THE SABARIMALA IMBROGLIO

  

It appears that the Supreme Court (SC) has opened a can of worms by its order pertaining to entry of ladies Into Sabarimala. At the outset let me affirm here that I am a Hindu by birth and is not against any religious beliefs .Even before the issue was considered by SC I used to argue with like minded parties like friends about the need to changethe restrictions for ladies for visiting sabarimala. In the present order the SC has only mentioned that if any lady wished to visit sabarimala and offer prayers , she should not bebarred on the ground that her age is between 10 and 50. The court has never said that all the ladies in the particular age group SHOULD visit sabarimala. The supreme court has seen the issue in the light of constitutional provisions only and held that the present restrictions imposed

by devaswom board are against the spirit of constitution . I do not understandwhy this has been termed as an encroachment on the rituals of the temple, rights of the mantri family etc. Aa far as I understand SC has not said what type of pooja should be made or how a particular pooja has to be conducted etc, which could have been interpreted as interfering with rituals at the temple. During the last about 60 years (which happens to be in my memory area) i have noticed many changes in the rituals at sabarimala. In my childhood days, my elder relatives used to observe the 41 days' vrutham religiously before they prepared the irumudi and proceeded for darshan of lord ayyappa either during the mandala pooja period ending on 25th or 26thDecember or later during the makaravilakku happening on 14th Jan. The temple used to be opened for about 10 to 15 days only during this period when all the devotees used to complete the darshan and return. And all the devotees used to travel the whole distance on foot for want of any transportation facility .  The devotees used to wear the black dothies and used to take bath in the morning and evening daily. Normally they used to stay at home only during the vrutham period , lest they may get ' impure' by coming into contact with somebody who is having 'pula' (15 days period after death of a family member) or 'valayma' (56 days period after birthday of a child in the family). If a death or birth happened in the family of the devotees during the vrutham period, he used to break the vrutham and postpone the journey to the next year!

Later on the temple was kept opened for 41 days during the mandalam period and later on for 14 days during makaravilakku period for the convenience if the devotees. This was further increased by keeping the temple opened for firat five days of all Malayalam months to enable the devotees have a comfortable darshan of the deity. And the devotees also started using various modes of transports including air conditioned cars for visiting the temple! And for the sake of convenience the devotees used to wear the beads garland (mala) on the day of their journey to the shrine only instead of wearing it on first day of malayalam month Vrischikam. (Start of mandalam period). And the size of the irumudi which used to be carried by the devotees shrunk from the bulky one to a miniature one too. All these were done as per the convenience of the devotees and nobody objected to these . However, in spite of all these improvisations there was no demand for changing the restriction put on the ladies of menstruating age all these days. Now that somebody has requested for such a change, this could have been acceded to by the board or temple authorities without allowing it to be drawn to the highest court leading to the present situation.

Personally , I believe that such a restriction were put on the ladies considering the difficulties they may face during the menstruation period during the trekking to the hill shrine , which used to take days together ! Even after improvement in transport facilities which has cut short the period of trek to the shrine to just one or two days, there is no meaning in continuing with this restriction imposed long back. As  such no devout hindu ladies visit any temple, leave alone sabarimala, during the menstruation period of 4 or 5 days. All other days they do visit the temple which can be easily followed in the case of sabarimala too. The argument of the deity being 'naishthika brahmachari' etc are absurd, i believe. A google search into the meaning of the words "Naishthika Brahmachari" will itself call the bluff if these people. As per the interpretation in holy books aa reported in google "Naishthika Brahmachari" is one who maintains celibacy in spite of being surrounded by ladies and hence this should not be held as a plea to prevent ladies of a.particular age group to the shrine .  (In the quote lord Sreekrishna has been shown as Naishthika Brahmachari!)

Coming to the present agitation against the SC verdict , i feel the gullible devotees have been drawn to the streets by some vested interests. It is interesting to note that ladies in the barred age group carry the pictures of lord ayyappa (whom they call brahmachari) during these protest matches which itself shows the hollowness of their conviction . It is high time the well educated malayalis participating in the protests realised their folly and dissociated from such activities .

ENTRY OF LADIES TO SABARIMALA

All the arguments made by senior counsel Mr Parasaran in supreme  court in the Sabarimala issue can used to interpret the existing practice in another way too . First, it is not a case of anybody that all hindu ladies SHOULD visit the temple in spite of their age. The plea is, if at all a lady aged between 10 and 55 is desirous of visiting the temple and praying there SHE SHOULD NOT be prevented in the name of practice.

Other than saying about age old practice, nobody says what is the logic in preventing ladies of a particular age group . If it is based on the menstruation period, two three issues arise. Is menstruation an impurity? Isn't it only a biological process? What is the guarantee that ladies below 10 and above 55 do not menstruate? There can be a lady whose uterus has been removed before 55 and hence does not menstruate. Similarly there can be a lady who menstruate even after 55 years. So it is a question of interpretation.

When we talk about practice followed, the same arguments were raised about opening of temple. Earlier it used to be opened during mandalam and makaravilakku only. Now it opens for five days during the start of each malayalam month. Nothing untoward has happened after this was started (I wonder why nobody is asking for opening the temple on all days just like any other temple)

It is also argued that there are any number of ayyappa temples elsewhere where ladies are not prevented and ladies could go to these temples. So if other temples can permit why not sabarimala, the pratishta everywhere being ayyappa. There cannot be different ayyappas.

I really wonder why the people who seek the entry and those who oppose the same do not touch upon these points.

I hope the so called custodians of Hindu faith do not pounce upon me for penning my thoughts .

Breach of Code of Conduct

I would like to mention the following irregularities/ breach of model code of conduct observed at Chengannur where a bye election is due next week.

As per the directives of the commission no official machinery is to be used for electioneering. However it s observed that almost all ministers of the government of Kerala are in Chengannur canvassing vote for the LDF candidate. Similarly many central ministers have visited or are slated to visit the constituency seeking vote for BJP candidate. This act is clear violation of the code of conduct on the following two counts:

The ministers use their official vehicles for travel to Chengannur for the electioneering, even though they do not have any official engagements in the place and hence travel by official car tantamount to misuse of official position. 

During the campaigns the ministers do make lot of promises which, coming from the ministers, may be construed as the stand of the government and the voters may consider as a promise from govt which may influence their voting pattern.

In view of the above I urge upon the Election Commission of India to instruct all state and central ministers from visiting the constituency for electioneering, failing which the whole process will become vitiated and liable for cancellation.

An urgent action is needed

Need for electoral reforms

Personally I feel what has happened in Karnataka is a rape of democracy. The arguments and counter arguments made by both groups and supporters are both correct and incorrect. When there was a triangular contest where BJP, congress and JDS had contested against each other , when none of the parties had a clear majority, the natural option the governor should have should be dissolution of assembly. But as per constitution there is a provision to invite the single largest party to form the government , which was exercised by him here. But the crucial point to be considered here is the governor had not applied his mind as to how BJP would garner majority. Looking at the party positions the only way was to wean away some legislators from JDS or congress, in which case they would be disqualified under anti defection law! Technically one can say the confidence vote would have been passed in that case, but whether the support of a disqualified member would count would have been subjected to judicial scrutiny.

The attempt of Congress to bring in supreme court in the matter and the urgency with which the court heard the matter in the middle of night also need to be deplored! Why is that the supreme court does not show this urgency in disposing of other cases pending with it, some of them even affecting the lives of old people ?

By making a claim to form the ministry and finally resigning without presenting confidence motion, BJP has unnecessarily made a fool of itself, which, I am sure, will adversely affect its performance in 2019 elections. I also wonder how the protem speaker permitted Yedyurappa to make a speech in assembly when called to present the motion of confidence! 

The alliance of congress and JDS

 with congress offering the post of cm to JDS which had less than half of Congress's strength was another act of misusing the provisions , but can be considered political expediency. Under the arrangement, when a claim was made by Kumaraswamy too, governor should have considered the claims of both and should have taken a judicious decision to invite Kumaraswamy as the alliance had a clear majority and there was no bar on post poll alliance! 

All said and done, the latest drama in Karnataka once again reiterate the need for  drastic electoral reforms in the country, on the following lines, which were suggested by me about 33 years back too.

1.The number of political parties in the country be restricted to 2 or 3.

2. Independents to be barred from contesting an election.

3. No post poll alliances be recognised to form ministry .

4. In the case of a hung assembly, the house should not be constituted and the state may be put under President's rule. Ideally next election should be held after five years only (for which there is no provision now)

5. Nobody should be permitted to contest from more than one constituency. If at all this is permitted, it should be done after the candidate deposits an amount equivalent to the election expenses of one constituency. (As per law, one can contest am election if his/her name appears in the electoral roll of that constituency. So I wonder how one can contest from two places without making a bogus claim!)

But all these look good on paper. The big question is who will bell the cat!

L affaire Karnataka

Yedyurappa resigns before facing confidence vote! He thus stood up and showed his lame leg. Couldn't this have been avoided? Why use the floor of the assembly to make a political speech prior to announcing the decision ? Shouldn't he be held accountable for the monetary loss he caused to exchequer by this drama ? SC having emergency sittings in night, early morning etc, swearing in as CM and calling a session of assembly to prove majority, which he didn't do?? The time is high that all the parties came together and thought of drastic electoral reforms to avoid such thamasha and rape of democracy . But this is going to be the order of the day, given the number of political parties and greedy leaders we have.

KSRTC, A SOCIAL OBLIGATION OR A PROFIT VENTURE?

The conundrum relating to pension payment in ksrtc continues to haunt the government . Now the government says it cannot take over the responsibility and ksrtc should find its own resources to meet the liability. However nobody answers the following questions on this.

What had the ksrtc done to build up the funds for meeting the liability to pay pension. Was a pension fund ever created by it and how the funds were utilised?

Is ksrtc run as a profit making organisation and if yes what happens with the profits?

If the ksrtc is run as a social obligation utility does the government subsidise it and pay the subsidy regularly.

What is the amount owed by the government to ksrtc on account of the various free journeys allowed by ksrtc to government officials etc.

How the banks consider the request of the ksrtc for further loans even to pay salaries? How do they work out the repayment capacity of a loss making organisation? Many ksrtc depots are reportedly mortgaged to banks for obtaining loans on various occasions. What is the enforceability of such mortgages and recovering the dues by banks?

On the whole it can be seen that the entire issue revolves around a vicious circle and unless some drastic measures are taken by the government which have to be supported by the employees irrespective of political affiliations, the future of the service will be murkier only, without any solution to the problems faced by it. Hope all concerned will rise to the occasion and do a brain storming.