My take on Sabarimala issue. The arguments put forward by all and SC reasoning doesnt reflect the concept of temple and relationship with God in Hinduism. Entire thing is treated in a non-Hindu manner.
Hindus go to temple to see the God. It is called darshan. Hindus go to temple to see God, discuss , debate, question, argue, seek advice from God. Not to do a ritual. This whole concept missed in entire discussion. Not only that.
Hindus believe that God lives in the temple. I am not using any words such as energy or power. Going to use the word presence. But that wont even convey the meaning. In sanskrit it is called sannithya or sannithyam. The place where sannithya is sannithanam.
So sannitham is the place where God's presence is the there. God sees food and that is distributed as prasad to people. How the presence is installed different from place to place but each temple is unique where God theirself decides on the rituals.
Hindus believe that God makes the rules and changes it. Not any priest or priestly class. The priest is not authority of Hinduism nor he is the worker in the temple. He has relationship with temple to take care of temple and God's presence.
So priest in one temple cant go to another temple to take over the rituals. This make the temples more unique because everything is customized. If things needs to be changed, then God theirself orders it. One example is asking God's opinion.
IN kerala, one ritual called devaprasanam or knowing God's opinion is conducted to decide on the changes. This has been conducted in Sabarimala and every time God Iyappan rejected any change in the temple conduct.
There is another way to make the change, that to ask the God to make the change. Pray to him that things needs to be changed. If you're devotee of the God then this should be the way. If not, then you're not a devotee.
In a secular republic which emphasis on Gandhian non-violence then the people want to change the way should go to talk to the devotees. Activists can call people to not go there or boycott the temple. Even converting to another religion.
That is the way to protest or register the protest. Using a judicial authority which relies on violence to implement a change will invite a same opposite reaction. God as a person has his own privacy in his place.
Even if the SC things that they can user a change by donning the mandate of reformers then they should go for abolishing all this kind of restrictions in all place and religions. It cant don the mandate of Hindu priest or do it in piecemeal
When SC tries to make every temple to look like uniform places then it creates a pan Indian hindus by wiping out the diversity. Diversity is the opposite of uniformity and sameness. Each temple will be unique. There are temples where men not allowed.
So once everything uniformed the diversity get destroyed. Then SC and activists cant accuse others for destroying India's diversity. In every way, SC trying to take the mandate of Hindu priest class is unwarranted and a judicial overreach.
Hope sense prevails in the review petition and order revoked.
