ceremony associated with Hindu religion”.

He also argued that the Sabarimala temple cannot claim the character of an independent religious denomination, pointing to the fact that it is managed by the Travancore Devaswom Board, which receives public funds. As a result, the temple cannot practice gender-based discrimination, as it violates Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution.

Referring to the Shiroor Mutt case, Ravi points out that attributes of a “religious denomination” are five-fold: 1) Having its own property, 2) District Identity, 3) Having its own set of followers, 4) Distinct set of practises and beliefs, and 5) Its own hierarchy of administration without external control and interference.

Ravi also told the court that the Sabarimala temple could not claim that the restrictions on women is a customary tradition as there are records of women entering the temple during the control of the Travancore King, tweeted LiveLaw. He also submitted that the ban on entry was based on practical considerations rather than on tradition, noting that earlier women were reluctant to visit Sabarimala due to the physical hardship of climbing the hill and other risk factors. Gupta added that the oath of 41-day celibacy taken by Ayyappa devotees did not constitute an essential practice of Hinduism.

Happy to Bleed
Appearing for Happy to Bleed, senior advocate Indira Jaising equated the ban on entry of women to Sabarimala temple with the practice of untouchability.  “Prohibition of women entry is a form of untouchability. The sole basis of restriction is menstruation of women. To keep away menstruating women is a form of untouchability. Menstruating women are seen as polluted,” she argued before the Constitution Bench.

She also submitted before the Bench that the Constitution guaranteed the freedom to practice religion (Article 25), noting, “There is nothing in health, morality or public order to prevent a woman from offering worship in a public temple”.

Concluding her arguments on day 8, Indira Jaising told the court that restraining women from entering Sabarimala on the grounds that the deity is celibate was equivalent to stereotyping women as seductresses. She also argued that the deity as a legal person had limited rights, and could not claim the protection of life and personal liberty under Article 21 and freedom of conscience under Article 25.

People for Dharma and Chetana
Two women’s groups, People for Dharma and Chetana, have moved the court demanding women not be allowed into Sabarimala temple. Representing them, J Sai Deepak, a Delhi-based advocate, argued that Ayyappa in Sabarimala is a celibate and his individual rights should be protected under Article 25 of the Constitution. He argued the rule is not discriminatory for it is neither based on misogyny nor menstrual impurity, rather Ayyappa’s celibacy here is a fundamental character of the temple.

Kerala Government
The Kerala Government’s stance, which has flip-flopped over the years, declared its support for women entering the temple. Representing the LDF Government, senior advocate Jaideep Gupta submitted that constitutional provisions have to be broadly interpreted. He argued that the State’s right to make laws under Article 25 (2) (b) applies to religious aspects and not just social aspects, reported Bar and Bench. He added that the Sabarimala temple could not be considered a separate religious denomination and therefore could not claim rights as per Article 26.

Furthermore, he argued that Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules could be read down to no longer exclude women. Submitting that the Constitution is reformist, Jaideep Gupta told the apex court, “If we go back to holy antiquity every time then there won’t be reform.”

Travancore Devaswom Board
Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared for the Travancore Devaswom Board, which manages the affairs of the Sabarimala Temple. Pointing to the historical origin of the ban, he argued that the entry of women of menstruating age was antithetical to the celibate nature of the deity, reports Live Law.

Abhishek Manu Singhvi centred his argument on observance of the 41-day penance, which he said, was essential for the pilgrimage to Sabarimala. Dismissing the idea that that the ban on entry of women is discriminatory, he said it was not physiologically feasible for women to observe the 41-day penance.

Further justifying that “every religion is based on male chauvinism”, the counsel for the Board stated, “Prohibition is not because of male chauvinism. It is linked to the penance and character of the deity. Women accept the prohibition. It is not imposed on them,” reports The Hindu.

When CJI Dipak Misra questioned whether the ban is an essential part of religion, Abhishek defended the restrictions observing that it is the crux of Sabarimala. He went on to submit, “If a person has a belief, it is not for a secular judge to sit in judgment of that belief", adding, “It is not for me or you to say the practice is irrational. That is a belief held by all Ayyappa Swamis”.

Head Priest of Temple
The main argument of advocate V Giri, who represented the Thantri of Sabarimala temple, revolved around the ‘Naishthik Brahmacharya’ or the celibate nature of the deity.

“I don’t go to a temple to question the faith but to assert my faith. If I say I believe in the deity, then my belief will be in sync and not antagonistic to what is held as an essential religious practice,” Giri told the court, reported G Ananthakrishnan. The counsel for the Thantri added that celibate character of the deity cannot be wished away by devotees.

Pandalam Royal Family
The Pandalam Royal family, which managed the affairs of the Sabarimala temple before the Travancore Devaswom Board was constituted, also challenged the petitioner’s claim to remove the ban on women’s entry to the temple. K Radhakrishnan, the counsel for the family, raised doubts over the petitioner’s intentions. Suggesting that removal of the ban on women’s entry attacks Hindu beliefs and practices and attempts to demolish the temple’s glory, Radhakrishnan argued that the petitioner does not represent the ardent faith of the Ayyappa devotees, reports Live Law.

Radhakrishnan also argued that girls and women of menstruating age abstained from undertaking a pilgrimage to Sabarimala in reverence for the celibate nature of the deity. He further submitted that constitutional morality cannot trump morality of society and of religious institution. Furthermore, the family’s counsel the rights of the State as per Article 25(2) does not apply to religious institutions.

Respondents like the Nair Service Society, Ayyappan Seva Sangham, People for Dharma, NGO Chetna among others have also batted for the ban on the entry of women, urging the court to respect tradition.

All eyes will now be on the Constitution Bench on whether it will order the 1500-year-old Sabarimala temple to open its doors to women.

(Source: TNM)

Why women should have the right to enter Sabarimala

Found an interesting piece on Sabarimala row on ET written by Charmy Harikrishnan. Enjoy reading:

On August 27, the Bombay High Court came out with a landmark judgment on the Haji Ali Dargah: "Women be permitted to enter the sanctum sanctorum of the Haji Ali Dargah at par with men," adding that the Haji Ali Dargah Trust cannot enforce a ban "contrary to the fundamental rights" granted by the Constitution.

The very next day, a few posts appeared on Facebook — Malayali's favourite social medium — of a few women holding placards saying #ReadyToWait #Sabarimala.

What they were saying was apparent. While women are fighting to enter the temple in Sabarimala in southern Kerala — which bars the entry of women between the ages of 10 and 50 — the placard holders are in no rush, they are willing to wait to see Lord Ayyappan.

But the more they talked, their arguments turned into a soup, sorry a sambar, of gobbledygook. What are they waiting for, exactly? Till they turn 55, apparently.

And why? Forty-year-old Padma Pillai, one of the placard women, says the "deity prefers it".

That is indeed clinching. But how does she know what the deity wants? God is really not known to WhatsApp or Facebook. "My mother told me," says Pillai, over the phone from Hyderabad, where she runs a startup called MovingDNeedle.

"In the aitihyam (legend) that she narrated to me when I was a child, only women who have crossed 55 could go to Sabarimala.

It is also there in the Tantra Samuchayam (a 15th century ritual manual) and our folklores." Really, Ms?

If Pillai wants to wait till she is 65 or 85, she could, but the personal whims of a few and age-old prejudices cannot impinge on the constitutional rights of women.

Put the same question — Why can't women between the ages of 10 and 50 enter Sabarimala — to Rahul Easwar, the self-appointed advocate of Ayyappan and whose family members are traditionally the tantris of Sabarimala, and the sambar of gobbledygook boils over.

"See, Sabarimala never restricted young women. They kept away of their own free will." So if women enter, of their own free will, that should not be a problem? "No, they cannot enter.

It is for the creation of ojas and the inward movement of the sexual energy of the male devotees." If women enter the temple, this will be affected. So to protect this seminal national treasure that is the male sexual energy, the entire area from the river Pampa to the temple shall be sanitised of women — blatant gender discrimination hasn't been dressed up in so much poppycock of late.

And why should it be so? "Because Manikandan (another name for Ayyappan) said so in 1150 AD." And how does Easwar in 21st century know what Manikandan said in the 12th century? "That has been the tradition for 900 years and this has been the belief of bhaktas and validated by devaprasnam." Devaprasnam, dear reader, is a group of astrologers "divining the will of God" using horoscopes and cowrie shells. While God hasn't so far spoken out against caste discrimination, female foeticide and the quality of PDS rice in ration shops, He has taken the trouble to specifically instruct astrologers about the age limit of women who can pray to Him. So they say. But since our legislature and judiciary do not make laws and dispense justice by carefully reading Nilgiri tea leaves, shuffling cowrie shells and wondering if the Saturn is retrograde, we should be following only one book: the Constitution, not folklore, bedtime stories and devaprasnam.

While Pillai and Easwar are careful not to utter the word "menstruation", it is the woman between menarche and menopause who is banished from the temple: she is the seat of vice, she is the impure one. This misogynistic notion that women can pollute God or man has no place in an equal society.

Rights and Rites 
A placard woman's devotion to Sabarimala, sorry the Sangh Parivar, can also be quite enchanting. Pillai, in a Facebook post, calls J Nandakumar, All India Sah-Prachar Pramukh of the RSS, an "undisputed spiritual giant", that for a moment everyone from Shankarachaya to Sree Narayana Guru might have experienced grave self-doubts and then chuckled heartily.

Nandakumar came out in support of #ReadyToWait on Twitter, calling it a "sacred cause". But the RSS had taken a different stance at the Akhil Bhartiya Pratinidhi Sabha in Nagaur in March.

Its annual report says: "Generally, both men and women are naturally permitted entry into the temples without any discrimination...

However, because of some unfair traditions, at certain places there has been a lack of consensus on the question of temple entry.

Wherever such problems exist, attempts should be made to bring about a change of mind through proper discussions." Didn't the report back women's entry to temples?

"Yes, in principle we are for it," says Nandakumar over the phone to ET Magazine. "But these are traditions that have been observed for centuries. There has to be a consensus on it.

It cannot happen one fine morning. It cannot happen today or tomorrow." Is there a consensus in the RSS on it? "We have had two-three meetings, but there has been no consensus." So women should be ready to wait till they find a consensus. Suddenly, it is no longer about what Ayyappan wants, but what men want. Kummanam Rajasekharan, BJP president of Kerala, toes the same line. "As a political, secular party, BJP does not want to directly involve in the issue. Priests, believers and the Devaswom Board have to sit together and find an amicable solution. Unilateral decision to allow women into the temple will have serious, longterm repercussions," he told ET Magazine.

Rights, however, are not decided on the basis of consensus. In fact, the law seeks to protect those whose rights are denied due to the high-handedness of the majority.

And who will come to a consensus? Prayar Gopalakrishnan, the chief of the Travancore Devaswom Board that is in-charge of the temple, had the temerity to say: "Women will not enter Sabarimala until we have a machine to detect periods." And what about the "believers"?

In the right wing's view, only those who are ready to wait are true believers; the rest are "feminists" and "activists" — as if women got the right to work, vote, property and dress because of the untiring efforts of women who held placards saying "We are ready to wait" and posted those photos on Facebook. Will the tantris vote for change?

TThey are Rahul Easwar's family, which has been enjoying a monopoly on the priesthood of Sabarimala (it' is another "tradition" that has to be challenged, because devotion and knowledge, dear lord, are not hereditarily transmitted).

The questions before the Supreme Court, which is hearing the case, and the society are simple: Should Gods reflect our basest instincts or our noblest aspirations? Should a dozen women who hold placards, saying "Ready to wait", decide what is right in this country? Should women be barred from a place where millions of men — age and religion and caste no bar — go to pray every year?

25 Years Ago 
The funny thing is that this rigid ban on women is just 25 years old — after the Kerala High Court upheld traditions in Sabarimala in 1991: "The restriction imposed on women aged above 10 and below 50 from trekking the holy hills of Sabarimala and offering worship at Sabarimala Shrine is in accordance with the usage prevalent from time immemorial."

Lord Ayyappan, the legend goes, is Hariharasuthan, born of the union of Vishnu in the form of the beautiful woman Mohini and Shiva.

This has been read as an epic moment for fluid gender identity and homosexual union. But as experts like Bibek Debroy say, there is no mention of Lord Ayyappan or Sastha in any of the 18 major puranas or the epics. A master's thesis at Carleton University, Canada, by one Radhika Sekar, refers to a 19th century Sanskrit text called Bhutanathopokyanam that refers to Ayyappan.

However, there is something more interesting in her dissertation: Sekar did enter the temple during her research in 1986-87. Although she could not take the famous 18 steps, she entered the shrine through the northern entrance.

Since Sekar could enter the temple about four years before the high court order, it can be safely assumed that the restriction on women became a rigid code only with the 1991 high court judgment. That case was filed after the then Devaswom commissioner, J Chandrika, conducted the annaprasan of her grandchild at Sabarimala in the presence of other women.

The Devaswom Board, which defended the presence of the women at the temple, said women were allowed on the first five days of every month but not during the festival season of November-January. The queen of Travancore is also reported to have visited the temple in 1940 when she might have been just 45.

Honouring traditions is tricky, since many are steeped in medieval darkness and discrimination. Here are some "immemorial" traditions that have been done away with: women in Kerala could not cover their breasts until 1865, "avarna" children would not be admitted to government schools until the beginning of 20th century, and lower castes could not enter a temple until 1936.

On September 30, 1921, TK Madhavan, a leader of the backward caste Ezhavas, told Mahatma Gandhi: "The removal o ..

On September 30, 1921, TK Madhavan, a leader of the backward caste Ezhavas, told Mahatma Gandhi: "The removal of untouchability is an abstract idea. Temple entry is a concrete representation of the abstract idea."

Three years later, as the great flood of 1924 swept the land, Malayali activists stood in pouring rain and rising waters before the barricades that stopped them from taking the road to the Vaikom temple. The backward castes were denied entry not just to the temple but even to the roads leading to them.

The clock should not be turned back to 1924. Malayalis should not be standing at the barricades once again for basic rights. The government of Kerala says it wants all women — age no bar — to enter Sabarimala. Devaswom Minister Kadakampally Surendran told ET Magazine: "The Left Front government sticks to the affidavit it filed in its earlier term: that women of all ages should be allowed in Sabarimala temple." By giving access to women, the court and the state will be giving a signal, they will be saying "No" to a pernicious mindset that believes women and men are not equal. Women should not wait, dear lord, women should not be required to wait any longer.

.