Four-time Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has avoided Sickular roadmap yet again and argued eloquently that Faith has an importance of its own and Rationality need not be pushed always.
This stance is a win for the right-wing BJP and other Hindutva forces.
"The legend of the deity at Sabarimala is that Lord Ayyappa did not want to see any female in the reproductive stage of life, and deliberately removed himself to his jungle abode for that purpose. Therefore, women are barred out of respect for his wishes. These are questions of faith, not rationality," Tharoor wrote in his column to 'The Indian Express'.
He also adds: "To ignore this is to ignore the very essence of the faith"
In 2018 and even later; there was a huge controversy with regard to the issue of entry of women devotees to the Sabarimala temple.
The BJP did organise multiple agitations in the state. Of course; these did not have any electoral gains for the saffron party. The temple again made news when there was gold theft controversy.
"We do not see Sabarimala as a political dividend issue or as something to be encashed for electoral gains. What happened there was an insult; it was sacrilege. It was about harming people who have no other demand in life except to practise their faith in the way it has been practised for centuries in this very sacred temple of Lord Ayyappa," BJP state president Rajeev Chandrasekhar told 'The Week' in an interview.
The Kerala government led by a Marxist Chief Minister P Vijayan made a "change" in its stance on women’s entry into the Sabarimala temple.
Of course the political row was bound to follow. The ruling CPI(M) and the Congress-led Opposition have started accusing each other of political opportunism eyeing the Assembly elections.
Leader of the Opposition V. D. Satheesan (Congress) alleged that the state government altered its position purely with the election in mind.
The Vijayan government had now effectively come around to the same position that the Opposition had taken earlier on the sensitive issue, he said.
In his article, Tharoor writes:
"For the devotees of Lord Ayyappa — men and women alike — the restriction on women of a certain age group was never about misogyny or the impurity of menstruation. It was about the naishtika brahmachari nature of the deity at Sabarimala".
He adds a vital point --- "The challenge of the coming years will be to find a middle path — one where religious reform is driven from within the community of believers, through dialogue and consensus".
The 2018 verdict was a triumph of constitutional literalism, but a failure of religious and sociological understanding.
It treated the temple as a public utility where ‘access’ was the only relevant metric.
Tharoor also notes:
"The news of the Kerala LDF cabinet’s decision to reverse its earlier position and support the traditional ban on women below 50 entering the Sabarimala temple, informing the Supreme Court that long-standing customs should be preserved, is as significant as it is transparently electoral."
After years of dogmatic adherence to a court order that ignored the nuances of lived faith, the ruling coalition has finally recognised that the sentiments of the devotee cannot be steamrolled by the state".
On this backdrop, the Congress leader says: "Yet, this reversal provides a critical moment for us to revisit the broader tension that has defined this saga:
The delicate, often precarious relationship between constitutional morality and the sanctity of religious tradition".
There is another big row ... the alleged Gold Theft.
Earlier this year in January, Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan ruled out the need for a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the Sabarimala gold heist case, asserting that the High Court-monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) was proceeding in the "right direction".
The CPI-M and the BJP have demanded a CBI probe into the matter.
"It was this government which suggested a High Court-monitored investigation. Neither the Chief Minister nor the Chief Minister's Office has any role whatsoever in the conduct of the probe," he said.
There was another dosage of controversy surrounding a photo that surfaced in connection with the case. The picture showed Congress MP Adoor Prakash, Anto Antony, the Congress MP from Pathanamthitta, prime accused Unnikirshnan Potti, and another jeweller who is also currently in jail, alongside Congress leader Sonia Gandhi.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has summoned Unnikrishnan Potti for detailed interrogation in connection with the Sabarimala gold theft case.
Potti was released on Thursday (March 26) after the Kollam Vigilance Court granted him statutory bail in the case, which is being investigated by a Special Investigation Team (SIT).
He is accused of misappropriating gold from the Dwarapalaka idols, sanctum sanctorum, pillars, and door frames of the Sabarimala temple. Three other accused—former administrative officer Murari Babu, former executive officer Sudeesh Kumar, and former administrative officer S Sreekumar—have also been granted bail.
Potti’s bail was granted under Section 187(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, after the Crime Branch failed to submit the final report within the prescribed time.
He was arrested on November 3, 2025, and had remained in judicial custody for over 90 days.
On the women devotees issue, Tharoor maintains ----
"When this controversy first erupted, I found myself in an invidious position. As someone whose life has been dedicated to the defence of individual rights and the progressive evolution of Indian society, my instinctive response was to champion the principle of non-discrimination.
However, Sabarimala is not a simple matter of gender equality in the secular sphere; it is a matter of the specific, localised sanctity of a deity in a particular manifestation. "
It is an issue that leaves instinctive liberals torn, forcing us to weigh the abstract elegance of legal rights against the profound, visceral reality of faith.
"The core of the debate lies in the judiciary’s role as a promoter of religious reform.
In a diverse democracy, the Court is often called upon to be the arbiter of social progress. Yet, when the gavel falls on matters of deep-seated belief, it must do so with an awareness of the limitations of legal logic.
The 2018 Supreme Court verdict was a triumph of constitutional literalism, but it was a failure of religious and sociological understanding. It treated the temple not as a space of specific spiritual practice, but as a public utility where “access” was the only relevant metric.
ends
No comments:
Post a Comment