The term "essential", as is being used in the context of the ongoing controversy in Karnataka, is, in fact, a (clever or innovative?) trick worked out by the Supreme Court.
The Indian Constitution lists certain "fundamental rights", which includes the right to practise religion. At times, this right comes in conflict with some other right(s). In the Constitution, there's no order of priority. So, in order to suppress some religious right(s) - considered unjust/irrational, in favour of some other right(s), that particular religious right(s) is adjudged "inessential" instead of irrational or unjust. (Such adverse judicial determination may raise doubts as regards the legitimacy of that religion itself. Hence, this "trick".) Hence, the rush to claim that hijab is "essential" (part of Islam) in order to obtain the protective cover of "freedom of religion". Now, hijab - regardless of its status in the Islamic scriptures, doesn't, apparently, harm anybody else; it's, in fact, a rather minor addition to one's dress. In the subject case, even the conflict with a specified dress code is also very minimal - it's decidedly less conspicuous than a turban and roughly at par with bindi, bangles and the likes. Hence, fairness demands that the bar for "essentiality" in this particular case should be set much lower. Accordingly, there is a very strong case in favour of individual choice as regards "essentiality". If an individual considers it as "essential" - obligatory under Islam, that should be duly respected. It's a fact of life, all over the globe - just not only in India, a huge of number of Muslim women - rightly or wrongly, wear hijab considering it as a mandatory religious requirement. Like Sikh turban, it's permitted in many non-Muslim countries as a part of various uniforms. It's not a case of some stray or wayward and whimsical individuals. The "essentiality" test must take that also into consideration. And, finally, a synonym for "religion" is "faith" and *not* "reason". That's the long and short of it. On top of that, the whole ongoing row is set in a certain context of which a few of the defining markers are: the demolition of the Babri Masjid; construction of a Ram Temple over its ruins overseen by the state itself and that too sanctified by the relevant Supreme Court order; ritualistic inauguration of the construction of the temple by the Prime Minister; a saffron robed functioning monk as the Chief Minister of the most populous state; Saraswati Puja in both government and non-government academic institutions a quite common occurrence; no problem with turban, bindi or cross; apart from lynchings and all that. This can hardly be lost sight of while objecting to hijab on the ground of transgression of prescribed dress code. This latest move is just yet another attack - to humiliate the Muslims, in an unending series. END May also look up: I. < https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/bangalore/karnataka-bengaluru-live-updates-hijab-row-college-protests-high-court-hearing-covid-7776019/ >. II. < https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/hijab-ban-karnataka-high-court-muslim-dress-code-head-scarf-islam-fundamental-right-erp-191915-192002-192089 >. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/greenyouth/CACEsOZgUjfYxrmNnSivhz21ryAO7kVo78ZOvH3MzF8wHiQvTEQ%40mail.gmail.com.
