Lord Ayyappa does not want women, apex court told

Defending the ban on women in Kerala's Sabarimala temple, the Nair community in Kerala has contended that the temple's deity Lord Ayyappa "himself doesn't want the presence of women between 10 and 50". Allowing them in the shrine would "change the character of the deity and the temple", said senior lawyer K Parasaran, appearing for the Nair Service Society, a representative body of the community.

"Lord Ayyappa at Sabarimala is unique as he is a celibate and doesn't want the presence of women aged between 10 and 50 as it would affect His penance. When the Lord Himself doesn't want them, who are we to say that they should be allowed," Parasaran quipped.

"I have two duties - one towards the Lords here in the court, and the other towards the Lord above all of us," he argued.

The petitioner further argued that the deity, which has a legal personality, also has a point of view that has to be protected. More important, the celibate nature of the presiding deity, Lord Ayyappa, is protected by the Constitution.

These arguments were made before the constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra. He is hearing a bunch of petitions that challenge the traditional ban on the entry of women between 10 and 50 years of age in the famous Sabarimala temple.

Parasaran further contended that Article 25 (2), which "throws open public Hindu religious institutions to all classes and sections of society," can be applied only to social reforms and not to matters of religion covered under Article 26 (b) of the Constitution.

"Kerala is a matrilineal society. Therefore to assume that the practice of the Sabarimala Temple is based on patriarchy is fundamentally incorrect," he argued.

This was in response to an observation of the bench that in a patriarchal society women are treated as chattels and conditioned since birth to conduct themselves in a particular manner. Again, the practice of Sabarimala Temple is not comparable to Sati. In fact, Sati itself has no connection to the Hindu faith, the lawyer said, adding that the wives of Dasaratha did not commit 'Sati' after their husbands' death.

The court "must listen to activist voices", but it also "must equally listen to voices which seek to protect tradition", it was contended. By abolishing the practice, the "very character of the religious institution" will be irreparably altered which affects the rights of devotees under Article 25(1) (freedom of religion), he concluded.