The Sabarimala protests

The Sabarimala stir, on a slow boil since last year, came alive after two women of menstruating age entered the shrine as soon as the annual pilgrimage season began. The women, it later transpired, had reasons other than faith to make the trek to the hilltop shrine. The ‘devotees’, functioning at times as vigilantes against the entry of women in the 10-50 age group, are driven more by the political opening it provides while the Kerala CM’s brinkmanship is a cynical gambit to consolidate the Left’s present lead by pushing some Congress’ voters towards the BJP that has emerged as the protagonist in the protests. What began as a contest between tradition and women’s rights before the Supreme Court has now entered the divisive domain of political gerrymandering. The only saving grace is that the situation has not taken a communal turn.  

The Kerala Government cannot but comply with the reformist impulse of the Supreme Court which had held restrictions on the entry of women of menstruating age in the shrine as unconstitutional. The Left also justifies the ‘firmness’ from its political standpoint of opposing prevailing patriarchy that is inevitably camouflaged, in this case it says, as faith: that the deity Lord Ayyappa is a Naishtika Brahmachari (eternal celibate). But the journey by Bindu and Kanaka Durga would have been interpreted by the faithful as atheistic insolence and not nonconformist behaviour.

The Supreme Court’s decision to hear all review petitions on January 22 should be the last word on the subject. In the end, it will be the people of Kerala who can achieve closure. Devotees must neither be visiting a shrine in riot gear nor should there be mobs dissuading some of the faithful. But mediation and conciliation can be effective only if all sides refrain from pandering to vote-bank politics. The mosque that sits in the shadow of the shrine is emblematic of Kerala’s social harmony. While the Supreme Court takes a call, it is essential for the state to be seen as an enabler of constitutional provisions rather than a provocateur.