Court:

The Supreme Court has ruled that women, of all age groups, can enter Sabarimala temple in
Kerala. The apex court in a 4:1 majority said that the temple practice violates the rights of Hindu
women and that banning entry of women to shrine is gender discrimination. A five-judge
Constitution bench, headed by the former Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, said that the
provision in the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965,
which authorized the restriction violated the right of Hindu women to practice religion.

The temple, dedicated to Lord Ayyappa, is one of the most famous temples in Kerala. The
Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) manages the temple. It is likely that the ruling will have an
impact on all temples and their customs across the state.

Priest Stance:
The temple management has contended in court that they are allowed to frame rules for the
shrine without the state’s interference as the Ayyappa devotees form a denomination—a body
with a definite identifiable character. They also said that it wasn’t discriminatory as the tradition
was born from the belief that the deity is a ‘naishtika brahmachari’ (eternal celibate).
women devotees who ran the #Readytowait campaign opposed the petition as well. The
campaign had sprung up in response to #RightToPray. They argued that only women of a
certain age are barred from entering the temple and that it is okay to wait till 50 to enter the holy
shrine. They also argued that the petitioners were confusing diversity of Hinduism with
discrimination.

Aftermath and Sit down situation:

Even after the apex court's decision, the temple people were adamant enough to not let women
get entry through and eventually heavy clashes took place and eventually women were provided
entry into the temple under heavy police protection. To get this situation to a sit down, we are
modifying it to something like this, where the apex court before giving its direction directs the
temple authorities and the petitioners to get into a mutual discussion and come to a common
consensus.

What traditions say:

1. Temples denying entry to men:

There are in total around 8 temples across the country, few most prominent are:
● Attukal Temple, Kerala
● Chakkulathukavu Temple, Kerala
● Lord Brahma Temple, Pushkar
● Bhagati Maa Temple, Kanyakumari
● Mata Temple, Bihar
● Trimbakeshwar Temple, Nasik
● Kamrup Kamakhya Temple, Assam
● Santoshi Mata Temple [Friday]
● Linga Bhairavi, Coimbatore
 2. Temples denying entry to women:
There are in total around 10 temples across the country, few most prominent are:
● Lord Ayyappa Temple, Kerala
● Lord Kartikeya Temple, Haryana
● Shani Shingnapur Temple, Maharashtra
● Mawali Mata Mandir, Chattisgarh
● Patbausi Satra, Assam
● Ranakpur Jain Temple, Rajasthan
● Sree Krishna Temple, Kerala
● Nizamuddin Dargah, Delhi
● Jama Masjid, Delhi
● Haji Ali Dargah, Mumbai

Argument:

Debrief:
You believe Indian temples are a place of prayer but our scriptures say otherwise. You need to
understand that Indian temples are not places of prayer. Different temples were built in different
ways and for specific purposes. Shani temple is built for occult purposes. It is said and observed
that the place where occult practices are being done, women in the state of pregnancy, in their
menstrual cycles, if they visit the place, it could seriously affect their lives. So, we said women
should not go, it also lays that on a certain day, the woman in certain condition, on a full moon
day she can go, these all are prescriptions these are not restrictions, these are prescriptions
these are not discriminations. These are done with a specific intent. It is not discrimination but is
a certain dimension of life. If you go by this crude sense of equality, you will harm the women
immensely. There are millions of temples open to everybody. Suddenly why discimination would
come to one temple, what are you talking about? This is not a culture that has discriminated
against women. There are more female deities in this country than male deities, evry village or
city you go there is a mata temple, there is a devi temple and you think this is discrimination?
These are very rudimentary ideas picked up from the west.

Counter:
Who are you and I to make prescriptions for women that are harmful for you don't do it, it is not
harmful if you do it and discriminate on the basis of gender?

Reply:
See, there are hundreds of places and if it happens simply because of gender it should be
completely struck off but if there are other aspects to it and you cannot think you cannot
consider anything else, it is absolutely ridiculous, it becomes ridiculous. It's saying like don't I
have the right to enter the ladies' toilet? What nonsense is this? For this you need a law? You
just need a sense that you do not go there.

Counter:
Is there not a difference between men entering a women's toilet and women being allowed to a
temple?

Reply:
See, I am not saying he is not allowed, the only thing I am saying is that a man, who is a man,
will not enter. That's all I said.

Eventual Crux:
There will possibly be no solution and sit down will be ousted without a resolution. What
resolution we want is that women will not be allowed till the age of 50 or till the time they are
menstruating, women after that can freely come to temple and worship. We have no problem
with that.