Sabarimala and Constitutional Morality – Parliamentary Speech of Smt. Meenakshi Lekhi

Source: Matters of Urgent Public Importance, Lok Sabha dt. 04 January 2019

This conversation and this narrative (portraying the restriction on entry of women aged bet 10-50 at Sabarimala as discriminatory) is coming from people who neither understand Hinduism nor the rituals associated with it. From Kamakhya to Chengannur the Goddess is worshipped as “Rajaswala” in menstruating form. That is what Hinduism is. We have space for everything. In the same way, Sabarimala also has its own ritualistic practices. We agree to the extent that rituals of a particular sect have to be preserved in their form.

But I feel that a certain type of narrative is being set in this country where men are made to feel small and anti-feminist if they pass any order which is logically correct. Will the supreme court decide how the birth of Jesus took place? Will the supreme court decide which body should be buried and which body should be burnt? Supreme Court has to act according to the law and in this matter, Article 25 says it all.

If a government refuses to maintain the law and order in the state by acting in a manner where it transports two women in an ambulance and surreptitiously takes them as transgender causing the death of one Ayyappa devotee due to stone pelting caused by the commotion around the incident, then the state government is squarely responsible for this and suicide of 4 Guru Swamies (because of the desecration of the shrine). You are actually provoking the Ayyappa devotees and leading the state to anarchy.

Ritualistic practices which are practiced by religious groups should be left alone even if you don’t agree with them and this is what tolerance is all about. This is not a question of civil rights. I have a small example to quote. If a friend of mine is fasting, will I go to his residence and force him to serve a cup of coffee? Here is a form of God who is celibate in nature. Why should women impose themselves on him?

The ritualistic practices of Sabarimala are also about disciplining men both physically and spiritually as they have to observe abstinence for 41 days. Will the court now decide that 41 day rituals should be reduced to 28 days or shorter? It’s not the court’s business.

The women calling for the desecration of Sabarimala are people who are transgressing in the name of feminist rights. They are not followers of Ayyappa. These are anti-religious people and they have rights to be anti-religion. But they have no rights to transgress in matters associated with a temple. I can personally have any belief but I can’t judge others based on their beliefs. This is actually what the theory of constitutional morality is.