Recent controversies regarding the age-old traditions of barring
women from entering two temples have rekindled the debate on discrimination.
Forced attempts to enter the Shani temple at Shingnapur in Maharashtra and the
legal efforts to entire the Sabarimala temple at Kerala is in the news. Views
on this range from the unfairness of the discrimination against women, in a
country which worships Shakti, the female principle, and scores of other female
deities, on the one hand to the other extreme of why care for a god who doesn’t
allow women near Him?
Just what is the controversy and why are females not allowed in these two
temples? Is it discrimination or is it sheer lack of knowledge of the said
deities? Is it holding on to old traditions when they are no more relevant,
without any logic, or is it case of sheer patriarchal hegemony?
The case of Shani is quite odd. Nobody quite knows why women are barred. Shani
is an astrological deity in the Hindu pantheon. Shani is the son of Surya and
Chaaya, the shadow of Sanjana, the first wife of Surya who left her husband as
she could not bear the brightness of Surya. Many myths around Shani show his
malevolent effects like when he opened his eyes after birth, he caused an
eclipse of the sun, or when he cast his first glance at the child Ganesha,
Ganesha’s head got severed. Shani or Saturn is representative of bad-times,
which are often in periods of seven and a half years (sade saati) and
worshipping Shani is to keep his ill-effects at bay or to reduce the impact of
the same.
What is interesting to note here is that there is no mention that women should
not worship Shani and that there seems to be no strong reason for his ‘dislike’
for women, if any. We also know that Shani’s consort is Niladevi and according
to scriptures, Shani dev respects all women, as his mother! However, many also
feel that Shani does not inflict his ill-effects on women and based on the
myths mentioned above, many pregnant women are kept away from visiting the
temples of Shani, lest the ill-effects of the deity affect the unborn child.
Let us look at the Sabarimala. Sabarimala is the temple of Lord Ayappa, who is
born out of the union of Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu as Mohini. As per the myth
of Ayappa, Mahishi, the sister of the slain asura Mahishasura was burning with
vengeance at the killing of her brother. She undertook severe penances and
sought the boon of invulnerability from Lord Brahma. Brahma however, declined
to give such a boon, but agreed to invulnerability from all men, except the son
of Shiva and Vishnu. Mahishi was happy with the boon as both were men and
according to her were not capable of giving birth. Mahishi took advantage of
this situation and wreaked havoc on earth. Later Ayappa was entrusted with
eliminating her. But the myth doesn’t end here.
When Mahishi is killed, from her emerges a beautiful woman, Malikapurathamma,
who was cursed to live as a demon, and with the death of the demon, she was
freed of the curse. Malikapurathamma now proposed to Ayappa to marry her, but
Ayappa had his own mission to remain a celibate and answer the prayers of his
devotees at Sabarimala. However, Ayappa promised Malikapurathamma, that the
day, Sabarimala did not receive a kanni-swami, or a first-time devotee, he
would marry her. It is said that she waits for him till date in a nearby
shrine.
Many feel that women stayed away from the temple of Sabarimala, partly out of
their respect for Malikapurathamma and her wait for Ayappa and partly due to
the tough terrain of the trek to the temple through the jungles, which were
unsafe and not conducive for women in the days of yore. Did someone say
anything about menstruation cycle of women? Well nothing of that has been
mentioned anywhere. What is implied is that Ayappa was a celibate and thus
women ‘should’ not visit the temple to ensure that his celibacy was not
disturbed and he could continue to answer the prayers of his devotees.
Many feel that matters of faith cannot be judged by modern laws, but if that be
true, then a significant number of people would have been deprived of entering
temples due to their caste status, or for that matter widows would still have
been burnt on the funeral pyres of their husbands. A religion to be inclusive
has to change with times and restrictions have to be judged within the milieu
of its impositions. The terrain to the Sabarimala has changed and so has the
ability of women to undertake arduous journeys. Certain restrictions which were
brought in as later interpretations, and fail to find home in any of the myths,
need to be discarded.
Not much seems to have changed since 1910, when Tagore wrote in his ‘Where the
mind is without fear’, hoping for his fellow men –
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way,
Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
First appeared on News18.comhttps://www.news18.com/blogs/india/utkarsh-patel/women-barred-from-entering-temples-discrimination-or-case-of-patriarchal-hegemony-14512-1197988.html
