ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2018
- The Supreme Court on 28 September paved the way for entry of women of all ages into the Ayyappa temple at Shabrimala in Kerala. The five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, in its 4:1 verdict, said that banning the entry of women into the shrine is gender discrimination and the practice violates rights of Hindu women. The CJI said religion is a way of life basically to link life with divinity. While Justices Nariman and Chandrachud concurred with the CJI and Justice Khanwilkar, Justice Indu Malhotra gave a dissenting verdict. Justice Malhotra, the lone woman judge in the bench, passed a dissenting judgement and said that issues which have deep religious connotation should not be tinkered with to maintain secular atmosphere in the country. She was of the view that it is not for courts to determine which religious practices are to be struck down except in issues of social evil like 'Sati'.
Guest:
Rahul Easwar, Sabarimala Supreme Priest's Grandson
Piyush Singh, Advocate, Supreme Court
J. Sai Deepak, Advocate, Supreme Court
Sunieta Ojha, Advocate, Supreme Court
Anchor- Frank Rausan Pereira
![เบิ้ล ปทุมราช - อ้ายกินดอง น้องลาบงัว ft. สแน็ก อัจฉรีย์ [Teaser]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n863TMuA1Ck/mqdefault.jpg)
Kudos to J. Sai Deepak for his powerful and logical arguments.
Hats off to you my learned friend Shri J.Sai Deepak !
The non-entry of women between the age group of 10 to 50 has nothing to do with the notion of menstruation or menstrual impurity. Lord Ayyappa, who is the presiding deity of Sabarimala is a Naishtik Brahmachari (which means eternal celibate). The rituals of this temple have been systematically prescribed in the book called "Bhootanatha Upakhyam". It is the will of the deity that is being preserved by the temple through the traditions it observes. If we cite the local history of Sabarimala, as found in the Bhoothanatha Upakhyam, it shows that there is a need to maintain extreme celibacy even in the rituals. It is equally important to note the fact that women "are allowed" in at three other Ayyappa temples in Kerala - Achankovil, Aryankavu and Kulathupuzha - where the deity is not considered a celibate and is depicted with wives. There are other temples in Kerala like "Mannarshala" where the Head Priest is a lady. In "Chakkulathukavu Temple" an annual ritual called ‘Naari Puja‘ is conducted in which the male priest washes the feet of women devotees fasting for 10 days on the first Friday of December. During ‘Naari Puja‘, only women are allowed to enter the temple. Exclusion is not discrimination, especially when the objective of the rule has nothing to do with misogyny or impurity because of menstruation. Since the practice is based completely on the celibate nature of the deity, it is an essential part of the temple’s fundamental charter of faith.
Thanks for bringing up some valid arguments. As said by Said Deepak, it seems that evidences are not keenly examined.
Gourishankar Panicker Then why does women belonging to age group other than 10-50 being allowed?Doesn't those women affect celibacy in any way?
Dear Mathew,
Hinduism does not consider sex as sinful. However sexual conduct is subject to the principles of dharma. Of the four stages (ashramas) of human life, only during the stage of householder (grihastashrama) a person was allowed to have sex. The 4 stages(ashramas) are Brahmacharya (student), Grihastha (householder), Vanaprastha (retired) and Sannyasa (renunciate). Women are considered to be fertile "not impure" between the age group of 10 and 50. The tantric school of Hinduism recommends fertile women to live a life of a householder. Where as girls below 10 belong to Brahmacharya Ashrama and women above 50 belong to Vanaprastha Ashrama or Sannyasa Ashrama. Most of the temples in Kerala belong to the Tantric school of Hinduism not Vedic School. There are other temples in Kerala like "Mannarshala" where the Head Priest is a lady. In "Chakkulathukavu Temple" an annual ritual called ‘Naari Puja‘ is conducted in which the male priest washes the feet of women devotees fasting for 10 days on the first Friday of December. During ‘Naari Puja‘, only women are allowed to enter the temple. Hinduism doesn't believe in Menstrual impurity had that been the case we wouldn't be worshipping Goddess Kamakhya in Assam which is famous as the bleeding Goddess.
Brahmacharya Ashram is considered till the age of 24, and I didn't understand how women's entry will have an impact on deity's celibacy, could you please elaborate.
Dear Dinesh, Read the folowing explanation patiently
BRAHMACHARYA AND ITS TYPES :
Quite a few of our Smriti Granthas (which are without a trace of doubt fundamental scriptures to Hindu Dharma) touch upon this topic of brahmacharya. Vasishta Smriti, Jabali Smriti and Smriti Chandrika are some of the granthas that give good details about brahmacharya. But two granthas - Smriti Muktavali by Sri Krishnacharya - and Yajnavalkya Smriti - give very good details relevant to the current Sabarimala debate.
Smriti Muktavali explains the two types of brahmacharya as follows :
कीर्तितावुपकुर्वाणनैष्ठिकाविति भेदतः |
There exists two variations in brahmacharya - "Upakurvaana" and "Naishtika'"
A Upakurvana Brahmachari is one who practices celibacy till his studies - vedadhyayana - is over; Once his education is complete, he ends his celibacy, marries as per shastra, and leads the life of a gruhastha.
On the other hand, a naishtika brahmachari is one who undertakes a vow to remain a celibate till his death. He also has to undertake to live forever with his guru!
Yajnavalkya smriti says :
नैष्ठिको ब्रह्मचारी तु वसेदाचार्यसन्निधौ |
One who is a naishtika brahmachari shall always reside with his guru..
In addition to this, there are two primary requirements of such a naishtika brahmacharya which is given in yajnavalkya smriti
अनेन विधिना देहं सादयन्विजितेन्द्रियः |
ब्रह्मलोकमवाप्नोति न चेहाजायते पुनः || Y.S - 1-50 ||
In this way (a naishtika brahmachari should) body should be subject to stress and extreme sense control should be practised. Such a person shall attain brahmaloka and will not be born again!
So, two main requirements of a naishtika brahmachari are
1) Physical hardship for one’s body.
2) Extreme indriya nigraha or sense control.
Physical hardship :
Vasishta Smriti has a long list of requirements in terms of physical hardship that a naishtika brahmachari should undertake. A few examples are as follows
आहूताध्यायी सर्वभैक्षं निवेद्य तदनुज्ञया भुञ्जीत |
खट्टाशयन दन्तप्रक्शालनाभ्यन्जनवर्जः तिष्ठेत् अहनि रात्रावासीत ||
He should undertake studies at any time (that the guru orders); He should hand over all his bhiksha to his guru and eat only what the guru gives;
He should never sleep on a cot; He should never brush his teeth with any special paste; He should never apply any oils or perfumes; He should always be seated, day and night, ready for studies
Note: One may recall that the Ayyappa idol at Sabarimala is in a seated position - that is conducive to studies - and as per the dictum given above!
Thus, there are extreme requirements imposed from a physical hardship point of view.
Extreme sense control :
Like we have seen above, Yajnavalkya Smriti says
“vijitendriyaH”
as the requirement from a sense control point of view.
In this ‘mitakshara’ commentary on the above shloka, Sri Vijnaneshwara explains it as below
विजितेन्द्रियः इन्द्रियविजये विशेषप्रयत्नवान्ब्रह्मचारी
In order to become a vijitendriya, a (naishtika) brahmachari should undertake extreme efforts to maintain sense control.
The sensory organs that need to be controlled are eyes, ears, mouth (and tongue), nose, skin, hands, legs, reproductive organ and excretory organ and mind.
Now it is well known that sense control involves control of actual performance of activities by the sense organs as also avoiding any thoughts that could corrupt the mind.
Since a naishtika brahmachari has been explicitly ordered to undertake extreme measures, in order to avoid the deviation of his mind towards procreation as also to keep the reproductive organs under control - he is required to completely stay away from women who are in the age conducive to procreation.
Diety (NOT GOD) is subjected to same conditions as Humans :
It is a well known, and well accepted, fact that as per agama shastra, the deity in a temple is subjected to the same conditions that an ideal human in that particular form would undertake. Hence whenever a male deity is worshipped as a naishtika brahmachari, the specific agamas of the temple - based on the injunction in Yajnavalkya Smriti - impose the condition that he not be subjected to the company of fertile women aged 10 to 50 - IN ANY WAY. Hence their entry to the abode of worship is forbidden and only if they are on either side of the age limit are they allowed.
Essential Religious Practice:
We can thus see that the temple agamas are clearly derived from one of the main Smriti granthas - the Yajnavalkya Smriti to be precise. Smritis, along with the Shrutis (Vedas) form the core of Hindu religious scriptures. Hence this injunction is an absolutely essential requirement for the worship of a deity in naishtika brahmachari form.
Every one in south india knows that sabarimala is different from others temples but supreme court don't know it..Pls Dont play with peoples emotions
Take it easy! and please watch your language. You don't have to prove that you're indeed an xyz production!
R we destroying our diversity ??
Good job sai deepak sir
Thank u frank sir for such a debate
See the entire problem is diversity.... Had we didn't have diversity ,we would have lived peacefully....now India is all about fighting on ones own old beliefs....shame
@@AVyt28Diversity is a reality of life. It can be a source of beauty as it unveils new shades of the truth. India has usually been able to understand this. One episode hope that Mr Deepak is not tempted too far in his quest for bringing about the Indic renaissance.
Rstv debates are usually good.. But today was something else... Brilliant, excellent, forceful.. Personally I support women entry but the way the temple person and especially Sai Deepak spoke was brilliant and now I have developed some empathy for the anti entry party (thought I still support entry)... That's the quality of Sai Deepak... Hats off..
Visiting VAVAR mosque is a part of SABARIMALA pilgrimage. so,will women be allowed to enter that mosque? If so what about the other mosques in India??
U gave words to my thoughts friend
@@VivekSingh-ks1mg if they enter too..one makaravilaku rush will teach them😂just kidding..our females in house during the time of 48 days fast supports our fasting through dressing,cleanliness ,etc ..but many follow it strictly even spending days in temples...but what if they see women bathing in pampa and moving together in the rush....after all they are just humans with sexual feelings. Doesn't his fast for weeks go futile??? I accept some ppl will argue about self control..but there is a limit for it...keeping a biriyani in front of a person hungry for weeks will make him atleast think of having it once... there's nothing to blame on it...and another part is to ensure that level of security for women ,nothing can be done rather than cutting the a vast piece forest down for seperate pathways,etc..,which is the other saddening part, destroying the beauty of Kerala forests...
@@vishnuvellingiri932 Superb points bro
Okay...another perspective is what about temples being dominated by male priests??.. should all temple allow designation of priests to be gender-equal and conduct recruitment based on meritocracy??... judicial activisms are always welcome. but judiciary should also remember that there's a beauty and a flavour which the current Indian society is being proud of is due to this gender based distinctions which are falsely hailed as discriminations without proper understanding.. gender equality can be asserted in many things like parliamentary representations,military etc.. but not in destroying the beauty of diverse Indian culture which is a result of our evolved civilisation ,as Tagore once said "Let's unite not in spite of differences ,but through them.. let us unite together not through uniformity which is dead,but through unity which is living".
Rekt.
I would disagree with the judgement... this case has to be seen along with taking care of religious practices... this is not a discrimination..seeing that there is culture of worshiping menstrual cycle of women in this country...
and there are temples where men are barred to visit.. so logic of Equality doesnt hold water in this case..
Came 4 sai deepk
The 2 ladies are unaware about Hinduism and the rights of the deities.
rights of deities above rights of living human beings, god help India and save us from 21 century young lads.
@@michaelscott3190 rights of diety is important for a person who reveres the diety. It is the basis of a religious system as you surrender yourself completely to the diety. It helps dissolve the devotees ego which is very much essential if he wants to taste the sweetness of Bhakti. If you are downplaying the rights of a diety you are essentially downplaying the religious system and thus article 25.
@@michaelscott3190 also you need to understand eastern societies traditionally are community focused which means the success of the community and the society matters more than individuals success. That's why we have strong institutions of marriage, culture etc.. Western societies are more Individual focussed and hence more importance is for personal rights. Both the systems have Plus and minuses. Now the issue here is our constitution is heavily leaning towards individualism, so we find our society finding it very hard to deal with. Instead There should be a balance.
Many person think that only English speaking amounts to how intelligent you are...
These feminists and communist are blindly following western world and destroying our traditional
Culture . They are getting money from abroad to destroy US . The advocate who want to enter feminists was getting huge money from abroad . Then central government stopped her source from abroad . Protect for hindus . Against this communists , feminists and pseudo secular
Now this opens up a debate for an other aspect, that is when considering Right to Equality, it's not just Sabarimala which doesn't allow women of a particular age. There are few temples in Tamil Nadu, as Rahul Eshwaran has mentioned where only women are allowed. So what about the aspect of equality in such cases?🤔
Lily Xin hahaha well said. I loved it.
You are asking difficult questions, this will mostly be applied to men not allowing women into temples.
@@arjunchatterjee9362 She is sarcastically exposing the hypocrisy of the supreme court ruling.
This non goers of so called liberal maniacs are blatantly denying the diversity of the hindu religion, they hardly know about the sanatan dharma and view it from the westernized view. It's like letting women allowing in men toilets and vice versa. Supreme court is trying to make a balance and trying to be unbiased to the muslims as they habe banned the triple talak and trying to show off by giving this hurriedly judgement going against the hindu as in a view to appease the muslims. It seems more like a keeping yourself unbiased with a hedonistic mentality.
this is the problem with west style democracy, constitution and laws. all the time they demand and talk about so called rights but what about duties and responsibilities . west society and families have been doomed for focusing only on individualism. individualism should have certain limitation. this imposition of western style individualism will destroy Indian culture ans families. In India we have left oriented English barking slave people in media, judiciary, ngos, entertainment industry, , writers etc who don't know a thing about Bharata and think only west have given light , are imposing their slavery on India. in this sabrimala case only the radical feminists and non Hindu people filed petition not a single Hindu practicing women went to court. they people who filed petition they never went to temple and will not go in future either. they are paid foreign ngo workers whose job is to destroy the native culture, society and family structure in India.
J Sai Deepak made some really good points... But Sunita ojhas concluding remarks (JUST TO WIN AN ARGUMENT...) were very very personal I guess that wasn't something I was imagining at RSTV.. Good job J sai Deepak.
yes and it was very very very disappointing that Sunieta Ojha and Aditi Phadnis fail to understand that there is neither gender discrimination nor is it based on menstruation nor is it untouchability. it is very sad that SC fails to respect deity and deity's character.
I'm going to file a pil against gender based schools. I want to study in a school which is the best in town but unfortunately it's a girls school. This tradition of discrimination has to stop because it violates my right to education. There are boys schools and coed schools in the town but I have the right to study in that particular school because it's my individuals choice. This age old tradition has to stop since it clearly discriminates us boys as we are going through puberty. Puberty shouldn't be looked down upon but should be celebrated in this modern, fast changing and very righteous world.
@@rohitk9221 Go ahead bro,all the best.
@@rohitk9221 in fact girls hostels are also gender discriminative. There should be hostel where all genders should be welcomed and age old traditions should go.
A
Why only Hinduism is targeting 👿
Gohil Omdevsinh I never knew Triple Talaq was a part of Hinduism. Thank you so much for enlightening, sir 🙏
@@shraddhasrivastava1198 answer to your sarcastic question is that u r missing the nuances. Even though triple talaq does not belong to hinduism but none of these liberals and leaders from that community came out on their own and fought for the rights of women against triple talaq. I hope u remember the reversal of sc judgement in shah bano begum case by congress govt. It was the bjp that took the matter of triple talaq seriously and brought ordinance(for the reasons u can assume)
I think the women penalist doesn't know about the rituals ,treaties & other practices that are the part of sabriamala temple.
J sai Deepak & Rahul eshwar had give the actual views
This is the best debate I have seen for a long long time.Everyone had an opposing view to the situation.I am unable to take sides in this case as it is very complicated.Right to religion Vs Right to equality in itself is complicated.Anyway some views pointed out by the panelists were awesome.Thanks for putting the things into perspective panelists.
Finally watched a fantastic debate on indian television. Great job by the anchor in being neutral and the panel for not interrupting while their counterparts were making their point.
J sai Deepak sir .......thank you
Constitutional morality has to be adhered to !!! Well said Madam Ojha! Supreme court rocks, thekedaars of patriarchy shocked!
I'm going to file a pil against gender based schools. I want to study in a school which is the best in town but unfortunately it's a girls school. This tradition of discrimination has to stop because it violates my right to education. There are boys schools and coed schools in the town but I have the right to study in that particular school because it's my individual choice. This age old tradition has to stop since it clearly discriminates us boys as we are going through puberty. Puberty shouldn't be looked down upon but should be celebrated in this modern, fast changing and very righteous world.
This is not how society works. Logic is tricky and it is not mathematics where 2 plus 2 will always be 4. Gender based schools are made because many people in our society are not comfortable sending their daughters for co education. (And trust me those are best schools to study ) Even my uncle said last year that he won't send her daughter away to study in Navodaya school because it is co education consequently she is continuing her education from village.
Article, 29 provides rights to protect and manage your cultural institutions. That is different from Article 26 where it gives right to manage religious institutions which is "Bound To Restrictions". Any religious instruction that discriminates can be ended. Sati was abolished, Untouchability was ended. They can't be pursued on cultural basis or tradition because they are discriminatory so YES in our constitutional secularism state can inter fare to outlaw traditions.
Does women entering temples harm men in any capacity ? Like it is assumed growing men would do in school, which also true sometimes. Or does "untouchable" ruin the Sanctity of temples ??? These are man made stupid traditions and must be ended as soon as possible. I am glad Mr Vijayan is taking a strong stance but look at opportunistic BJP they are igniting fake religious fear in people that Hinduism has been attacked... Shame
auril k Everything is man made right
Stupdit people might claim others stupid too.
Sabrimala is not the place for proving gender equality .
I had seen thousands of ayappa bhakts in my own state who are all men
What's ur problem if Temple tradition is as such.
Ha ha u said it !
auril k u hv a very bad logic. First learn the basic facts about this issue.
Hahahahha
Its not a issue of discrimination its all about differentiation. Vry unfortunate this judgement will collapse our cultural diversity....
@@navdeeprathee2006 In short, It's not about restrictions as you're pointing out. It's more about 'prescription'.
In detail now, first of all, Not all women are prohibited.
Secondly, Women in general are not prohibited from every temple and it's more about beliefs of a particular sect of people following Hinduism.
Thirdly, even Bhairvi temple in Tamil Nadu doesn't allow male entry because of their personal beliefs and prescriptions so does that make a case of discrimination ?
Fourthly, Even this wasn't related to discrimination still there's no rule of precedence among Fundamentals Rights ( Here Article 14 over Article 25 and 26 ).
Lastly, I know this is absurd comparison but should I consider it a discrimination that I am not allowed to enter a public ladies' toilet because I am a man ? 🤔
@@navdeeprathee2006 This is not a 'social evil' such as Sati or Santhara as clearly pointed out by Justice Indu Malhotra.
And I think you didn't listen to Rahul Easwar's reply to Aditi Phadnis at 13:20. I request you to understand the whole practice in detail and then come to conclusions.
Handover this case to Dr. Subramanyaawamy Luke sethusamudram and Ayodhya Ram temple issues can be resolved to upkeep our sanathanadharma. Just a opinion
These feminists and communist are blindly following western world and destroying our traditional
Culture . They are getting money from abroad to destroy US . The advocate who want to enter feminists was getting huge money from abroad . Then central government stopped her source from abroad . Protect for hindus . Against this communists , feminists and pseudo secular
I personally accepting the point of view of sai Deepak,and this situation is not all about the women discrimination, this certainly moves towards article25,26,which Indu malhotra gave under her verdict, jai hind
to all the people who are arguing that its not a gender discrimination on the basis of physiological process, why not ban the complete entry of women of all the ages, why is the limitation only for certain age group. Make a complete ban, prohibit the worship of the same deity even in households also by all the women. Only then it will not be counted as discrimination based on a gender specific physiological process
Throw cultural aspect in the garbage of the constitutional morality....gender right and feminism doesn't make sense on all matter even lot of temple doesn't allow men so what? these western educated judge are completely out of sync with indian etheos...
Agreed bro, WESTERN EDUCATION effect
Supreme logic of western education based on Abrahmic coordinates.
1. If GOD is the ultimate creator why does "he"(patriarchal GOD) the supreme creator see certain Humans (believers) in a partial way by not allowing them in the place of worship ?
2. If partiality in any form is practiced that must be abhorred by using common sensical arguments that apply methods of justice to rescue the aggrieved party.
The Dilemma here is the understanding of the needs of a hindu diety and the perception of GOD
Likewise there are so many such technical indepth aspects to consider......
Yes they knew nothing about indian culture and are hell bent on destroting it.
These feminists and communist are blindly following western world and destroying our traditional
Culture . They are getting money from abroad to destroy US . The advocate who want to enter feminists was getting huge money from abroad . Then central government stopped her source from abroad . Protect for hindus . Against this communists , feminists and pseudo secular
Deepak nailed it..
Sunita ojha wonderfully explained the majority judgement and i also think we should see our society in evolution. When the practice like sati was made an offence there were strong resistance from society. We have to remove unwanted elements from our society and make it inclusive and egalitarian. I also believe that It is a human nature to resist change.
Most awaited judgement and most awaited discussion!! Thank you Frank and all for putting things in to perspective.
J Sai Deepak made very clear and logical arguments. It is very unfortunate and shameful that 4 judges of supreme court and 2 lady panelists in this show; failed to acknowledge the nuances of tradition. Now i also think there should be transparency in selection of judges in SC. From 1950 to 2018, there have been only 8 female judges in SC. In fact, the 1st female judge was made in 1989 (after about 40yrs of independence).
Is supreme court gender discriminatory? When will equality of gender come in SC?
They call themselves "Lord". Ironically, even today there are only 3 female judges out of 25 judges in SC.
Comment section saddens me. This is precisely why such judgement needed. I am sure Lord Ayappan has stronger resolve than us humans that he won't loose his celibacy. Namastubhyam.
Such a dignified debate! A refreshing change from all the shouting and yelling that is going on in other debates. Huge respect to all panelists!
Review Petition should be Put forward for "Keeping hold of our unique culture".
i have paused and rewind atleast 10 times to understand sai deepak's vocab.His Flow of english language is very good.
Sunita mam 's point is correct . We can not deprive dignity of human being just to protect the dignity of deity. We are the creator of deity. It is just the projection of our self.. so we can not cut root to make the branches alive.
as always J sai Deepak again rocks...thnx sir
Big Picture is a good avenue to listen to healthy arguments. My kind request for this team is to increase the Duration of this program to 1 hour or even more.
Great discussion man☺☺.... J sai deepak is such a brilliant speaker........he can take a clear stand on any issue......wish he becomes the CJI in future.... 👍👍👍👍👍👍
so I am little bit confused now. I am all for equality but is the time have come for men to demand their right to enter kamakhya temple in assam.
Ofcourse , they should demand if they wish so. Really hopeful that today's judgement will pave the way for the entry of women in the Kritan Ghar of Barpetra Satra , Assam too where women are denied entry within a certain age. Unbiased gender equality is what I stand for.
@@AN82945 I was being sarcastic. But then I realize that you should respect SC judgment. So now it would be a real good time to lift the ban of Muslim women entry to haji Ali dargah in Mumbai. Because gender equality can't be different for Hindu and Muslim.
@@smruti93rsa you have a point. But again, this is just a beginning and we can willfully hope for changes to come over in every sections of society irrespective of anything.
@Frank www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2018/sep/28/indian-temples-where-men-cant-enter-on-certain-days-1878292.html
In the name of constitution and religious freedom we have to respect the sc interpretation until it is overturned(I am hopeful like in the case of right to privacy). But the lone woman judge in the bench dissented about the entry of women of menstrual age to Sabrimala. This shows us how we internalized religious and cultural practice. The temple board never argued that women of menstrual age should not enter because they are impure. I think the menstrual blood is as pure as your mother because you are born out of it. It is because the Lord Ayyappa is a celibate or naistika brahmachari and it is his prerogative to not to be touched by women of reproductive capability.
The reason you are studying about this in the newspaper which linked this to art 14,17 is because they have build up such a propaganda around this so that you can not realize what is real and unreal.
Those who compare it with sati, please realize that Sati was a social evil and it is gone for good. If you compare it with social evil then I think it would be better that the supreme court would allow men and women of any religion to the place of worship they like. With this one stroke sc would throw art 26 which is not subject to 14,17.
I don't see a problem when the state manage affairs of a religious institution. But there is problem when the state does not manage affairs of all the religious institutions esp Islamic institutions and churches.
Most of the time I agree with Mr J Sai Deepak but not in this case. Sunita mam kept to the point argument and her closing comment was brilliant
Rahul Easwars claim that only women can offer pongala in Attukal temple is absolutely false.. Even men can do it.. No one will stop them.. But men are voluntarily not doing it.. It cannot be compared with the forced restrictions for women in sabarimala
One of the best big picture show till date bringing out differences in such a lucid way. Deepak Sir as always excellent analysis.
Constitutional morality vs cultural ideology and practice ...whole debate revolve around it....it's been right to say that equality means not to all matters .There are certain things which can't be bring under single umbrella on the basis of equality ...We should remember that cultural diversity is the basis of Indian society ..at the end of this judgment , you cannot say that by passing law and verdict things will change on the ground ..
What a civilized debate and superb anchoring.... This is actually the first time am coming across Rajya sabha Tv... I loved it.. Like and subscription for sure
And why should a deity break his celibacy against his will ? He should have control over that. Does deity speak with any one about his will? .who know the truth.. As far as i think even celibate individual also want to come out of this same life.. want to enjoy life with all aspects. I think we should not bind scriptural rules to the deity. It is not joyful. Any binding is always painful.
Its a request please extend The big picture program for 1 Hour.
Two ladies just beat around the bush. Please don't bring such unaware and immature ones in discussions. Sai Deepak put it in a logical way as always. Thanks for bringing him and bringing this topic to the discussion.
Great debate !
Uphold constitutional morality beyond religion. All religious places must be open to all... It's a welcome step.
Amazing debate! All the panelists are evidently clear with their points. Kindly keep bringing such good debates for audience.
Let bizarre misogynistic religious customs like this change
I completely agree with J. Sai Deepak that people should not make their argument only based on what they know, but they also should know the history and practices of the tradition before making any argument. And the 2 ladies don't seem to know it.
one of the best debate I watch.thanks rstv for ur learned panel and also thanks to Frank.
Sai Deepak....u beauty !!
what happens if a women of fertile age enters a place where a group of men were in penance for 40 days?..valid points taken from j sai deepak sir
Had SaiDeepak been in the studio, Sunieta Ojha would have exercised a little more restraint in delivering such illogical generic arguments.Untouchability? This shows her complete lack of knowledge about the issue.
According to you if someone agrees with your argument than only that person is knowledgeable else a fool rather it be anyone.
mithun vasanthkumar very true!! I just became a fan of Sai Deepak.
Amit Kumar Its not about agreeing or disagreeing. It's about realising the fact atleast when it's told a number of times.
She said right... Its untouchability ....during menus... women are not allowed to enter temple , not allowed to worship , not allowed in kitchen , even can't touch the dry clothes... we have to sleep in a room where i can't touch my any family member.. even in morning I have to hide from my father till they don't complete his regular worship of God.. I am not allowed to take the name of GOD during my menus..... I am a VICTIM of it... and I know how it feel.....
SO don't say she is making some invalid point....
No one is threatening women to not to enter. The women themselves won't enter out of respect of the diety
This practice show how gender specificity is deep rooted... specificity comes from generalisation.. This practice show how we look on opposite gender through our eye lense.. only through the prism of sexuality..
As society moves 'forward'...One fundamental right vs another - this is going to b common theme in future SC litigation...Hence to bring some uniformity,consistency- larger bench of SC should dispose the pertaining issues of 'Essentiality doctrine' nd Balancing between various fundamental rights! Good debate!👍👍
If Sunita know anything about the culture of sabarimala temple
extraordinary debate... I honor the judgement of Justice indu Malhotra and views of sai Deepak as well as Rahul eshwar..
superb debate ever...
I really love RSTV debates. They are always healthy and peaceful.
womens entered sabarimala till 70's and it was aftr that womens were baned there ..so i think no belifs had breaked here..
'I here by support womens entry on sabarimala being a hindu malayali '
Almost all other temples are open to women. Hindu temples have their diversity. It would be have been great if that diversity could have been preserved. We should have instead constructed only for women temple celebrating womanhood near the Sabarimala temple. That would be interesting instead of completely changing the essence of Sabarimala temple :)
Forget temples our law itself is different based on gender.
Aditi mam never goes to temple, then she should resist from commenting on such a sensitive temple going issue.
Aditi Phadnis is like - "I have no respect for temples, i dont go there and i will not go to the Sabrimala temple as well. She seems arrogant and gives more priority to her ego than the people' beliefs, says if i am not not welcomed i will never go. Otherwise all panelist were superb, disscussed brilliantly. We saw both sets of opinions. It was quite benificial and educational.
Am from kerala.I support the judgement of our honourable supreme court,their wordings and verdicts.Rahul Ishwar is little bit crack.He is always against in this case.Only some peoples are taking 41 days of penance.most are taking it for hardly 1 or 2 weeks.I cant entertain any kinds of superstitious beliefs which exits here that may create revolt among the people.If anyone wishes to go there, let them go.others pls remain their homes.swami sharanam
j sai deepak as always fluent,crisp and to the point.If SC has allowed women in sabarimala on the petition filed by certain persons who have nothing to do about sabarimala,i have a question in a mind??Mr.saideepak being an advocate on the case perhaps spoke in a moderate manner.
If a person of hindu or sikh or some other faith files a PIL in SC to allow muslim women in all Masjids,will SC direct muslim body to allow women in masjid??
I think minority judgement clearly warned of this probable consequence of the judgement-That reforms in any religion or faith should come from the section themselves who believe in that faith or religion.
Good issue taken by rstv
tnx rstv
And why exactly does the government get to dictate what a Hindu place of worship can and can't do? In India, the church is separate from the state, the mosque is separate from the state, and similarly so for the other religions. Isn't this essentially an infringement upon the rights of Hindus and their religious freedom, while the rest of the religions enjoy complete autonomy? Is this the definition of a "secular" state?
I think you are aware of court judgement of declaring mosque as non essential part of islam, ban on instant triple talaq.
So its not just about Hinduism....
@@AmitKumar-ox6nu Triple Talaq is a true gender rights issue where the woman perpetually doesn't have an advantage or say in it, and Triple Talaq is not a place of worship. Also, you didn't address my point about the government not separating the Hindu religion from state. I think YOU know that all Hindu places of worship are taxed around 18% on their endowments and donations. So, we, as Hindus, are supposed to pay for our faith in our religion? Whereas Muslims get SUBSIDIES for Haj! Is this equality? I donate money to temples so the that the temple and its foundation benefits from it, not so that the corrupt government can greedily gobble up MY money donated for the upkeep of a Hindu temple. Also, Hindu temples have been assigned NON-HINDUS as management staff. Is it even conceivable for a Hindu to be assigned to a management role at a church or mosque? Please don't sugarcoat what is otherwise an ugly reality.
I remember a zizya tax from medieval period.....
Exactly they are playing with our religious sentiments.
Deepak sir.. Outstanding comments
women r discriminated at many instances certainly need gender justice , but really sabarimala issue is about discrimination?. there are many ways in which men and women are different, many rituals are reserved for women and men as well. we as a society need to look from social + Economic+ cultural or any other point of discrimination. by not allowing women or men to perform certain ritual is gender discrimination? we need debate on this. whole concept of gender equality is western concept. we have to decide we want only western mode of life or can we incorporate some indian ethos of life.
This is the real beauty of "Democracy"
Every matter of citizen's interest are open for discussion..
I just love my country.
And I think we all should be proud of it..
I am highly upset with this judgement...but sooper impressed by the moderator of this debate
It is because the respect you have for ayappa you all want to go right?? If you have so much of respect for him why you don't respect that temple's aidheehyam and story behind ayappa's pradhistha there??
Rahul Eswar & Sai Deepak are well said. Need to check actual facts first.
Thank you.
Jai Hind
Hats off to host....all are calm and was disciplined..i hav fedup with malayalam news channel they will be shoutin in between
Not clear when guests speaks on ph calls
In this moment of history there is no place for dogma. If the celibacy of someone is under threat because of any particular thing then that is not celibacy. It is hypocrisy. I have never heard that Lord Buddha's or mahavira or Christ's celibacy was under threat because of women.
Only the south Indians know the real religious conditions of lord ayyappa.......others are waste.......
Sunita Ojha: calm, composed, relevant and on point.
AWESOME DEBATE
People dont understand that Sabarimala, is different from other temples in the country, it is not a 365 days temple, it opens at a particular time. and it is because of the history it holds.
Since men too are not allowed in some temples therefore whole argument of menstruation and untouchability is rubbish.
Allowing entry to women of all ages is a welcome decision. That is what article 14 says!
I visit my street ayyappan temple every friday..he is my clan god...there im not barred..then why alone in sabarimala..wr went deity rights thr?
Hi adithi, there is something called Sthana puranam. The history of Sabarimala. Read it . It might help you.
Very very good and progressive decision by SC. If sabrimala wanted to barred women, ban every women why only women between 10 and 50. Those who are saying that diversity of india is disturbed are wrong. Nothing is going to happen to religion if women are allowed to certain places. Religion never stops anyone it's the few "high level" men that make the rule and the society follows it. History is witness to this.
Sabarimala was never a case of caste or colour-based oppression or ostracising of any particular community. There was no social injustice against which to fight. It is also not an institution that has upheld any social evil like Sati or child marriage. Behind the reason why for centuries the temple has not encouraged women in the age group of 10-50, to enter its walls lies an age-old faith that has been the cornerstone of the very existence of this hill-temple.
Sabarimala is built on a story. A story that has linkages with faith that said that the main deity of the temple, Lord Ayyappa, is a brahmachari (a celibate god) and the presence of women of the menstruating age group is a hindrance to his meditation. Women outside this age group can enter the temple and that has been always so.
And there is more to this story. A female deity in the temple called 'Malikappuram Devi', is given place within the temple and as per the centuries-old belief, Lord Ayyappa will marry Malikappuram Devi the year in which there are no 'kanni' ayyappans (first-time visitors to the temple). But, such a scenario doesn't happen in reality since every year there are thousands of new devotees thronging Sabarimala.
Although the story of Lord Ayyappan and the associated faith may sound silly to the proponents of gender equality and social reform, the fact is that the very existence of the hill-temple and its relevance is based on this. Sabarimala wasn’t created by an Act of the Kerala state Assembly, Parliament or by an order of court, but on faith. Now, if that faith is not respected, there isn't Sabarimala as it exists today.
I respect Supreme court verdict,so many powerful women god,no one other religions have this concepts,I hope people itself realise and allow women..
It is the right of the deity...
Hindus please teach our younger generation our history and stories.. all other religions are teaching them everything about their god from such an young age.. our religion is heading in Wrong direction.. enlighten the young..
To those two lady panelists I would just like them to read about this issue before comprehending the practice as they like. The lack of clarity in their words is a clear indication. Moreover when the question of 'reverse discrimination' was asked they were prevaricating! Why so? Because they view everything with a parochial lens.
But I have an other doubt.....even Vishnu had to take the form of a woman right to give birth to Ayyappa..so how can you say that women are not allowed ...isn't mohini a woman?
If the question is about equality, why are we talking about unity in diversity. Let us evaluate all the aspects of constitution and come to a state of equality on all the possible manner.
love to watch this debate again with J SAI DEEPAK & SUNITA OJHA again face to face .........
So those saying Supreme Court should not interfere in religious matters mean that even Sati, child marriage, dowry, triple talaq should have been allowed to continue? So women are impure for a few days?
Just wanted to knwo the exact reason why a man or a women is not allowed to sabrimala or other temples wher men are not allowed? Whats the exact reason
Why don't we have the same rule regarding mosque where women are prohibited to enter inside.
the reason behind all the debatable judgements made by the supreme court (adultery, 377 and sabarimala) in such a hurry is only because of the CJI dipak mishra, as he will be retiring on 2nd october, 2018 and often the retiring CJIs tend to make judgements in a hurry as seen by previous judges like lodha, dattu and khehar
Constitution of India stands way above any thing on this land.
What really beautifully summaries this debate is what Dr. B R Ambedkar remarked when asked about merits of the constitution "However good a constitution maybe it will turn out to be bad if people called to work upon it happens to be a bad lot, however bad a condition maybe it will turn out to be good if the people called to work upon it happens to be a good lot".
Here the golden formula of a good constitution and a good lot (SC judges) make historical changes.
This is the Beauty of our Indian Constitution
I'm sorry, if ppl took me wrong that I'm trying to create some communal arguments..all that I want is to ensure that the diversity in our culture and religion to be intact. As we are always proud of it
What ever it is if any religion,or place,public places, temple, mosque, or anywhere if a women is restricted to enter, it is not fair.Something wrong with that. .....I welcome the court order...
You should understand that shabarimala is not park that everyone can easily go. It is a religious place which maintain strict rules and custom that's why it stand unique.we are not against women but don't try to break our custom