With several incidents of prohibiting Muslim women from entering colleges in Karnataka and other states of India by Hindu right wing college authorities and their colleagues, public arena as well as social media is rife with various sorts of debates by liberal Muslims as well as Mu’mins (Steadfast Muslims) on Hijab. Many have extended support resorting to liberal ideologies by claiming Hijab or the modest clothes prescribed in Islam is an individual ‘choice’ or fundamental ‘right’ in accordance with Indian constitution. The problem with this line of argument is that it is placing the burden of defending the constitution which is inherently biased against Muslims as argued by the now jailed Research scholar and activist Sharjeel Imam. Moreover, such a stance further constricts a global phenomenon of Islamophobia and legal ban on fundamental Islamic practices across the world within the limits of nation-states, hence facilitating Islamophobic Indian liberals and government officials to wade off any foreign criticisms as an ‘internal matter of India’. Given the Indian states lack of appetite towards anything they deem to be tarnishing the image of the country, this trope will continue to be their main weapon of defense against any international outcry.

Different foe

Although oppression faced by Indian Muslims is not a post 2014 phenomenon, what has changed is the strategy of the oppressor. In the previous decades since independence, when numerous anti-Muslim riots and pogroms where organized and engineered by the centrist Nationalist party Congress and its allies, today what the right-wing Nationalist groups are engaged is in the advanced stage of this oppression which they commit with complete impunity and without concealing their Islamophobia and hate towards Muslims.

Muslim men and women are attacked and dehumanized by Hindu right wing who have major objections to the principles of Constitution. The ruling BJP and other right-wing groups have made their disregard to the constitution very clear and are also actively engaged in legislating laws contrary to the principles enshrined in the constitution at various instances. The BJP government had also legislated several acts including the Citizenship Amendment Act that particularly targets Muslims in the country, laws which are clearly formulated to strip the citizenship of only Muslims. We are thus fighting against a majority group and ideology that is opposed to a large extend to the idea of India envisioned by the centrist nationalist parties post independence. Muslims should comprehend this change in nature of our foe and organise our resistance strategy accordingly different from that used to counter left-liberal onslaught. Given the fact that BJP and its political allies comprises a large majority in the legislative assembly, it is very easy for them to negate the constitutionally guaranteed ‘rights’ of Muslims and other minorities with utmost ease, and global and internal circumstances are moving in a very favourable direction for Hindu Rashtra.

It is also important to realise that the centrist and left leaning liberals are no longer in the positions of power and authority and hence their opinions which they blare out in social media, does not deserve a constructive engagement. it should not be used more than to expose their Islamophobia and their congruence with the right wing ideology. Over the past few years, people who were considered centrist or left liberals have switched their ideology to the right in-order to gain acceptability with the power holders or simply have revealed their true colours under the Hindutva regime. Centrist and Left-wing liberals are a miniscule minority in the country today, unable to influence the policy or decision making in the government. For Muslims, this is a progress in the right direction, for it is better to have a visible foe who are honest in their hate against Islam and Muslims. After all the worst of enemies are the double dealers or those who deceive us with their flattering words, hiding their hatred towards Islam.

Interfering with the Fundamentals of Islam

Unlike the centrists and leftists who could effectively curb or propagate against outright Islamic practices under the garb of secularism, the current right-wing government which does not adhere to the version of secularism propounded by their predecessors, cannot largely employ this strategy while legislating laws against Muslims. This is the reason why their line of argument is to justify their Anti-Muslim actions by misinterpreting Qur’an. This is a significant change which we should notice. We saw these at the time of Babri Masjid verdict when the debates in the courts were whether a masjid is important aspect of Islam or not. Same rhetoric was used recently for the Hijab ban in educational institutions across Karnataka. Right wing intellectuals and prominent personalities, not to speak of liberal Muslims who rightly qualify as Munafiqoun (hypocrites) propped up by the Government were busy debating if Hijab was religious mandate mentioned in Qur’an with the formers giving the answers in the negative. Although the absurdity of calling those who have no credibility to speak on the matter is clear, it is an attempt to ‘control’ and manipulate Islam in order to tame and fit it within Indian nationalism that is de facto Hindutva. Those liberal ‘Muslims’ who are being used as pawns by the government have also completely shifted their arguments in favour of government without any reference to the ‘fundamental rights’ of citizens ( Muslims) given in the constitution. Although it can be argued that this is reflective of the dehumanization and otherization of Muslims in India under Hindutva, more than that, this signifies the attitude of the government towards the constitution itself. It is also a great opportunity to untie ourselves from the bondage of explaining our right to ‘exist’ through the language of constitution.

What has to be highlighted is that, the disregard and sideling of the constitution is actually carried on by the judiciary. While upholding the ban on broadcast license on MediaoneTV imposed by the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, and dismissing the petition filed by Madhyamam Broadcasting company for MediaOneTV- (a leading Malayalam news channel noticed for its unwavering coverage of Anti-Muslim pogromes and criticism of Hindutva) on account of ‘National security’, Kerala high court judge Justice N. Nagaresh in the 42-page report quoted Artrisamhita, which is an ancient Hindu Text written in the period of Rigveda to justify its verdict. Explaining the responsibility of a state as mentioned in the text, a four-line Sloka is added into the report. Aside from the absolutely farcical excuse of ‘National security’ which the government has refused to inform the petitioner and handing it over in a sealed letter to the court citing exposing it will in fact be threat to National security, the reliance on Hindu scriptures for passing a verdict is a post-liberal phenomenon.

Hijab- Not a choice, but Submission to Allah

This asserts the need for Muslims to address our oppression (Fitnah) and ongoing dehumanization in Islamic perspective rather than in the jargons of Centre-left liberals which yield no solution to our existential threat and render us hypocrites. Since the courts are going to such an extend to question if everything written in Qur’an is an essential practice for Muslims,[i] we need to focus on the studies of Qur’an along with understanding the ideologies used by liberals of all spectrum to rationalise our dehumanization and persecution. Although out rightly, we seems to think that Hindutva is not a secular ideology, it is important to be educated that they only have objections with left-liberals in the interpretation of secularism. The time is ripe for true believers to engage with all discourses in light of the holy Qur’an and Islamic sciences. To cite an example, appropriation of Hijab as a ‘choice’ might be right from a liberal perspective, but it is antithetical to the fundamentals of Islamic philosophy.

Humans are one of the species instilled with choice to believe in the messengers sent by Allah and to abide by the revealed knowledge with different recompense for the ‘choice’ they make in this life as well as in the life after. However, once a person have believed and become Muslim- i.e, to submit to the will of Allah, then there’s no choice but to follow the commandments of Allah and the final messenger Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.s). One can’t exercise ‘freedom of choice’ and disobey Almighty and his Messenger without negative consequences in this life or the next. Allah clearly states this in Qur’an Surah Ahzab:

“It does not behove a believer, male or female, that when Allah and his Messenger have decided an affair, they should exercise their choice. And who ever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has strayed to manifest error”.

33:36

This verse was revealed for facilitating the marriage between a girl named Zainab, who was one of the relative of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.s) from Quraysh tribe and prophet’s foster child Zaid. However, despite it being revealed for a special occasion, Islamic scholar Abul A’la Maududi explains the injunction given in it as the cardinal principle of the constitutional law of Islam, which applies to the entire Islamic system of life. No Muslim individual or nation or constitution, or court or parliament or state, is entitled to use its own freedom of opinion in a matter in which Allah and his Prophet (s.a.w.s) has already given a decision.[ii] The one who desires to remain a Muslim will inevitably have to bow to the command of Allah and his Prophet (s.a.w.s), and the one who is not inclined to bow will have to admit that he is not a Muslim. If he does not admit, then he is regarded as a hypocrite or Munafiqoon using the vocabulary of Qur’an.[iii]  After stating clearly the above-mentioned verse on ‘choice’, in the following verses there are a list of commandments and injunctions among which one is on Hijab. Allah commands, O Prophet, enjoin your wives and your daughters and the believing women, to draw a part of their outer coverings around them.” Without stopping it at that, the rationale of it is also given next, “it is so that they will be recognized and not molested.” Here by recognition, it is implied that they will be recognized as modest, chaste and believing women among the disbelieving women who does not observe hijab.

The other chapter that gives the injunction on Modest clothing and Hijab is Surah An-Noor. It begins with the verses stating:

“This is a Surah which we have revealed, and which we have made obligatory; we have revealed in it clear instructions so that you may take heed”

24:1

Further in verse 31, it is admonished accordingly;

“And enjoin believing women…. to not reveal their adornment except that which is revealed of itself, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornments save to their husbands, or their fathers, or the fathers of their husbands, or of their own sons, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sisters, or the women with whom they associate, or those that are in their bondage, or the male attendants in their service free of sexual interest, or boys that are yet unaware of illicit matters pertaining to women”.

Hence beyond the need for any further clarity, emphasis is also for Hijab as an identity of Muslim women to differentiate her from the disbelieving women. By obeying to this command of Allah, a Muslim women who observes hijab is also submitting to the will of Allah and his messenger, implying hijab is a symbol of submission.

[i] While hearing the petition on the demand to wear hijab to educational institutions, Karnataka high court poised this question.

[ii]  Abul A’la Maududi, Thafheemul Qur’an, explanation of verse 36 of surah Ahzab.

[iii] Ibid.