Tuesday, August 10, 2010

In God's name

Those of us who have seen the cover of the Time magazine of the week will retract in horror at what man can inflict on his own kind. Let me recall the picture of the woman with a gaping hole where her nose was.   Mutilated, chopped off by the self proclaimed puritan Muslims of Afghanistan. Her crime, having born in a medieval society which is sliding faster into the black hole! The abhorrence of the act which will be displayed in her face as long as she is alive, pales into insignificance compared to the absolute silence of the Muslim intelligentsia all over the world who ostentatiously  swear by woman’s rights, and respect for the fairer sex, and quote the  holy text to that end.. It really is sheer nonsense and of no vain that the scholarly and erudite Muslims world over proclaim that such acts are un- Islamic. Does it really suffice and justify if we trumpet that we are against thieving while we stay mute to the very act of thieving? Such silence and tacit acquiescence is similar to the Hindus turning blind eye to the practise of self immolation on the funeral pyre -‘sati’.

I have been following   articles and stories in various magazines and The Hindu on the French ban on the burqa – the full facial veil for women. And there was a programme on the BBC wherein quite a few young Muslim men and women where speaking on the ban and allied topics. Ironically even many of those young and educated women on that show swore by their Islamic identity- fair enough,but  for which they considered the veil as synonym and indispensable. How would it be if Hindu women swear by their right to perform ‘sati’i and claim that if they are forbidden it is infringement on their inalienable religious rights? And also claim that performing sati is bringing out their religious identity and that it is display of piety etc? I do not now intent to dwell on the merits and otherwise of the French legislation against the facial veil. That is a different matter and prerogative of the law makers of that country.

People quote scriptures to suit their end. The devil does that often too.

And there are people every where who  condone and clamour for such archaic and antediluvian practises.


scarlet pimpernel said...

Me and my friends were on our weekend prowl at a mall when we saw this particular times cover. Pheww!!! sucked the life force out of us.

Insignia said...

Bibi Aisha; she will be etched in memories for quite sometime. She is getting cosmetic surgery done to tame her disfigured face. But how about the scar that has left in her thoughts for ever?

People do get away with goriest of the things in the name of religion and practice while the world stands a mute spectator.

The Holy Lama said...

Abuse is simply abuse. But Times Cover seems to be jingoistic. Can't agree with that too.

anilkurup said...

@ the holy lama
Well yes the Americans have other motives in that country and not the betterment of women.
But what I wanted to discuss was the acts of barbarism perpetuated on hapless women ( this pic is just one sample) and the silence of the religious heads and the community at large.Is that not condoning the abuse?

RGB said...

It's outrageous and heinous and absurd and...And most of these crimes are meted out in the name of religion (misquoted & misinterpreted by barbarians obviously!).

deeps said...

going by the book we are all holy n perfect...but..

sujata said...

Abuse in any form is exploiting the basic right to live and should be condemned. However, on the other hand, a burqa is just a way of dressing, I dont see the need to ban it, sati is a different matter altogether.

anilkurup said...

@ sujatha

Yes burqa is a dress. But what if one is forced to wear that and if one is physically abused if one refuses to wear? What if religious obscurantism is unleashed in the name of the dress?
And as with burqa there where Hindu widows voluntarily performing the act of Sati because they thought that was the dictum of the religious code and a form of reaffirming their religious identity.