INTRODUCTION
The recent
judgement of the supreme court in Sabarimala temple dragged us to mull over
whether judiciary or legislature should involve in religious matters. The
verdict of the supreme court that knocked down the gender barrier at Sabarimala
temple by allowing women of all ages for the pilgrimage is commemorated as a
great vanquishment but the question arises, can it really be considered as
a triumph when it clearly clampdown the religious practitioners? Article 25 of
Indian Constitution clearly states the freedom of conscience and free
professions, practice and propagation of religion which delivers that to
declare freely and openly one’s faith and belief and to carry out the
prescribed religious duties, rites, and rituals, and to manifest his religious
beliefs[1]. In a matter of religion or religious practices, courts must put their
views with caution as the constitution gives every individual the right to
practice their own faith and beliefs. Therefore, it cannot be said whether this
comes under the sphere of judiciary or legislature to get involved in religious
matters or practices unless such religious practices are detrimental to society
and obviously against their own set of beliefs[2].
As a
responsible citizen, I’m fully aligned to the directives of the Supreme Court
but I have few points to spew about this ruling:
·
This is the not only temple of Ayappa in India.
·
This is not the only temple that has eerie rules associated with it.
·
Sanathan Dharma is not at odds with the women, sex or menstruation.
Here,
let’s try to understand the background and weird rules that are associated with
the temple.
OVERVIEW
Sabarimala
a Sree Dharma Sastha Temple is one of the most prominent Hindu temples in
India, situated in the Pathanamthitta district of Kerela. The Shrine at Sabarimala
is an ancient temple of Ayappan also known as Sastha and Dharmasastha.
Sabarimala temple is commanded and managed by the “Travancore Devaswom Board”.
Lord Ayappan “diety” here is a “NaishtikaBrahmachari” or Eternal Celibate.
About 2 crore devotees visit the temple every year. As diety is an eternal
celibate, women belonging to the age group (10-50) are not allowed to visit the
temple as per the notification by Travancore Devaswom Board that manages the
temple. The devotees visiting the temple are required to follow a Vratham of 41
days prior to the pilgrimage in which devotees are strictly prescribed to
follow only a Lacto-vegetarian diet, follow teetotalism, follow celibacy and
many more[3].
RELIGION AND THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION
India
is a secular country and a land of rich cultural heritage, religious beliefs,
diverse religions and various types of custom being practised since time
immemorial. Each and every individual in India right from the birth have an
identity based on caste, colour, sex, status and religion. During the
pre-independence period, religion and religious matters, is a highly tactful
issue which often turned violent. Post-Independence, when the Constitution came
into force, the right to practice any religion was guaranteed as a Constitutional
right under part III of the Indian Constitution. Therefore, it is a highly
sensitive issue and judiciary or legislature must obstruct with this matter
cautiously[4].
Religion
was intentionally not defined by the makers of the constitution and therefore
it is still uncertain or not definite what exactly religion constitutes, but
here it doesn’t mean that any religious practices could fall under the term
“RELIGION”. Article 25 of Indian Constitution clearly says all persons are
equally entitled to the freedom of conscience and free professions, practice
and propagation of religion which delivers that to declare freely and openly
one’s faith and belief and to carry out the prescribed religious duties, rites,
and rituals, and to manifest his religious beliefs. Article 26(b) of the Indian
Constitution clearly signifies to manage its own affairs in matter of religion.
BELIEF
It
is not that every facet of religious beliefs has been shielded under Article 25
and 26 and also it is not provided by the Constitution that every religious
activity cannot be interfered with. Belief is one of the most important aspects
of any religion and it is held by the Supreme court of India that every
religion has some basic fundamentals associated with it that has to be followed
by the followers without which the religious belief is worthless or pointless[5].
Justice Indu Malhotra rightly said that "Judicial review of religious practises ought not
to be undertaken, as the Court cannot impose its morality or rationality with
respect to the form of worship of a deity. Doing so would negate the freedom to
practise one's religion according to one's faith and beliefs. It would amount
to rationalising religion, faith and beliefs, which is outside the ken of
Courts".
CONCLUSION
The feature of secularism
keeps the country unique from other different countries and it clearly draws a
line between the religion and the judiciary. Everyone is given the right to
practice any religion and the court must make sure that they should not come in
between the religious practices. Every temple is unique and has some set of
rules associated with it and if one cannot respect the God and respect the
rules then what’s the point of following that religion, just quit it. Also,
Mother Justice was blindfolded and gives the decision irrespective of caste,
creed, sex, colour and religion. “If I were a
dictator, religion and state would be separate. I swear by my religion. I will
die for it. But it is my personal affair. The state has nothing to do with it.
The state would look after your secular welfare, health, communications,
foreign relations, currency and so on, but not your or my religion. That is
everybody's personal concern!”
-Mahatma Gandhi[6]
शानदार लेख
ReplyDeleteFab
ReplyDelete