FREEDOM TO HURT RELIGIOUS SENTIMENTS!

India has always witnessed law and order problems whenever Bangladeshi writer Tasleema Nasreen is here. Will the government continue to support this foreign national ignoring its citizens’ protests? Are all Bangladeshis welcome in India? Or only those who are anti Muslims?

In a small village of Karnataka, a family is mourning. Imran (13), Salman (9) and Tahseen (5) have lost their father. The innocent children do not know why their father Abdul Latif (42) was killed. Now the whole responsibility of caring for these children has come upon the shoulders of his widow Rehana Begum. Her puffed rice (murmure) vendor husband, who used to earn daily to buy food for the family, has not left behind money to feed them even for some days. The earnings of this family man were just enough to feed his family daily.

Abdul Latif, as usual, was on his bicycle selling murmure when the communal violence erupted in Shimoga, Karnataka. He told his family not to go out of house lest the rioters should target them, but after half an hour he himself was murdered.

He is one of the two people killed, and scores injured, during the riots which took place after a translated version of an article by Tasleema Nasreen criticizing burqa was published in a Kannada daily “Kannada Prabha”. The newly married wife of Sadiq Pasha too was widowed on the same day. The riots which spread through Gandhi Bazar, Nehru Road, Ameer Ahmad Circle and Waqf Board office in Shimoga caused a total loss of around Rs 7 crore.

This is besides many innocents being arrested from the same community whose shops, houses, cars and two-wheelers were damaged. According to a report at least 158 Muslims, among whom some are high school and college students, were arrested for creating riots. The police, as usual, have been alleged to support, instead of stopping, the communal elements from the majority community.

Has India or the world, showed the same hospitality to anyone who instead of criticizing Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and Qur’an, had made any other religion, belief or culture their nefarious target? India’s distinguishing characteristic of being multi-cultural, multi-religious and above all the largest democracy is tied tightly with due respect to every culture and religion. Why is the evil Tasleema, who hurts sentiments of Muslims, then allowed to have an Indian visa?

The Shimoga-Hassan riots are not the first which the Bangladeshi writer Tasleema Nasreen has caused since she started seeking fame through criticizing Islam. A doctor by profession Nasreen was never a good writer. So-called protagonists of secularism have made her seem so, merely because she criticizes Islam, asks to revise the divine book and so on. She was expelled from her own Muslim dominated country for hurting the sentiments of Muslims. Since then, she has been visiting doors of various countries to seek shelter.

There would be no protest if she was given asylum in the USA or any other European country, but when our country does it, 180 million Indians have the right to raise their voice.

given asylum in the USA or any other European country, but when our country does it, 180 million Indians have the right to raise their voice.

Besides provoking the second largest majority of India, Nasreen has created law and order problems many times. Indians want to live in peace. Then why should a potential threat to peace be allowed to stay in the country.

Tasleema may be called a guest of India. But this guest who is breaking the unity of the host’s house should be thrown out and never be allowed in again. The presence of Tasleema has always been harmful to the peaceful atmosphere in India. Whether it was the Bengal riots or the Shimoga riots, her articles have been responsible.

It is she who caused huge economic damage to India—during protests against her, work would come to a standstill affecting market and lakhs of rupees have been wasted for providing security to her. Yet our country insists on giving her visa and (might be in future citizenship too).


“The purdah (Islamic face veil) that I wear protects me. I like the purdah which Muslim women wear. I like the lifestyle of Muslim women. Purdah is a wonderful dress. No man ever makes a pass at a woman in purdah. It provides her with a sense of security.” Kamala Das Suraiya


The reason given for showing sympathy towards Tasleema—protecting freedom of expression—is illogical. What she does cannot be called “freedom of expression”. It is utmost misuse of the freedom. Freedom of expression is meant for better understanding of necessary issues and not for criticising religious issues which are one’s personal beliefs. There are many fools who think that being critical is the only way of being liberal. Tasleema Nasreen is one of them.

Everything is tolerable within specified limits. Freedom of expression should not mean that everyone goes on accusing and defaming people and get away. Those who blindly advocate freedom of expression beyond limits will not tolerate if their sentiments were hurt by any kind of matter however trivial. If the same kind of article was written on Tasleema Nasreen accusing her of the same indecency she has accused so many in her books would it be still considered freedom of expression?

Quite contrary to it, when anyone criticizes or opposes Tasleema they are labelled “fundamentalists” and “orthodox”. Read any news article about Tasleema and there instead of condemning the views of Tasleema she is applauded and those raising voice against her blasphemy and nefarious actions are called the fundamentalists. None of the practicing Muslims oppose freedom of expression. But tragedy is that many raising the issue of freedom, either of expression, choice or anything else, become partial when it comes to Islamic traditions. Voting for minarets ban in Switzerland or ban on burqa in many western countries is one example.

A deep study of the reason behind opposition to the Burqa will reveal the main factor and that the pity for women under the guise of liberating them from veil slavery is “artificial”. It, instead of being freedom from so-called “subservience” is the fear of many industries which run on women who compete in revealing to the possible extent the ups and downs of their bodies, shutting down.

Scores of companies manufacturing beauty articles from nail polish to hair conditioners, shampoos to skin creams among others hugely depend upon women anxious to display them publically. If women start to wear burqa then the use of all these products and their sales will plummet. In the same way myriad kinds of fashion statements—either topless or sleeveless or bottomless—will lose attraction once women start to see the advantage of covering themselves. This is the main reason why the anti burqa propaganda is created.

Unlimited freedom of expression which includes the right to legally portray the body of a woman in any fashion desired, has given rise to the multi-billion pornography industry, making her an economic commodity. She has been used as a means to promote business. One may easily find advertisement posters here and there having beautiful women. Nobody realises that men look at these advertisements because there is a natural instinct and an urge in man to look for women. The more her body is exposed the more the hits. See what the status of women has become. Will any decent society want their women to be treated in this manner?

In the US, pornographic films generate revenue of $8 billion every year. Britain sells 20 million copies of porn magazines every year. The economic benefits of stripping women have been understood by the west. There is a lot of exploitation of poor and needy women in this industry.

Tasleema may be called a guest of India. But this guest who is breaking the unity of the host’s house should be thrown out and never be allowed in again. The presence of Tasleema has always been harmful to the peaceful atmosphere in India. Whether it was the Bengal riots or the Shimoga riots, her articles have been responsible.

It is unfortunate that many females fail to perceive that men dominant societies have always encouraged the exposure and exhibition of the female body regarding it as a great art. Public displays of female bodies in various magazines are considered artistic developments. Careers like modelling, acting, singing and dancing are short cuts for women to become famous and rich. Men design clothes for fashion, which accentuate the femininity of the woman and her figure. Is it not the conspiracy against woman to compel her to wear her dress according to the desire of Men?

The feminist Tasleema, as she is called, too has fallen prey to the desire of men by advocating free relations and unlimited revelation.

She alleges Muslim men to create a hurdle in ‘free revelation’ by compelling their women to wear burqa. But people know that nobody has ordered Tasleema (a Muslims as she claims) to put on veil. The statement of a veteran writer Kamala Das Suraiya reveals the reason why Muslim women are seen in purdah.

“The purdah (Islamic face veil) that I wear protects me. I like the purdah which Muslim women wear. I like the lifestyle of Muslim women. Purdah is a wonderful dress. No man ever makes a pass at a woman in purdah. It provides her with a sense of security,” she has written.

Actually the introduction of the ideas of freedom and liberation for women is itself shadowed with doubt. Economic need of the western society is said to be the factor behind this. Bernard Lewis writes in his book, “The Middle East”, in the Chapter entitled, “From Freedom to Freedom”, “A major factor in the emancipation of women was economic need...”
If liberty entitles a woman for nudity then why does it not sanction a woman to put on veil and hide her garments and beauty? France is one of the main protagonists of liberty and secularism but on the other hand it not only legally prohibits women from burqa but also imposes penalty on the husband of the woman caught red handed wearing a veil. France has the largest fashion industry in the world and the veil can become its biggest hurdle in its progress and growth.

It is always better to let the persons wearing burqa describe themselves how they feel in it. If women putting on a veil feel it to be a sign of chastity and modesty then others including French President Nikolas Sarkozy and Tasleema Nasreen do not have any right to call it “sigh of subjugation”.

How ridiculous is it that Sarkozy, not the Muslim women, feels “women are prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity” if they use veil.

It’s not surprising that Tasleema Nasreen gets support from the western minded secular and tolerant people like Sarkozy. The spirit of secularism sustains only as long as every theory, religion or ism gets due respect from bearer of secularism and it will die in the case the situation stops to exist. Supporting anyone going against this, will also cause its death. The support of Tasleema in targeting a certain community well reveals the hypocritical attitude of protagonists of secularism.

One point which people often fail to mention is that banning burqa violates the freedom of expression of those fashion conscious designers who design burqas in different styles. In other words they are restricting the designers from expressing their freedom in designing dresses. The market for designer burqas too is growing .The western clothing manufacturers have sensed the potential in this business and are already involved. The expensive and high end stuff, including burqas designed in different ways, sold in rich Muslim countries to rich Muslim clients comes from designers in France and other European countries.

It is unfortunate that in India, the largest democracy of the world; Tasleema is allowed to spewvenom. In spite of 17 crore Muslims appealing against the government for its decision to give shelter to Tasleema, the government remains unmoved. If any country happens to be generous to a foreigner it should not ignore its citizens’ sentiments.

This is a sentimental issue. It harms the very spirit of cosmopolitan and pluralistic India to directly or indirectly encourage such a writer like Tasleema. Has India or the world, showed the same hospitality to anyone who instead of criticizing Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and Qur’an, had made any other religion, belief or culture their nefarious target? India’s distinguishing characteristic of being multi-cultural, multi-religious and above all the largest democracy is tied tightly with due respect to every culture and religion. Why is the evil Tasleema, who hurts sentiments of Muslims, thenallowed to have an Indian visa?

It was merely the objection to some paintings by M F Hussain by a section of society which led to chaos in India. An Indian artist who has many well wishers in India has been hounded out of the country for his freedom of expression and now lives in another country. Whereas Taslima is given asylum for hers.

A doctor by profession Nasreen was never a good writer. So-called protagonists of secularism have made her seem so, merely because she criticizes Islam, asks to revise the divine book and so on.

If seen in reality, Tasleema does not use her “freedom” and is rather intent to hurt the emotions of a certain group without caring whether it threatens the unity of the country. Why does India not see that Taslima Nasreen has been creating internal law and order problem?

What happened in Karnataka was an eye opener for all concerned citizens of the country. There are always opportunists in the media who every now and then test the patience of the public by printing something unrequired and totally unnecessary. This time the matter was controlled and died down. If it happens again then who knows how much loss of life and property it may cause. People like Tasleema Nasreen are the fuel for this fire. Her words are worse than poison. It is best in the interest of peace that India does not allow her to stay.

By Junaid Maseeh
junaidmaseeh@yahoo.co.in