Resolve Hijab Controversy by Enacting Uniform Civil Code
Hijab controversy is raging in
the country. Ideally, there should be no objection to what one wears if it does
not violate decency. Modern Muslim feminists like Wafa Sultan, Ayan Hirsi Ali
have, in fact, have been campaigning against those Islamic orthodoxies, which
are retrogressive, and they have said unequivocally in their books that any
type of veil is retrogressive, and they plead that earlier this practice is
eschewed by the Muslim women the better. However, presently society appears to
have got divided along religious lines. Even those, who have till
yesterday been opposing the dictates of Taliban for women to compulsorily wear
veils and not to venture out of their houses without the company of any male
member have come now out in support of the Hijab for women. Sudden change in
their attitudes may be intriguing but those who have closely watched them in
the last few years would never be surprised. Anyway, the matter is now
sub-judice and hopefully, the ruling of the High Court will settle this issue.
The moot question is whether
Hijab is an essential and integral part of the religion, or it is simply a
symbol of the distinct identity. There is no doubt that it is a new phenomenon
of asserting recognition. Earlier it was being worn by a few women, that too,
under the pressure of their menfolk. Men and women of different communities and
areas, of course, have been wearing such traditional clothes which could make
them different and distinct from the people of other places. Even the persons
belonging to the same religion have been wearing different types of dresses.
For example, the style of wearing a Dhoti by Brahmin differentiates from the
ways of wearing the same cloth from a Kshatriya or Vaishya or other castes. The
style of wearing a Lungi of a Panjabi is distinct from a Keralite. A Bengali’s
dhoti looks separate from a Rajasthani or UPian or Bihari. Thus, in a way the
trousers or pants have brought a welcome change among men and as it is a big
equaliser. Saris are also worn in different ways by women across the
country. A Bengali’s style is district from those of Marathi or other places.
But Burqa is a regimented dress, which has been imposed from abroad. It denies
any scope of diversity regardless of area or region.
In our university days, we have
seen Buddhist students coming from Thailand, Sri Lanka and Burma used to wear a
loose saffron robe or habit by which they could be easily recognised. But it
was meant only for monks and not for levity. Although some Muslim boys, not
all, have been wearing long Kurtas and short pyjamas, which gave them a
separate recognition. But this freedom has been available only after higher
secondary not before that level. The sight of a burqa-clad girl was not to be
found in any school, college, or university except in Madrassas. Burqa has been
considered to be a symbol of bondage and most of the educated girls have been
vociferously raising their voices to get rid of this bondage.
It is now clear that girls in
Karnataka and elsewhere have not taken this decision to wear Burqa or hijab on
their own. They m have reportedly been instigated or radicalised to take up
such a retrogressive step by the Campus Front of India an outfit of the
People’s Front of India, which has its roots in Kerala. Obviously, the Hindu boys
took the steps of wearing the saffron scarf in reaction, which also cannot be
endorsed. If they are studying in any Gurukul or Mutt, there is no bar on them
to wear saffron or any other prescribed clothes.
But look at the brazenness of
some people, who have been appreciating the insanity of a burqa-clad girl, who
was shouting an Islamic slogan before a crowd of scores of Hindu boys. Instead
of hauling up that cranky girl for her highly uncouth and ugly behaviour, there
are some who praise her dementia. Hindu boys should also have been scolded for
raising slogans in retaliation to Burqa.
At a time when the women are happily moving shoulder to shoulder with
men. Can they be caged with their clumsy dress like Burqa? After all, there has
to be some semblance of discipline about dress in certain fields and there
should be no exemption to that. For instance, if a Muslim woman is serving in
the police or military, can she be allowed to wear Burqa, even it is integral
to her religion? Similarly, A Muslim Advocate cannot claim to have the liberty
to wear Burqa in the Courtroom in the name of her religious identity. The same
is the case if a particular attire is prescribed in any company or institution,
the same cannot be allowed to be diluted. How can these Muslim girl
children be permitted to wear Burqa in a school, which has a prescribed dress
code?
However, let it be hastened to say that where there is no dress code,
there should be complete freedom to wear anything of his/her choice subject to
decency and decorum. Like no one can insist on entering a temple, a mosque or a
Gurdwara with their shoes on in the name of the fundamental rights. In some of
the temples men are allowed to enter only with bare chests and dhotis and in
Gurudawaras one can enter only after covering the head. But then it is a dress
code, and nobody can be allowed to defy it in the name of individual freedom.
In the same way, the food habits differ from place to place and person to
person and no one can claim to have the liberty of eating any and everything
without having regard to the sentiments of persons and the place.
Hopefully, the responsible persons of the society of different religions
will rise to the occasion to maintain peace and cordiality. Most of such
problems and difficulties can be got over by enacting the Common Civil Code for
the entire citizenry.
Comments