Asghar Ali Engineer is someone whom I greatly respect. He is a brave man and a learned man; a man not just of words, but also of action. It is therefore with much humility and sincerity that I beg to differ with him in the matter of Taslima Nasreen. His long piece, entitled "Reform and Social Context," appeared here in Spotlight (Chicago) of 15 July 1994./1/ (Since the weekly does not indicate its sources I don't know where the article originally appeared.)

Mr. Engineer's position is that Taslima Nasreen is "the darling of the press," and "a woman in a hurry, both to acquire publicity and to establish sexual equality." He accuses her of only condemning religion while ignoring the reality of present "social context," and being of the same ilk as Salman Rushdie and others: "thoroughly westernized and cut ... adrift from their own roots." "They talk like aliens," he charges, "and needlessly provoke their fellow religionists." These are strong accusations, but also unfair.

The first time I became aware of Dr. Nasreen's existence was on 6 October 1993. The Times of India had a short item about her. It said that she had written a novel criticising the Muslim fanaticism in Bangladesh that caused substantial loss of Hindu life and property after the destruction of the Babri Mosque in India. It further reported that several Muslim religious leaders were angry at her and that one of them, Maulana Habibur Rahman, had issued a fatwa that she should be killed. Clearly, if anyone was in a hurry, it was the Maulana.

As the story developed and people became more curious about her, it came out that she was not just a novelist. She had been writing essays and columns and was fairly well-known for her trenchant comments, but her reputation as a novelist was meagre compared to that as a social commentator. More important, in my view, was the fact that her novel Lajja was consistent with what she had been saying all the time. In other words, she had not put on some special act when she wrote her short novel.

But even if she had, what of it? Were there not attacks on Hindu lives and property in Bangladesh? Do two wrongs make one right? Personally, as a Muslim, I felt proud of the fact that she had the courage to describe the pain of her non-Muslim brethren. Just as I was proud -- as a former Indian -- that an Indian Hindu, Vibhuti Narain Rai, had the courage to write a short novel, Shahr mein Karfiu, about the plight of riot-stricken Muslims in Allahabad./2/ So far, no Hindu organisation has asked for his head on a platter. And that deserves to be noted. Yes, it is true that Islam is not any less tolerant than other religions, but it is also true that presently a lot of Muslims seem to have become more intolerant, or at least the more intolerant among them are getting a dominant hand in many so-called Muslim countries. It seems that is the "social context" that Dr. Nasreen has had very much in mind. As has Mr. Engineer, for that matter -- in other writings.

Taking up the issue of "sexual equality," Mr. Engineer uses the example of Islam to make his point that "even if a religion preaches sexual equality, it is quite naive to believe that sexual equality will be established." I must quote his entire paragraph:

Islam normatively accorded equality to both the sexes. There is a clearly worded verse in the Koran (33:35) which strongly and unambiguously advocates sexual equality. However, it made concession to the then prevailing context and accepted slight male superiority. When a woman complained to the Prophet that her husband had unjustly slapped her, the Prophet advised her to retaliate (iqtasi). The women of Madina were jubilant. But this was short-lived as the men protested to the Prophet and Allah had to make a concession to the men as they were the earning members of the then society and women and children were dependent on them (see the Koran 4:34). Thus the social context has to be taken into account for legislation.

Mr. Engineer believes the word of The Statesman's correspondent despite the denial issued by Dr. Nasreen. That's his privilege. Perhaps he has never been misquoted in the press. But when a matter concerns something that touches on faith, I'm more willing to believe the accused. Mr. Engineer also accuses her of seeking publicity. But she only gave interviews when the reporters came to her, and the reporters went to her only because a Maulana issued a fatwa against her and demanded her death. (Now he denies that he offered a prize.) But he is not accused of seeking publicity!

Yes, there are contexts within which this entire matter must be placed to get a better sense of it: (1) The fatwa against Salman Rushdie which no "Muslim" country or Muslim religious institution seriously challenged, not even to the extent of asking for a trial of some kind before passing a judgment of such nature. (2) The attacks, verbal, physical, even fatal, on any number of writers and journalists in "Muslim" countries, including Egypt, Turkey, Algeria, Sudan, and Pakistan. (Remember, in Pakistan, Akhtar Hameed Khan, a true man of social action, has also been accused of blasphemy, and in India, Professor Mushirul Hasan was bloodied and has not been allowed to work for only questioning the ban on Rushdie's book.) (3) The campaign being waged by the mullas of Bangladesh against various NGOs involved in developmental work. (4) The rise and rehabilitation of the Jama'at-e-Islami in Bangladesh and their increasing attacks on supporters of secular polity. Rather than getting upset about what we assume to be Dr. Nasreen'smotives, we should give some sober thought to the ambitions of her detractors.

N O T E S

/*/ Originally published in Mainstream, Bombay, 17 September 1994.
/1/ For Asghar Ali Engineer's article, see Appendix 2.
/2/ The Hindi novel is now available in English translation. V. N. Rai, Curfew in the City, translated by C. M. Naim, New Delhi: Roli Books, 1998.