A clash has been set up against the modern reformists and the religious conservatives. The duel has however been postponed by referring the case to a three-judge bench.
Sabarimala is dedicated to Lord Ayyappa. From November to January devotees undertake an arduous 41-day pilgrimage to the shrine. Women between the ages of 10 and 50, which is between puberty and menopause, are not allowed to participate. In ancient Hindu societies women were considered unclean during their menstrual cycle and hence were isolated during that period. This notion was perhaps then valid because of the inadequacy of personal hygiene products. Today, this is not the case, and therefore most of the restrictions have been done away with. The restriction on worship however remains.
In most temples there is no ban on women entering. Women are aware of this restriction and generally comply willingly. However in Sabarimala the restriction is an enforced one. Women have been regularly arrested for trying to enter the temple precincts, the latest incident occurring in November last year. This prompted the Indian Young Lawyers Association to file a case in the Supreme Court challenging the ban. The Travancore Devaswom Board, which is the duly constituted governing body, claimed that it had statutory authority to form the rules and regulations and was upholding age old religious practices in not allowing women to enter. They have provided some reasons. The State of Kerala, where the temple lies, was also made a respondent. It made ambivalent statements in an attempt to defend both vote banks. It said that it decried discrimination against women, but at the same time the scholarly reasons for the ban need to be understood. Hence it proposed the setting up of a committee that would examine if the ban confirmed to the principles and philosophy of Hinduism.
A single judge heard the case on March 7, 2008, and referred it to a three-judge bench considering the far-reaching consequences any judgment will have.
