Chalo, let us debate!!!
The guy looks convincing but his whole argument hinges on history and mythology. He doesn’t realise, that is what has been questioned by the court and ruling has been given.
Swami Ayyappa is an eternal brahmachari, that’s what he says, but, why should it forbid women’s entry is the question.
Does it distract the deity or the devotee?
Where’s the will of the deity written?? Can the creator himself be so very vulnerable and so very discriminatory, prejudiced and biased?? People have witnessed the proponents of these practices tie themselves in knots with unconvincing, contradictory and silly arguments.
Truth be told, many of the orthodox Brahmin families still follow the tradition where a ‘ bleeding woman’ has a restricted movement within her own house. This was possible in joint families where there were many women to take care. Now, in the nuclear and smaller families, such outdated practices have been done away with. If the woman of the house sat outside for three days, who would cook food for the man of the house? Practicality pipped the precedence!!
customary laws of some ethnic communities around the world and also in India, till very recently, discriminate against women when it comes to property ownership and inheritance; while some traditional leaders have supported transforming these laws, many others defend them as embodying “tradition”. The pillars of patriarchy should be demolished.
Can the traditions be invoked to contravene rights of certain sections of the population is the question.
The deity will look after himself, devotees need to look after themselves. And, if one can’t stand the sight of women entering the Sabarimala shrine, refrain from going there.