Thread by @MahaRathii

Dear friend, I would like to ask you a question regarding your discussions about Sabarimala and women's entry. Upon reviewing your profile,
I understand that you are a supporter of the Congress party. Here is my question:

https://twitter.com/iampremkurien/status/1668601405756805121

The issue of Sabarimala first came to court through a complaint filed by S. Mahendran on September 24, 1990. The Kerala High Court heard the case, and on April 5, 1991, the Chief Justice K Paripurna and KB Marar of the High Court pronounced the verdict.

In the 1991 judgment, Justice K Paripurna specifically mentioned certain words. He stated that the entry of women into Sabarimala is a violation of the customs and beliefs of Sabarimala and is against the constitution.

After the ruling, the Sabarimala matter returned to court in 2006, which is 15 years later, through a complaint filed by the Young Lawyers Association. Although the case was not widely discussed at the time, it did proceed. In 2007, the VS government provided

an affidavit in favor of allowing women's entry.

However, my dear friend, do you know what the stance of the UDF government was after the change in government? Am I asking you this because you are a UDF supporter?

In the affidavit submitted by the UDF government to the

Supreme Court, it stated that they are not in favor of women entering Sabarimala. Why did the UDF express such a view?

The UDF stated that the customs, rituals, and beliefs of temples should be respected.

So, does this mean that the UDF is against women, as you claim?

Does the UDF consider menstruation as impurity?

At that time, the UDF firmly believed that Sabarimala was not a case of discrimination against women. The controversies surrounding Sabarimala and women's entry were seen as media publicity, and the UDF viewed them as encroachments

upon Hindu customs.

If you ask me, the deity in the temple possesses the same rights as any other citizen of India. The deity of the temple holds all the rights provided by Articles 21, 25, and 26, just like women do. This was the point raised by Sai Deepak in the Supreme Court.

Each temple and its mode of worship are unique. The rituals in temples are conducted while considering the deity's preferences and wishes. In the case of Sabarimala, the deity is known to be celibate in nature, which is why young women are not permitted to enter.

To clarify, young women are restricted from entering Sabarimala, but women in general are not completely prohibited. Even today, women do visit Sabarimala. The prohibition applies only to those between the ages of 10 and 50.

The practice of barring young women from entering Sabarimala is rooted in the belief that the deity is celibate in nature. As celibacy involves avoiding contact with individuals of the opposite sex, particularly young women, this concept is applied to the deity and the

associated rituals. This practice is followed based on the sole concept of maintaining the deity's celibate character. It is believed that if this celibate nature of the deity is compromised, the rituals and the importance of the temple would be diminished.

Anyway, since you

are discussing women and menstruation, let me ask you another question. Do you know what is special about the Kamakhya Temple?

During a time when even the word "woman" was understood as an abbreviation for "abala," the Kamakhya Temple is a place that celebrates menstruation.

Do you have any idea how the Kamakhya Temple with the Yoni deity came into existence?

Are you familiar with the 51 Shakti Peethas?

The Kamakhya Temple is situated on the land where Goddess Sati's vagina fell, and menstruation is celebrated there as a festival.

Isn't it unconstitutional to prohibit men from entering the Kamakhya Temple?

It's not just the Kamakhya Temple; there are several other temples where men are not allowed, such as:

- Attukal Bhagwati Temple
- Lord Brahma Temple in Rajasthan
- Mata Temple in Muzaffarnagar

- Devi Kanyakumari Temple in Kanyakumari

Men are prohibited on specific days and times in these temples. Shouldn't this be considered a violation of rights?

These are just a few examples of temples where men are banned, and the list goes on.

In Kerala itself, there are many other temples dedicated to Ayyappan where young women are not prohibited. If Sabarimala is an exception, there are special reasons for it.

When discussing something, please make an effort to learn about it before forming an opinion.

Holding blind hatred in your mind is detrimental to everything!!

#മഹാരഥി 🚩🙏