New Delhi: The All-Kerala Brahmins Association has moved the Supreme Court seeking a review of the judgment, allowing entry of women of all ages into Sabarimala Ayyappa temple.
This is the sixth review petition against the September 28 verdict. The Travancore Dewasom Board is yet to take a decision on filing a review.
The association, also known as Kerala Brahmana Sabha, in its petition submitted that the restriction on entry of women in the age group of 10-50 years cannot be seen as gender discrimination issue and that the court had erred in looking at the matter from the prism of individual dignity without considering similar restrictions placed on men in many other temples in the country.
It faulted the majority judgment for failing to appreciate the distinction between “pilgrims” and “devotees”. It pointed out that different temples across India follow different practices such as different time of opening and closing, donation of hair etc., and such a customary practice cannot, therefore, be questioned.
The petition said that the judgment has unnecessarily widened the scope of adjudication by going into the question of whether the practice in question is an essential aspect of Hindu religion instead of confining the scope to the question as to whether the said practice is an essential aspect of the Saba-rimala temple or not.
It quoted evidence to show that the practice in question has been going on from time immemorial due to the tantric nature of the temple and the celibate form of the deity.
It said the court has completely ignored the diverse practices, traditions and schools, which exist within the Hindu faith. In arriving at the aforesaid conclusion, the court has completely disregarded the examples of the Hindu temples dedicated to female deities where restrictions are placed on the entry and participation of men in the temple and its practices.
Drawing a distinction between a devotee and a pilgrim, it said that a devotee may go as a tourist to any temple where permitted but not to certain places where only those who come on pilgrimage are allowed. Pilgrimage is sacred journey. They require a different environment. A pilgrimage to temple enables the devotee to live within the context of a sacred narrative. Devotees will become pilgrims if they got to a particular temple. In that circumstances they have to follow different custom and usage followed in such temples.
The petitioner said that the court should take note of the fact that post-judgment, an overwhelmingly large section of women worshipers came out in support of the custom of prohibiting the entry of women between the age group of 10 and 50 years at Sabarimala Temple and that the judgment was rendered behind the back of the review petitioners and millions of devotees of Lord Ayyappa.
It also said that the court erred in holding that the devotees of Lord Ayyappa do not constitute a separate religious denomination and went on to frame the issue of whether restriction on entry of women is an essential practice of Hindu religion.
It pointed out that the majority judgment was in error in holding that exclusion of women with reproductive capabilities has nothing to do with the celibate nature of the deity at the Sabarimala Temple and is therefore not an essential religious practice. The petitioner while seeking review pleaded for oral hearing as review petitions are normally decided in the presiding judge’s chamber.
