Ferocity of Sabarimala protests proves Hinduism is taking on Abrahamic characteristics to tackle external threats
FirstpostThe issue of entry of menstruating women into the Sabarimala temple should never have been the cause for a debate on the touchstone of one-size-fits-all feminism. Union women and child development minister Maneka Gandhi’s opinion that the Supreme Court verdict on Sabarimala has made Hinduism more “inclusive” is more than a little ironic. However, as Justice Malhotra had pointed out in her dissenting judgement, “the equality doctrine enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution does not override the fundamental right guaranteed by Article 25 to every individual to freely profess, practice and propagate their faith, in accordance with the tenets of their religion.” The majority judgement refuses also to recognise Lord Ayyappa devotees as a separate entity, in effect denying them the group rights under Article 26 that would have enabled them to manage their own religious affairs — a protection extended to minorities. In assuming the role of a papal authority while managing Hindu religious affairs — while at the same time denying Lord Ayyappa’s devotees the right to do so — the court has foisted among Hindus a sanctified version of the religion that looks and sounds like an Abrahamic faith, devoid of its customs and codified by judicial decree. I do not have any other option: Kandararu Rajeevaru, #SabarimalaTemple head priest #Kerala pic.twitter.com/6LilPOx9qr — ANI October 19, 2018 As ordinary devotees and the head priest of the Sabarimala temple feel as if their faith is under siege, it is worth reflecting on the path Hinduism might take if forced within the shackles of monotheistic interpretation from a “judiciopapist” authority.