Shashi Tharoor’s article kicks up a new storm on Sabarimala, splits opinion
Politics

Shashi Tharoor’s article kicks up a new storm on Sabarimala, splits opinion

Historian Ramachandra Guha called Shashi Tharoor’s article for ThePrint ‘deeply disappointing’, but MP’s position was backed by ex-foreign secy Nirupama Rao.

   
Shashi Tharoor

Shashi Tharoor | Facebook

Historian Ramachandra Guha called Shashi Tharoor’s article for ThePrint ‘deeply disappointing’, but MP’s position was backed by ex-foreign secy Nirupama Rao.

New Delhi: While the controversy over the Supreme Court’s decision to allow women of all ages to enter Kerala’s famed Sabarimala temple rages on, Shashi Tharoor, the Lok Sabha MP for Thiruvananthapuram, has ignited another heated debate.

In an article he wrote for ThePrint, Tharoor called himself an “instinctive liberal” who felt “torn” about the continued refusal of the temple authorities to follow the Supreme Court’s order, and the public support they seem to have.

However, the article has drawn mixed responses, with many including historian Ramachandra Guha criticising Tharoor’s article, while others like former foreign secretary Nirupama Menon Rao have backed the Congress MP’s position.

What Tharoor wrote

Tharoor wrote that he respected the “equality of men and women” and had “respect” for the Constitution and the Supreme Court, it had become difficult to reconcile these beliefs with another set — that people could follow their own religious beliefs and practices “as long as they did not harm others”, as well as his “respect for Indian democracy and the rule of law that sustains it”.

“…as subsequent reactions in Kerala have demonstrated, abstract notions of constitutional principle also have to pass the test of societal acceptance — all the more so when they are applied to matters of faith,” he wrote.

He added: “For a secular institution like the Court to engage in a theological exercise as to what aspect of faith or belief is an ‘essential religious practice’ is therefore problematic; when such a ruling is done by those who do not share the belief or practice impugned in the legal process, the problem is compounded.

“The overwhelming majority of Kerala Hindus, including a significant majority of women, have now demonstrated that their faith is offended by the Supreme Court verdict. Informal surveys suggest that opposition to the court judgment among Kerala Hindus is above 75 per cent and perhaps as high as 90 per cent.”

Adverse reactions

Historian Guha criticised Tharoor’s piece on Twitter, calling it “deeply disappointing”. He argued that if great leaders of past had thought like this, then Dalits of Kerala would still not be allowed in temples.

Guha’s disappointment was shared by economist and author Rupa Subramanya, who said she was “yet to hear a convincing explanation from those who claim this is tradition”.

Lawyer Sanjay Hegde also criticised the article.

A ‘brave’ article

However, Tharoor’s piece also received some prominent support. Former foreign secretary Nirupama Menon Rao, while quoting a line from Tharoor’s article, expressed how as “a Hindu Indian and Malayali woman”, she was disturbed by some arguments in favour of women’s entry.

ThePrint’s editor-in-chief Shekhar Gupta, in response to the ensuing debate, also retweeted a piece he had written in the immediate aftermath of the Sabarimala verdict. In it, he had argued for the Supreme Court to show greater restraint while interfering in religious matters.