The Pandalam police in the Pathanamthitta district have registered a case against Sri Ramadasa Mission president Shantananda Maharshi for allegedly portraying Vavar, an Islamic invader, in a negative light during the Sabarimala Protection Sangam. The case has been filed under non-bailable sections following complaints that his remarks allegedly hurt religious sentiments and threatened communal harmony in the Sabarimala pilgrimage region.
The remarks were made at the Sabarimala Protection Sangam organised in Pandalam, the birth place of Bhagwan Ayyappa by the Sabarimala Karma Samiti. The event was held soon after the Kerala government and the Travancore Devaswom Board conducted the ‘Global Ayyappa Sangam’ on the banks of the Pampa River as part of the Devaswom Board’s platinum jubilee celebrations.
According to the complaint, Shantananda Maharshi told devotees that the widely accepted story of Vavar is historically inaccurate. He said Vavar was a Muslim attacker and a Islamic terrorist who came to challenge and defeat the Bhagwan Ayyappa and that presenting him as a companion of Ayyappa murti was a distortion introduced only in recent decades. Maharshi asserted that ‘Vapura’, described as a manifestation of Bhagwan Shiva and protector of Ayyappa murti, is the one who ought to be honoured by devotees.
Maharshi said that devotees should have the opportunity to worship Ayyappa murti by breaking coconuts at the ‘Vapura Swamy’ temple. He stated that a ‘Vapura Swamy’ temple is being built in Erumeli for this purpose and that it is important to restore the older belief that ‘Vapura’ protects the Ayyappa murti. According to him, ‘Vavar’ has no true connection with Sabarimala or Bhagwan Ayyappa and was only placed in the pilgrimage narrative 25 to 30 years ago. He described Vavar as an Islamic invader who sought to destroy the Ayyappa murti in battle and insisted that ‘Vapuran’, not ‘Vavar’, should be worshipped.
Muslim character Vavar has long been portrayed as a companion of the Ayyappa murti, though this narrative is increasingly questioned by devotees and scholars who argue it was inserted into the pilgrimage tradition only in recent decades. A shrine for ‘Vavar’ was placed at Sabarimala and a mosque was established for him in Erumeli, opposite an Ayyappa temple, a development distorts the original worship of the Ayyappa murti and introduces an outsider figure with no authentic link to the deity.
Two formal complaints were filed after the speech. Congress media spokesperson Anoop V. R. submitted a petition alleging that Maharshi’s statements offended the faith of Ayyappa devotees and created hostility between religious groups. Another complaint was lodged by Pradeep Verma, a member of the Pandalam royal family and the CPI(M) Area Committee. Verma argued that Maharshi’s remarks misrepresented the accepted tradition of Ayyappa’s association with Vavar Swamy and threatened Hindu–Muslim harmony in the pilgrimage centre. Both complaints asked for legal action against what they described as religious hate speech.
Responding to the police case, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) claimed the complaints were politically motivated. The party alleged that Pradeep Verma, who is both a CPI(M) leader and a member of the royal family, acted out of political interests rather than religious concern. The Pandalam police said further action would follow after reviewing the full content of Maharshi’s speech.
