THE PAST IS NOT ANOTHER COUNTRY
Taslima
Nasrin
Growing Up
I
was born in 1962 in a small town called Mymensingh in what then was
My
childhood was not much different from that of other girls of my generation. I
was sent to a school like other girls. Girls typically attended school, but
they frequently dropped out when they were fifteen or sixteen, ages at which
they often were given into marriage by their parents. Few girls had a chance to
continue their studies, for after an arranged marriage they were not allowed to
continue studying nor could they take a job. They became totally dependent upon
their husbands. I observed that all
girls or women had to have male masters. When they are young, the father is
their guardian, after marriage it is their husband, and during old age it is their son.
It
was usual for us children to read the Qur’an in Arabic early in the morning, and like all other children in
When
I was thirteen years old, I found a book that translated the Qur’an into
Bengali. To my surprise, I found Allah saying that men are superior to women. Men could have up to four wives. Men could divorce their wives any time they want. Men
are allowed to beat women. Women are not allowed to give testimony in some
legal cases. Women are not allowed to inherit the property of their father
equally with their brothers. I was definitely in shock to discover such
injustices and inequalities in a holy book.
I
realized that Islam does not consider woman full human being. Man was the original creation and
womankind was created secondarily for the pleasure of man. Islam considers woman nothing
more than slaves or sexual object. The woman’s role is to stay at home and to obey
her husband, for this is her religious duty. Women are considered weak, so they
should be taken care of, their body and mind, their desire and wishes, their
rights and freedom must be controlled by men. Islam treats women as being
intellectually, morally, and physically inferior. In marriage, Islam protects
the rights of men and men only. The Qu’ran gave total freedom to men saying,
"Your women are as your field, go unto them as you will.” (2.223)
And Allah says very clearly that men have authority over women: "Men
have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other
and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient.
They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from
whom you fear disobedience, admonish them, forsake them in beds apart, and beat
them. Then, if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surely Allah
is all-knowing and wise.” (4.34)
Women
are ordered by Allah to run to their husbands wherever they are, whatever they
do. The Hadith says that two prayers that never reach the heavens are (1) those
of the escaping slaves and (2) those of the reluctant woman who frustrates her
husband at night.
Islam
considers women psychologically inferior. Women’s testimony is not allowed in
cases of marriage, divorce, and Hudud. Hudud are the punishments of Islamic law
for adultery, fornication, adultery against a married person, apostasy, theft,
robbery, and so forth. If any woman is raped, she has to produce four male
witnesses to the court. If she cannot, there is no charge against the rapist.
In Islamic law, the testimony of two women is worth that of one man. In any
case in which a man suspects his wife of adultery or denies the legitimacy of
the offspring, his testimony is worth that of four witnesses. A woman does not have
the right to charge her husband in a similar manner.
Women are not allowed to inherit the
property equally with their brothers. In the case of inheritance, Allah says,
"A male shall inherit twice as much as a female.” (4.11-12)
And
after all the rights and freedom, after getting all the sexual pleasure and
pleasure of being the master, Allah will reward the men with wine, food, and
seventy-two virgins in Paradise, including their wives of the earth. Allah
said, "They relax on luxurious furnishings, and we match them with
beautiful virgins.” (52.19-20). "Near them, shall be blushing virgins with
large beautiful eyes who will be like hidden pearls.” ( 37.48-49) And what is the reward for the pious
woman? Nothing but the very husband that
caused her suffering throughout her life
on earth.
I
was a student of science, so it was hard to accept that the sun moves around
the earth, that the moon has its own light, and that the purpose of mountains
is to support the earth so it will not fall down somewhere (31.10, 41.10). I
came to suspect that the Qur’an was not written by Allah but, rather, by a
selfish greedy man who wanted only his own comfort. Then I read the Hadith, the
words of Muhammad. I found different events of Prophet Muhammad’s life in which,
when he had problems, Allah solved them immediately. For example, when he was sexually aroused by seeing his
daughter-in-law, Allah sent him a
message saying he could marry her because his son Zaid was adopted. Since Zaid was not his real son, so the marriage was therefore
justified. Further, he created a new rule, that Muslims would not be allowed to
adopt any child.
I was so shocked to see that Allah, who is
considered the judge of everything, gave Muhammad a blank cheque saying, "Prophet,
we have made lawful for you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the
slave-girls whom Allah has given you as booty, the daughters of your paternal
and maternal uncles and of your paternal and maternal aunts who fled with you,
and any believing woman who gives herself to the prophet and whom the prophet
wishes to take in marriage. This privilege is yours alone, being granted to no
other believer." (33.50)
Muhammad
married thirteen times, one of his brides being six-year-old Ayesha. Allah, he
said, told him that he was allowed to enjoy his wives, his female slaves, and
all the the captive women he had. He put his beautiful young wife Ayesha behind
the curtain because he did not want his friends looking admiringly at her.
Allah, he said, told his friends that they should not go to the Prophet’s house
any time they want but if they go, they should not look at any of his wives or
ask any of them for something. He was so jealous that he introduced the veil
for his wives and, ultimately, for all Muslim women.
To
support Muhammad, the Qu’ran, the holy book says, “O wives of the prophet,
you are not the same as other women, if you keep your duty, you shall not speak
too softly, lest he whose heart is a disease aspire to you, but utter customary
speech.” (33.32). “You shall settle down in your homes and not mingle with the
people excessively, the way you used to do in the old days of ignorance. You
shall observe prayers, and give the obligatory charity, and obey Allah and his
messenger. Allah wishes to remove unholiness from you.” (33.33)
And Allah asked
the friends of Muhammad, "O you who believe, do not enter the
prophets’ homes unless you are given permission to eat, nor shall you force
such an invitation in any manner. If you are invited, you may enter. When you
finish eating, you shall leave, do not engage him in lengthy conversations.
This used to hurt the prophet, and he was too shy to tell you. But Allah does
not shy away from the truth. If you have to ask his wives for something, ask
them from behind a curtain. This is purer for your hearts and their hearts. You
are not to hurt the messenger of Allah. You shall not marry his wives after
him, for this would be gross offence in the sight of Allah.” (33.53)
Even
though widow-marriage was legal, Muhammad made his wives illegal to be married
even after his death.
Allah is also concerned about the veil,
saying in the Qu’ran, “O prophet, tell your wives and daughters and the
women of other believers that they shall lengthen their clothes. Thus, they
will be recognized (as righteous women) and not annoyed.” (33.59)
So,
women have to cover themselves from head
to toe because otherwise men might see them and start having sexual urges. In
numerous hadiths, which are based on the Islamic laws, I have found that the
woman’s role is to stay at home and to obey her husband, for this is her
religious duty. "The women who die and with whom the husband is
satisfied will go to heaven. A wife should never refuse herself to her husband’s call for sex even if it is on the saddle of a camel or she
is on the top of the burning oven."
A hadith
collected by Bukhari quotes Muhammad as saying, on the occasion of his
night trip for
the heavenly summit, that he had noticed that Hell was populated above all by women,
and he confessed in the same vein according to a different hadith that "if
it had been given to me to order someone to be submissive to someone other than
Allah, I would certainly have ordered women to be submissive to their husbands,
so great are a husband’s rights over his wife."
Inasmuch as most of these traditions are
invented, what matters here is not whether these words were actually spoken by
the prophet. What matters is that they are believed to have been spoken and so
are part of Islamic culture.
Omar, the second Islamic Caliph, said, "Prevent the women from learning
to write, say no to their capricious ways." Ali, the fourth Caliph, said, "Woman
is an evil and what is worse is that it is a necessary evil."
There are still more bits of advice about
how to be a good Muslim. For example:
1. You should never ask a woman her advice because her advice is worthless.
Hide them so that they cannot see other men! Do not spend too much time in
their company for they will lead you to your downfall.
2. Men, never ever obey your women. Never let them advise you on any matter
concerning your daily life. If you let them advise you they will squander all
your possessions and disobey all your orders and desires. When alone they
forget religion and think only of themselves, and as soon as it concerns their
carnal desires they are without pity or virtue. It is easy to get pleasure from
them but they give you big headaches too.
After I read what was written about the women in the Qu’ran, it
became clear to me that the Qu’ran was not written by Allah, but rather that
some selfish greedy man had written the Qu’ran for his own self-interest. So I stopped believing in Islam. I threw off the
veil, the sign of oppression, which my mother wanted me to wear. I tried to
convince other women not to wear the veil and to read the Qu’ran in order to
understand its stated meaning, so that they could understand that Islam is
patriarchal and oppresses women. There is no way to attain freedom
and the right to live as human beings
other than to cross the barrier of religion and patriarchy. When I studied
other religions, I found that they also oppressed women. All religions are
oppressive to women. Women are oppressed
not only by religion, by traditions, and by customs but also by cultures too.
All religions were created by men for their own interest, for their own
comfort, for their own fun. Women have no significant role in any of the major
world religion. Gradually, however, secularism has been bringing changes, but Islam
still remains in the dark. I believe that education is a candle in the dark. A
secular education is important – no, it is a requirement - for changing
society. It is important for the peaceful evolving of what a society is and should be. It is imperative that
children receive a secular education. All the children of this Earth deserve to
learn about all the religions, but they also deserve the right of freedom from
religion, to learn about the alternatives of atheism and humanism or just plain
ethical living. If children are taught humanistically, society will evolve in a
progressive, positive way. If women have any wish to live with dignity and
honor, the traditional family structure absolutely has to change. The new
society I envision is one in which love,
not religion and patriarchy, rules.
As
I grew up, I kept observing the condition of women in our society. My mother,
for example, was a perfect example of a woman oppressed. She had been given into marriage when she was but a
child. Although she excelled as a student in school, but she was not allowed to
continue her studies. My grandfather and my father did not want her to study,
for what they wanted was for her to be a good housewife, a good mother, a good
caretaker. My father, a physician, had a scientific outlook but was very
domineering. He did not allow me the freedom to play, to go outside, to meet
friends, to go to the cinema or theatre, or to read any book that was not in a
syllabus. He wanted me to earn a medical degree so he could say that one of his
children followed his path. On the one hand, he wanted me to be independent,
but on the other hand he wanted to find a good match for me inasmuch as
educated men often desire an educated wife. In our house, I grew up with much
fear, having to keep inside my heart all my desire for freedom and curiosity
for the outside world. I was not allowed to step outside the house except to go
to my school. As a result, I developed a passion for reading practically
anything I could get my hands on, including:
books, fiction, poetry, essays. And I had another passion: to write
poetry.
Growing
up, I naturally had the belief that girls surely must be inferior to boys, for
boys could play in a big field whereas girls had to play with their dolls in a
corner of the house. My brothers were free to go anywhere they wanted, and could watch any
games, could play anything they wanted to play. I could not. My sister could
not. I was told that girls were not made for such, that their role was to stay
home, learn how to cook, make beds, and clean the house. My mother was not the
only woman who was oppressed, for I saw my aunts, my female neighbors, and
other female acquaintances who were playing the same roles, that of being
oppressed. In our minds, torture of women was not oppression but, rather, was
tradition. We become accustomed to tradition. As I grew, I realized that I was
a part of the tradition but also that I was being oppressed the same as other
women. I realized that whether women are poor or rich, beautiful or ugly, have
blue or black or brown eyes, have white, black or brown skin, are unmarried or
married, illiterate or literate, clever or stupid, all are oppressed.
Everywhere women are oppressed. And all because of male-devised patriarchy,
religion, tradition, culture, and customs.
Rising Islamic Fundamentalism in the
1990’s
A Chronology of
Relevant Events
1947
1952 A language movement started in
1969 An uprising occurred against
the
1971 War began between West and
1975 Sheik Mujibur Rahman, the Prime
Minister of Bangladesh was killed in a
military coup. The military, using their power, legitimized their power by
using religion.
1984 The secular Bangladesh
Constitution was changed. The Jamat e Islami, which collaborated with the
Pakistani Army during the war of 1971, got the license to be political, based
on religion – this had been banned following independence.
1988 Islam was introduced as the
state religion. Hindus, Christians, and Buddhists automatically became
second-class citizens.
1990 Muslim fundamentalists began
attacking Hindus in
1992 After the Babri Mosque was
demolished by Hindu fundamentalists in
1990s Islamic fundamentalist gained
strength because of
Humankind is facing an uncertain
future. The probability of new kinds of rivalry and conflict loom large - in
particular, the conflict between two different ideas: secularism and
fundamentalism. I do not agree with those who think that the conflict is simply
between two religions - namely, Christianity and Islam. After all, there are
fundamentalists in every religious community. Likewise, I do not agree with
those people who think that the crusades of the Middle Ages are going to be
repeated soon. Nor do I think that this is a conflict between East and West. To
me, this conflict is basically between irrational blind faith and the modern
rational, logical mind. To me, this is a conflict between modernity and
anti-modernism. While some people want to go forward, others are trying to go
back. It is a conflict between the future and the past, between innovation and
tradition, between those who value freedom and those who do not.
The
basic argument of the fundamentalists is this: the idea of secularism is
Western in origin. The imperialistic West sold its idea of secularism to the
nationalist leaders of the newly independent states so that the West could
dominate the indigenous culture and religion by proxy. After the breakup of the
In
True,
the imperialist West did not establish and rule over its colonies by peaceful
means. It did not colonize the countries with idealism, enlightenment, and
democratic values. So when the fundamentalists argue that they are paying back
their old adversaries in the same coin, they may find some sympathetic
listeners even in the West. But, and it is incontrovertible, the fight is not
between the former colonial powers and newly independent nations. The war is
between two ideas of our time: secularism vs. fundamentalism. So the doctrine
of "life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth . . . burning for burning,
wound for wound" is totally irrelevant here. The fundamentalists want to
replace democracy with theocracy and to impose old theocratic laws instead of
modern secular laws on the members of their own society, not on other distant
powerful states that they consider their enemies. Though it has a global
dimension, Islamic fundamentalism is also a local phenomenon. In reality, there
is no such thing as an "Islamic front" embracing all the states of
the world that have a Muslim majority. It has been proved time and again that
pan-Islam is just an aspiration. There is no end of fighting between different
Muslim states. The war between
All the various Islamic groups are
actually artificially constituted by the rulers of different countries to
buttress their own position. Often, these groups are initiated by despotic
rulers who use Islam to perpetuate their despotic rule. For example, my country
of
In
Women’s
suffering is increasing at an alarmingly rate because of the rise of
fundamentalism. The panic is felt in the villages where women are sometimes
stoned to death, the girls' schools are shut down and burnt by the
fundamentalists, and girls are not allowed to study. Female workers are forced
to quit their jobs – otherwise, they are rejected by the society or their
husbands and are forced to divorce them. Writers and intellectuals at one time
wrote against the fundamentalists. I did, also. In addition, I wrote something
that others failed to write: I wrote that the root of fundamentalism is
religion itself. So long as religion remains, fundamentalism will remain. To
remove fundamentalism we have to replace religion with something rational.
First, I empahasized that the state should be separate from religion. In my
poetry, fiction, and non-fiction as well as in newspaper columns, I tried to
make people understand that religion in no way gives freedom or equality or
justice.
The fundamentalists talk about morality,
alleging that being religious guarantees that people will be good, will be
moral. I certainly believe in morality, for certain, but my belief is not
religion-based. My belief was, like that of the ancient Indian philosophy, of
not doing anything to others that you don’t want done to you. That was all, and
that was enough. Such an outlook became part of my conscience, and it made me
an honest person. The biggest tragedy of mankind is that morality is hijacked by religion. Actually,
morality has nothing to do with religion.
The fundamentalists became angry upon hearing
my views. They got furious when I said, Let the pavilions of religion be
ground to bits, let the bricks of temples, mosques, churches be burned in blind
fire, and upon those heaps of destruction let lovely flower gardens grow,
spreading their fragrance. Let children’s schools and study halls grow. For the
welfare of humanity, let prayer halls be turned into hospitals, orphanages,
schools, universities. Let prayer halls become academies of art, fine arts
centers, scientific research institutes. Let prayer halls be turned to golden
rice fields in the radiant dawn, open fields, rivers, restless seas. From now
on let religion’s other name be humanity.
Protest
Nobody told me to protest, but I
naturally developed a strong feeling that it was important to fight oppression.
Nobody asked me to shed a tear, but I did. I started writing against oppression
of women. I found my protests got the attention of readers and that people
either hated me or they loved me.
However, those who hated what I wrote organized
demonstrations against me, and people
began protesting by marching through the streets of
I continued writing. I continued
defending women. I demanded loudly for
equality and justice, justice for all people whatever their religion or gender.
I spoke loudly in defense of secularism.
I spoke against any religious laws in which women are oppressed. Women continue
to be flogged, stoned to death, raped. Even more alarming is the fact that
women are blamed for their own rape, while they rapists go free. Women have
been suffering from trafficking, from slavery, from all sorts of
discrimination. Men have thrown acid on women’s faces and walked away as happy
men. Women are not considered as human beings, not by religion, not by
so-called tradition. For a couple, the most unwanted thing is a female baby. If
a female baby is born, either the wife gets a divorce for her crime of having
given birth of a female, or the wife must spend her life with disgrace. By writing books, I wanted to do something
constructive, I wanted to help women understand that they are oppressed but do
not need to be. I wanted to encourage them to fight for their rights and
freedom. I wanted to make women realize the conspiracy of state, society and
religion to prevent women from living like human beings. My voice, however, gave
women the chance to think differently. Some things started to change. Some
girls, who had to quit their study, started studying again. The battered and
oppressed wives started raising their voices and said NO MORE.
That, however, did not make the
religionists or the male chauvinists happy. As a result, the fundamentalists
took the stand of absolutely not tolerating any of my views. They
objected to women breaking their
oppressive chains and becoming free, and
they could not tolerate my saying that the Qu’ran is out of place, out of time,
and that secular law with a uniform civil code for women is a necessity. Extremists
broke into newspaper offices, sued my editors, publishers, and me. They
demanded my execution by hanging. Hundreds of thousands of angry people
demonstrated on the street. They called general strikes all over the country
for months and months, insisting that I be killed. After the demolition of Babri Mosque in
I defended the oppressed, the poor, the
women, and the various ethnic and religious minorities. For the sake of humanity,
I have endeavored to stand beside them.
The Fundamentalists' Movement:
1. Smash Taslima Committee 1992
In 1992, a Smash Taslima Committee was
established. Their intent was that, wherever they found me, they would smash
me. Male students of universities with right-wing and conservative ideas led
the movement. They marched in the book fair with a banner proclaiming that I was
damaging society, that I was making girls and women into filthy people, and that
therefore I should be smashed. They burned my books in the middle of the
national book fair as well as threatened the bookshops if they did not remove
my books. Fortunately, a book fair committee rescued me, and I was sent home by
the police. Because of the ongoing protests, the book fair group became intimidated
and it became too dangerous for me to attend the book fair. I was blacklisted,
unable to visit my favorite place, the book fair.
The reasons for the oppositions to my
writings included that I had written on
behalf of women's rights, that women should not shut their mouths, they should
swim if they liked to swim, they should go out of the house if they liked to,
they should break their chains and make themselves free. Also, they should not
fall into the negativistic male views concerning virginity, chastity, and
motherhood. Females, in short, should have the right to enjoy life. It was such
a rational thing that I wrote about!
In traditional societies, a long legacy
has existed of men controlling the
bodies and minds of women. Such societies have valorized motherhood and
fabricated concepts like chastity. For thousands of years, women have been the
victims of such notions. Men are allowed to have multiple relationships and
affairs and to talk about them, but if a woman writes about love and her
sexuality, she is immediately defiled and called treacherous as well as
abominable. In times of darkness, the female who speaks out against patriarchy,
speaks for emancipation, and tries to break free from her chains is called a
"fallen woman." In one of the prefaces to my book, A Fallen
Woman's Fallen Prose, I wrote about how delighted I was to call myself a
fallen woman. I knew I would be called a whore, but I believe that in this
world, for a woman to be pure and to be true to herself, she must become a
fallen woman. Only then, when called a "whore," can she know that she
is free form the coils of society's dictates. The "fallen" woman
actually is a pure and pristine human being. I truly believe that if a woman
wants to earn her freedom and be a human, she has to be willing to earn the
label that is unreasonably uttered by a fallen, degenerate society. She will
then be accorded the honor of being free.
2. The Physical Attack on Me at the
National Book Fair, February 1993
At the National Book Fair, February 1993,
I was physically attacked by the fundamentalists. Even though I was not
supposed to go to the book fair any more, as per last year's warning, I went.
At the book stall where I sat and signed autographs, I noticed that suddenly I
was being surrounded by hundreds of men who began throwing stones at me and
shouting abuse. They broke lights bulbs, made the stall dark, and pushed hard
to come inside the stall. Clearly, they intended to kill me. Fortunately, the
people who worked at the book stall and the police saved my life. The book fair
committee warned me to never again return to the book fair.
After a few months, the Government on
3. Books and Articles Written Against Me
Daily, I found articles In their newspapers written by the
fundamentalists against me. In a several
different ways, they tried to prove that
I was an immoral writer and a poor role model. The fundamentalists insisted
that I was no more than an apostate, and that I should be dumped or
killed. Numerous books and articles were written to tell just how bad, how nasty, how idiotic, how
cunning, how filthy, how atheistic I am. How Taslima Should be Punished by
Islamic Rule was one, on the back cover of which was the verse of the
Qur'an to the effect that if anyone rejected Islam that person's right hand and
left leg should be cut off, and then the left hand and the right leg should
also be cut off. My crime was extreme because I was born into a Muslim family,
was considered Muslim, rejected Islam, and I was therefore murtad. The
following punishments from the Qur'an they suggested for me.
Apostasy
in Islam is punishable by death:
Make no excuse; you have
disbelieved after you had believed. If we pardon some of you, we will punish
others amongst you because they were criminals. [Qur'an 9:66]
Verily, those
who disbelieved after their belief and then went on increasing in their
disbelief - never will their repentance be accepted [because they repent only
by their tongues and not from their hearts]. And they are those who are astray.
Verily, those who disbelieved, and died while they were disbelievers, the
(whole) earth full of gold will not be accepted from anyone of them even if
they offered it as a ransom. For them is a painful torment and they will have
no helpers. [Qur'an 3:90-91]
O you who
believe! Whoever from among you turns back from his religion, Allah will bring
a people whom He will love and they will love Him; humble towards the
believers, stern towards the disbelievers, fighting in the Way of Allah, and
never afraid of the blame of the blamers. That is the Grace of Allah which He
bestows on whom He wills. And Allah is All-Sufficient for His creatures' needs,
All-Knower. [Qu'ran 5:54]
O Prophet
(Muhammad)! Strive hard against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be
harsh against them, their abode is Hell, - and worst indeed is that
destination. They swear by Allah that they said nothing (bad), but really they
said the word of disbelief, and they disbelieved after accepting Islam, and
they resolved that which they were unable to carry out, and they could not find
any cause to do so except that Allah and His Messenger had enriched them of His
Bounty. If then they repent, it will be better for them, but if they turn away,
Allah will punish them with a painful torment in this worldly life and in the
Hereafter. And there is none for them on earth as a Walî (supporter, protector)
or a helper. [Qu'ran 9:73-74]
The
following verse is about the Meccans who, after accepting Islam, did not want
to emigrate at Muhammad's behest or wanted to go back to
They
long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a
level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they for sake their
homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and
kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among
them. [Quran 4:89]
They
swear by Allah that they said nothing (evil), but indeed they uttered blasphemy, and they did it after accepting Islam; and they meditated
a plot which they were unable to carry out: this revenge of theirs was (their)
only return for the bounty with which Allah and His Messenger had enriched them!
If they repent, it will be best for them; but if they turn back (to their evil
ways), Allah will punish them with a grievous penalty in this life and in the
Hereafter: They shall have none on earth to protect or help them. (Qu'ran
9:74)
Also, many hadiths confirm
what is in the Qu'ran about the harsh treatment of the apostates.
Some of the books written against
me complained that I was a male-hater, that I was destroying the structure of the family, and that I promoted immorality and impurity among
the girls and women. Because I had
rejected the idea that women should be submissive, that it was the natural
character of females, therefore I should be punished, my mouth should be shut,
and my pen should forever be taken away. I should not be allowed to destroy the
society.
By
writing against the patriarchal system, male chauvinists claimed that I really
was showing my hatred for males. And the rumors flew, people became confused,
and individuals questioned my motives. Was I really a man-hater? Did I have other reasons for thinking the way
I did? Was I fighting against men for personal reasons?
4.
My Passport was Confiscated
The Government
confiscated my passport while I was in the airport and just before I boarded
the airplane. I was going to
5. I Was
Forced to Quit My Job
The
6. The Fatwa and Demonstrations
The
fundamentalists were not the ones responsible for the banning of my book Lajja (Shame). It
was the
The Islamists were angry with me
everywhere in the country. They spat at my name, showing their extreme hatred
toward me. Now, whenever a female raises her voice, or protests oppression, she
is called “a Taslima.” It became an everyday phenomenon for cheap
tabloids and the fundamentalists’ newspapers and magazines to attack me. And it
became commonplace to see leaflets and the posters against me.
One day on the wall next to my house, I
found the first of many posters, others being on my father’s clinic, that
proclaimed, “Taslima Nasrin is a filthy, nasty witch, a bitch, a sinner, a
sex-lover, a prostitute, an antireligious and anti-Islam atheist! All are
warned to stay far away from this filthy woman.”
On another day I found on the front page
of a daily newspaper that at a public meeting in Sylhet a holy man, Moulana Habibur
Rahman, had announced a price for my head. The price was 50,000 taka, a little
more than $1,000 but a huge amount of money in the poor country of
Now, when on the street I rode in a
rickshaw, men who saw me shouted such things as, “Oh, look, look, it’s Taslima.
Look at the bitch. Grab her. Grab this slut. Oh, look, the atheist, the whore,
is here.” I could only cry out to my rickshaw puller to go faster, to get away
from them. And I feared leaving my own house. One day, some bearded men tried
to break into my place, for they knew that police security had been suddenly
withdrawn by the government.
Upon the advice of friends, I asked for
police protection. But only when human rights organizations outside
In their fight against me, The Mosques and the Mullahs were
very active. The Imams, the men who lead the prayers in mosques, used mosques
for political purposes, and leaflets that defiled me were delivered from the
mosques. Everywhere, Islamists organized people against me and encouraged the
distribution of material such as the following, literally translated:
Allah is the greatest - Allah is
all-knowing
Insults to Islam - Muslims will never
tolerate
Insults to Prophet Muhammad - we can’t
stand
The supporter of BJP - Taslima be aware
The partner of Rushdie - Taslima you are
in danger
The infamous Taslima - punishment we need
Atheist, apostate, betrayer - be aware be
aware
Whose awful
comments against the holy Qu’ran, the great Islam, and the prophet Muhammad and
who is engaged in a conspiracy against the peace and freedom of the country,
the infamous apostate, anti-Allah, the enemy of prophet Muhammad, the partner
of Satan Rushdie, a toy of India’s Hindu fanatic BJP and a shame of the whole
generation of women apostate shameless Taslima Nasrin
1. Arrest
2. Hard punishment 3. And banning
of all her objectionable writings
For this demand
A BIG public
demonstration
Venue – Baitul
Mokarram, The National Mosque, south gate
Date – 18th
November, Thursday 1993
Time –
Please come to
a procession with the Islamic consciousness and with the spirit of love of the
country,
the nation and
the prophet
Invitation by
on behalf of
all kind of Ulama and Mashaiyekhs
Shaikhul Hadith
Maulana) Azizul Haque and the Imans of Mosques in
Some intellectuals started writing in
defense of my freedom to express myself, but they soon were astonished to see
that some religionists dared to issue a fatwa against a writer and were more
astonished to see that the government was silent on this issue.
The
newspapers, whether they wrote good or bad, positive or negative, comments,
sold like hotcakes. Dailies, weeklies, fortnightlies, and quarterlies: all began
gossiping about my personal life. My marriage was criticized, my writing
against Islam was bad, my making fun of the fatwa was bad. I came across as a
really bad woman. Meanwhile, Habibur Rahman began to be famous. Foreign
journalists came to
‘Taslima sounds like a very Muslim
name, but her belief, her ak-ida or devotion, her mentality is totally
different. She is engaged in doing crimes against Allah by saying offensive
remarks about the Holy Qu’ran, Prophet Muhammad, and Sharia law. Because of
Taslima’s shamelessly daring, extremely objectionable writings, vulgarity,
obscenity, illicit ideas, and adultery are spreading like an epidemic in the
country and abroad. This is leading to damage not only to the Prophet’s
reputation but also to Islam itself. She has teased and criticized the law of
Allah. She has criticized verses of the Qu’ran: sura Emran, sura Nisa, sura
Bakara, sura Huzrat, sura Wakia, sura Arrahman. Also, she has used
offensive language in criticizing Muhammad. She has said that religious faith
is a false faith, that all religions are fairy tales, and that religion makes
people inhumane. She has written that religion has made women ugly, inferior,
slaves, and sexual objects, thereby insulting women. She has blamed Allah and
his prophet Muhammad for the oppression of women and the inequalities between
men and woman. She claims religion has led to injustices against women, has
discriminated against women, and has led to society’s instability. She has made
obscene comments about believers, saying, “Shame on you who believe and follow
the orders of the Hadith of Muhammad.” She encourages nudity, adultery, illicit
relationships, vulgarity, and obscenity, saying, “I believe that one woman can
be chaste after having sexual relations with ten men if the word chaste
has anything to do with honesty.” It is dangerous for people like her to spread
such statements. If it is proved that a person is against the state, has openly
conspired against the state, then the punishment must be death. Similarly, if any
Muslim says anything bad against Islam, the Qu’ran, or the Holy Prophet, the
punishment under Sharia law is that of death!’
The leaders of Soldiers of Islam declared
that ‘they were ready to have successful public demonstrations, processions,
and general strikes or hartal, and they had three demands to the
Government: (1) the immediate arrest of Taslima Nasrin; (2) the banning of all
her writings; and (3) giving her exemplary punishment. These demands, they
asserted, came from the hearts of all religious people. They declared that the government was bound to
fulfill the public’s demands. The government had banned her Lajja
(Shame), but books a million times more objectionable had not yet been banned.
The government must fulfill the demands of the Soldiers of Islam. Furthermore,
a new law needed to be introduced to punish by death crimes of saying bad words
against Islam, the Qu’ran, and the Prophet Muhammad (Pbuh).'
Demonstrations increased, and I saw
them on the streets of
A
new organization, a committee to prevent actions against state and religion,
was formed. Sheikh ul Hadith (a religious title, Hadith referring to a teacher who instructs about the words of the Prophet Muhammad’s
sayings) Maulana Azizur Rahman led a large procession of the committee to the
office of the Speaker of the Parliament, submitting the following petition:
The
Honorable Speaker
Parliament
House
Sere
Bangla Nagar
Dear
Sir:
With
due respect I am informing you that
1. Everybody knows that people of
2. An infamous writer called Taslima Nasrin has
been attacking the religious feeling of the people of
3. Taslima
Nasrin has destroyed the reputation of
4. Even though
it is punishable under the law of the land by the Constitution to hurt
religious feelings of the people and to create hostility between different
communities, the government has not properly responded. Because there is no law
against the anti-religious and anti- state people, the anti-state and
anti-religious groups continue their heinous crimes without any hesitation or
fear.
5. In
6. The writer
Taslima Nasrin is not only attacking religion but also she is not showing any
respect toward the existing societal system. She is trying to destroy the peace
of the society by spreading stories that encourage adultery, sexual relations
without wedlock, and sexual relationships before marriage. She also has called
the patriarchal system barbarous, which of course encourages the devils. Her
pornographic writings are conspiratorially destroying our youth, leading them
to be immoral.
At this moment,
we the patriots and religious people of this country, showing respect towards
the feelings of the people, demand (1) a very hard punishment, including a death
penalty, to be established for the anti-state and anti-religious people; (2)
the immediate arrest of Taslima Nasrin in order to give her exemplary
punishment; and (3) the banning of her writings.
Sheikh ul
Hadith Mauland Azizul Haque
Convener
Committee to
Prevent the Activities Against Religion and State
Sat Mosjid,
Muhammadpur,
The same letter also was
given to the Interior Minister.
International organizations like PEN,
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and others outside
Meanwhile, the streets all over
However, I found myself becoming a
victim of censorship. Newspapers and magazine editors, becoming scared, began
to cut out parts of what I wrote about religion. Readers, who in the past had
supported me for fighting oppression against women, began to criticize me. I
began to lose friends. On the streets of
At the same time that hostility was
increasing at home, support and solidarity for my cause was increasing abroad.
I was asked to write op-ed on my
struggle from the
newspapers like The New York Times. The western media wrote a lot about me, referring to me as the female Salman Rushdie.
7.
Turmoil, April – May 1994
In April 1994 I went to
I went to Kolkata from
WHY
THE MOVEMENT AGAINST TASLIMA
The
honorable people of the country,
Assalamu
al aikum
Why is the movement against Taslima? The
anti-Islam forces, Taslima's supporters, are asking this question to confuse
the people. All walks of people of this country demand her death. For this
demand the peaceful hartal made history. There are court cases against
her. She for a long time has been staying in foreign countries in the shelter
of international Jewish and Christian lobbyists, campaigning and conspiring
against Islam. Recently she returned to our country, so it is very natural that
the patriotic people of this country got very upset. This time the anti-Islam
forces at home and abroad are really trying to become a monster. Their
anti-religious and anti-state activities are encouraged by the recent comments
of our prime minister, who said, “Taslima’s enemies are going extreme.” But
Taslima is continuously abusing and insulting Allah, the Prophet, and the Holy Qu’ran.
Taslima will not be satisfied until she puts the borders of
1. ‘I am not
for a small change. We will not get anything by this. We need total revision of
the Qu’ran.’ (Taslima’s comment published in a interview in The Statesman,
2. Here from
Hasan and Hussain to Muhammad none is a holy person. Everybody is a human being
of the Dark Ages, like Yajid and Ma-abia. (Book: Choto Choto dukkho Kotha)
3. I don’t
believe in prayers and the holy Qu’ran. When I read the Qu’ran, I found that Qu’ran
says that the sun revolves around the earth. Then I told my mother that I read
in the science book that the earth is moving around the sun, so that means
Allah is a liar. (Interview in Savvy, published in
4. I feel
Rabindranath Tagore is a God. Whenever I picture God, the picture I get, with
his blood and flesh and with his art, he is Rabindranath Tagore. This is my
religion. Only this god defeats me. I don’t have any other natural or
supernatural attractions. I don’t have any other destination than Rabindranath.
(Book: Nosto Meyer Nosto Godyo, page 80)
5. I don’t
believe in the after life, Hell, Heaven. What is this ALLAH? Everything is just
made up. (Book: Nimontron, page29)
6. Yes, I
attack Islam. Because Islam does not give any freedom to women. Savvy,
November 92)
7. Israfil has
fever/Gabriel has cough/Munkar and Nakir have gone to have dinner at Hurs/the
angels are free flying on the seventh sky as they wish/Israfil has fever; who
will blow the whistle?/the judge is crying alone, sitting of the final
bridge/and the scale is falling apart. (Poem, “Israfil Has Fever.” Weekly
Purnima, 17th november1993)
8. Why would
Muhammad’s wife - Khadija - be a character from whom girls of the country
should learn to build their character? What good would you find in Khadija’s
character? What in the hell can school children learn from the biography of the
13 or 14 wives of Muhammad? And I want to know what kind of ideology they are
getting. Why don’t they get any opportunity to study or learn the biography of
Mary Wollstonecraft, Joan of Arc, Begum Rokaya, Shorojini Naidoo, Leela Nag, or
Ila Mitra’s revolutionary life? (Book: Nosto Meyer Nosto Godyo, page
121)
9. There are
many dishonest people in the country, among whom the peers are quite
noticeable. The job of the peers( religious gurus) is that of cheating –
they are greed for money and women and act under the camouflage of long Arabic
people’s dress and a long beard and hair. Peers are not good and honest persons
and are more like bad characters, pedophiles, promiscuous and sexy crazy men
who want to be surrounded by young women. (Book: Nirbachito Kolam, page
27)
10. Women
should never marry in a society like ours. Because then they become the slaves
of men. As for sexual relationships, I believe if grownups want to have sex
with each other they can easily do it Marriage is not necessary for this
relationship. (Savvy, November 92)
11. Women must
have the freedom of their own uterus, whether or not they are prostitutes.
(Interview, Sonar Tori, Dec 1993)
12. Women
should learn how to rape. Women should learn to be adulterous. (Book: Nirbachito
Kolam, page 118)
13. Son of a
swine, this
14. The
totalitarian government has selected a state religion for this country. By the
attack of that religion the people are now suffering from anti-Indian feelings
and a deep desire for Islamization of this country. (Book: Jabo Na Keno?
page 49)
15. My country
is the whole of
16. Look, the security
I am getting is because the foreign countries have asked for this. (Interview
in Sonar Tori, December 1993)
17.
Respected
brothers,
There is no
pressure on anybody to accept Islam as his or her own religion. If they wish,
they can get the citizenship of a different country. But by using a Muslim name
and identity, nobody has the right to deny the faith, the main pillar of Islam.
Enjoying the citizenship of
Let’s go, O
patriotic, religious brothers! To save our Islam and the country. Let’s throw
ourselves into the jihad and save the honor of Allah and the prophet Muhammad
(Pbuh). Let’s shout loudly.
LET’S PASS THE ACT AGAINST BLASPHEMY
TASLIMA’S DEATH PENALTY IS DUE, LET’S KILL HER.
The united Islamic groups ( Islamic oikkojot)
Temporary office: Published and distributed from 44/1 Purana Paltan,
The Islamists are getting
more furious every day. The situation for me is getting scary and dangerous.
8.
Hiding, June – July 1994
After returning from
When I came back to
I had no clue why the government filed
the case against me, for it was supposed to give me security to save my life
from the Islamic fundamentalists. I was informed by unknown fans or
well-wishers of mine that an arrest
warrant had been issued against me. I talked with my lawyers, left my house,
and immediately went into hiding. The advice given by my lawyers was to go into
hiding because prison was not safe for me. Religious sentiment is a very
dangerous sentiment, and if police or prisoners had such feelings they could
kill me at any moment. I learned that
the law was a 150 years old British law, one which was the first used against
me in the history of
If I were to be convicted, I could be sentenced
to two years in prison. My case provoked clashes between fundamentalists and
defenders of secularism. Millions died
for the secular tradition inherent in Bangladeshi statehood which was
established after the victory against
I went into hiding on the 4th
of June, but not to any friend's or relatives' house. I was given shelter by
people who were not my close friends - some I knew, some I did not know. It was
very hard to get any shelter, but several good-hearted people worked hard on my
behalf. In the middle of the night I, covered with a burkha, had been taken by the small group of people
and dropped into storage room of some
houses, where I went without food for several
days. I was in total darkness, not allowed to make any sound. It was not safe
to stay in one hiding place, so I had to move from one house to another. It was
getting very hard to get any shelter. Nobody dared speak about me or even think
about me. It was dangerous to give me shelter, for if I were discovered the host would be killed for supporting me. Also, it was against the law of the land
to keep a fugitive in hiding. The Muslim fundamentalists became totally furious in their efforts to kill me.
Their demonstrations and procession were getting more ferocious day by
day. Police searched everywhere in order
to arrest me.
On
the 2nd day of hiding, I called an officer of the American Embassy who had
previously helped me to get back my passport. In desperation I requested shelter
in the Embassy for I had no other safe place to hide. The officer said it was
impossible for him to help me, so I was unable to get shelter there. But the officer promised that he would contact my lawyers to find what
legal matters were involved. He even suggested that it would be better for me
to leave the country immediately. But I told him that all the borders were
closed for me, a fact reported in the newspapers. My rescuers repeatedly advised me to leave the country illegally after they
realized that it would be hard for me to get bail and that the country was
moving quickly into the grip of fundamentalists. I did not like the idea of
leaving the country illegally. Every day, everywhere in the country, cities,
towns, villages, and remote villages, people were demanding my death. Political as well as
non-political Islamic groups came together under one umbrella. The situation
changed quickly. The roads were all under the control of religionists. The
anti-fundamentalist groups did not know how to strike back against the
fundamentalists. They could not go to the streets, because it would look as if
they supported me. No political or non-political party that was against the
fundamentalists wanted to be known as having fought for me. I was branded as
being antireligious. So it took a long time for them to turn to the streets in
protest. But no big political party actually did take a stand against the
fundamentalists. All were too afraid to support me, not the person, not even
the cause. No intellectual or writer who supported freedom of expression dared
to support me or utter my name. For me, it was really a strange situation. A
few days after the government filed the case against me, it filed charges
against four journalists of a daily newspaper because the fundamentalists
demanded banning of that particular journal because one article was published
there which criticised the religionists. The article criticized those who
exploit innocent villagers in the name of religion. They really did not
criticize religion. Whenever the four journalists were accused by the
government the same way I was, the interesting thing was that the media, the
writers, the intellectuals all gave statements against the government action
against those journalists, including all the political parties except the Jamat
e Islami and BNP ( Bangladesh Nationalist Party), and the hundreds of
non-political cultural and professional organizations. But no one pointed out
that I should have freedom of expression like the others, and that the
government should not have filed case against me. All my writer friends gave
statements saying that those journalists should be free, that the government
must withdraw all the charges from them. Although they were my friends, they
did not say that the government should do the same thing to me, also. I felt
alone, abandoned, and afraid. Nobody, it seemed, was supporting me. Those who previously had
supported me now were dangerously silent. The people who gave me shelter were
not the people who were my friends - some were acquaintances and some were
totally new to me. But my secular friends, they were now the ones who denied me
support. I was in a hopeless, helpless desperate situation. My lawyers needed
statements supporting my freedom of expression to defend me. But no one was
there to make a statement for me. Every day the statement of support for those
four journalists got published in the newspapers. Afterwards two of my friends
worked hard to obtain names of important people who would speak out on my
behalf, but few were willing to sign
such a statement. I became deeply
depressed.
The biggest Islamic political party,
Jamat e Islami, joined the anti-Taslima rally. And the United Islamic Party
became stronger. Not only the the Islamic political and non- political parties
joined the coalition but also other political parties that were not based on
religion joined the coalition also – the Freedom Party, the National Democratic
Party, and the People’s National Party. The streets were never before so full
of protesters. A variety of professional
people joined the anti-Taslima organization. Big bamboos were in the
protesters' hands during processions. Snake-charmers declared that they would
release 1,000,000 poisonous snakes in the city of
9. Two More
Fatwas and a Countrywide Demand for My Execution by Hanging
I was in hiding for 2 months. My rescue
team got exhausted, and my cause looked increasingly hopeless. The team could
not bear the tension and risk anymore. I was living in constant darkness, felt
hopeless and helpless, and was in constant fear of death as I heard every day
that the fundamentalists had said they were going to search houses to find me.
I was sure that I would be dead soon. It was almost like living in a coffin for
months.
There were many hartals, many general
strikes, hundreds of demonstrations, and processions were made all over the
country for the purpose of killing me. An anti-fundamentalist group tried to
stop them, but failed. Six people were killed in one of the many clashes when
the anti-fundamentalist group wanted to prevent the Jamat e Islami leader Golam
Azam’s meeting in
The
situation became desperate, the country was under the control of the Islamists,
and I could no longer find a hiding place. The human rights and writers'
organizations abroad demonstrated to
show their solidarity toward me.
Support
That I Received
The
support I received from the fellow writers was really
encouraging. Authors worldwide fought
for the writers' right to freedom of expression. Some of the Nobel Laureates
wrote open letters in the leading newspapers in
From
Salman Rushdie
To Taslima Nasrin
I am sure you have become
tired of being called "the female Salman Rushdie" - what a bizarre
and comical creature that would be! - when all along you thought you were the
female Taslima Nasrin. I am sorry my name has been hung around your neck, but
please know that there are many people in many countries working to make sure
that such sloganizing does not obscure your identity, the unique features of
your situation, and the importance of fighting to defend you and your rights
against those who would cheerfully see you dead.
In reality it is our
adversaries who seem to have things in common, who seem to believe in divine
sanction for lynching and terrorism. So instead of turning you into a female
me, the headline writers should be describing your opponents as "the
Bangladeshi Iranians." How sad it must be to believe in a God of blood!
What an Islam they have made, these apostles of death, and how important it is
to have the courage to dissent from it!
Great writers have agreed
to lend their weight to the campaign on your behalf: Czeslaw Milosz, Mario
Vargas Llosa,
You have spoken out about
the oppression of women under Islam, and what you said needed saying. In the
West, there are too many eloquent apologists working to convince people of the
fiction that women are not discriminated against in Muslim countries or that,
if they are, it has nothing to do with religion. The sexual mutilation of
women, according to this argument, has no basis in Islam. This may be true in
theory, but in many countries where this goes on, the mullahs wholeheartedly
support it. And then there are the countless crimes of violence within the
home, the inequalities of legal systems that value women's evidence below that
of men, the driving of women out of the workplace in all countries where
Islamists have come to, or even near to, power.
You have spoken out about
the attacks on Hindus in
You are accused of having
said that the Qu’ran should be revised (though you have said that your were
referring only to Islamic religious code). You may have seen that only last
week the Turkish authorities have announced a project to revise these codes, so
in that regard at least you are not alone. And even if you did say that the Qu’ran
should be revised to remove its ambiguities about the rights of women, and even
if every Muslim man in the world were to disagree with you, it would remain a
perfectly legitimate opinion, and no society that wishes to jail or hang you
for expression can call itself free.
Simplicity is what
fundamentalists always say they are after, but in fact they are obscurantists
in all things. What is simple is to agree that if one may say, "God
exists" then another may also say, "God does not exist"; that if
one may say "I loathe this book," then another may also say,
"But I like it very much." What is not at all simple is to be asked
to believe that there is only one truth, one way of expressing that truth, and
one punishment (death) for those who say this isn't so.
As you know, Taslima,
Bengali culture - and I mean the culture of
I have seen and heard reports that you are all
sorts of dreadful things - a difficult woman and an advocate (horror of
horrors) of free love. Let me assure you that those of us who are working on
your behalf are well aware that character assassination is normal in such
situations and must be discounted. And simplicity again has something valuable
to say on this issue: even difficult advocates of free love must be allowed to
stay alive, otherwise we would be left only with those who believe that love is
something for which there must be a price - perhaps a terrible price - to pay.
Taslima, I know that there must be a storm inside
you now. One minute you feel weak and helpless, another strong and defiant. Now
you will feel betrayed and alone, and now you will have the sense of standing
for many who are standing silently for you. Perhaps in your darkest moments you
will feel you did something wrong - that those demanding your death may have a
point. This of all your goblins you must exorcise first. You have done nothing
wrong. The wrong is committed by others against you. You have nothing wrong,
and I am sure that one day soon you will be free.
The
European Parliament supported me and
asked the Government of Bangladesh to let me leave the country. After long
negotiations between the European and
the Bangladesh Government, I was granted bail, after having been two months in
hiding. But, also, I was forced to leave
Some Speculations
As I see it,
the reactions from the society in general and Islamists in particular were
three fold: I was portrayed as being anti-religious, anti-Bangladesh, and anti-social
order.
My writings were seen as a challenge to
the existing interpretation of Islamic texts. Most people in Bangladesh,
unfortunately, do not really understand the texts, so they were not
particularly irked by anything I had written inasmuch as for them those texts
are for memorizing, not understanding. What they did understand was the
interpretation advanced by a section of half-educated mullahs through regular
religious meetings, sermons of the local Imams, pirs - the religious gurus -
and books like Muksedul Momenin, in which instructions were as to how to
control women. These interpretations are misogynistic and reflect an inherent
hierarchy within the society. Above all,
they give the interpreter the power to define what religion is. When I questioned
the validity of such interpretations from my non-religiocentric position, I
wrote not from a point of view of what the holy books actually said but from the
perspective of the popular interpretation of the books. I pointed to how the
prevalent hierarchy was (ab)using its positions.
At stake are several points: firstly,
there is the shift of power to a non-Mullah (who in their opinion has no rights
to discuss the texts/interpretations; and secondly, there is a woman (who,
according to their interpretation, is of an inferior gender).
I was portrayed as someone who challenged the texts and questioned the
legitimacy of those sacred texts. I did question the texts, but at no time on
the level of contending any interpretations of the texts. Others may have done
so, but to my knowledge nobody has ever challenged me on the ground that there
can be a different interpretation to the one I have suggested. That is why
there has been no debate, why there was the fatwa. That is why the Islamists
have flexed their muscle on the street, why they insist upon silencing me.
Secondly, I have been portrayed as being
anti-state. This is ironic, because all along my expressions have always been
"poetic" rather than "political." I have expressed my
opinions about the Bangladeshi state in reference to its historical connections
with the Indian state of
Thirdly, there is the social order. The
Islamists, when they have read my writings on sexual issues, have appeared as
the moral guardian of the social order. The Bangladeshi society cannot accept
the fact that women can and do have desires, do want and deserve sexual
pleasure. If and when they have desires, these need to be whispered, not
discussed in public discourse. I, however, have not accepted that dictum. I
broke the "socially structured silences." The silences, practiced and
continued over ages, have helped men control women - including their
sexuality. Now I have attacked
patriarchy at its core. Did that only anger the Islamists? No, that angered the
middle class, educated, even secular men, too. They read my book and found it
amusing . But as for the meanings/implications of these writings, they were
angry and irritated. They were happy with the way the world was, and here I was
rocking their boat. Thus, they were looking for someone to stand up and say
"enough is enough." But they didn't want to do it, because it
would be a politically incorrect thing
to do. Therefore, when the Islamists spoke out against me, many members of the educated
secular middle class enjoyed it. The lack of their support for me causes bears my contention.
10. Banning of
the Books and Loss of Freedom of Expression
Because my freedom of expression has been
continually violated by those with authority in power, I have been unable to
reach readers in my own country. Even the series of my autobiographical writings
has been banned. It tells the same story that thousands of women already know
and have experienced. It documents how
Muslim women suffer as they live in a patriarchal country with hundreds of
archaic traditions. I have described my childhood days, what it was like to be
a female child, how I was brought up, how I had privileges others did not have,
how I became a medical doctor – all shown to reveal why I think differently,
why I think there is hope for others to break away from patriarchy. It is important
that women be inspired to have the strength to revolt against the oppressive
system in which they and I have endured. I told the truth. I expressed what
happened in my childhood. Although it is considered taboo to reveal having been
raped, sometimes by a male member of one's family, I did so. Most girls shut
their mouths, feeling ashamed. I did not, for it is the abusers who should be
ashamed, not the abused. I am well aware that many others have experienced
abuse and though they have not dared to
admit it, reading about my experience has given them a new
outlook.
We, the victims, must cry out and do so
loudly. We must demand to be heard. We must protest loudly. We must demand
basic freedom and basic human rights. We must demand to live in happiness.
If women do not fight against being
oppressed by a shameful patriarchal and religious system, then shame on them!
Shame on all of us if we do not protest, if we do not fight, if we do not
object to a system that, if allowed to continue, will also affect our daughters.
Mine
is not a unique story. My experiences, unfortunately, have been shared by
millions. In my book, I cried for myself. I also cried for all those who have
not been able to enjoy a productive life in which they could achieve happiness.
Our cries must become universal, not stifled and done in lonely places.
Meanwhile, four of my books have already
been banned in
After waiting six long years, I was
allowed to enter
As should be obvious, freedom of
expression in
The list of books banned in
Lajja
(Shame) 1992
Amar Meyebela
(My Girlhood) 1999
Utal Hawa
(The Wild Wind) 2002
Dwikhandito
(
Sheishob
Ondhokar (Those Dark Days) 2004
My Return to
In 1998, I returned to
I decided to risk making the trip,
thinking that I might be able not to draw the Immigration people's attention if
I hid my face. I succeeded. But the next day the news broke out that I had
entered and some people had recognized me. My return became a top news story,
and the country appeared to have become panicked. My well-laid plans had not
worked, and I immediately went into hiding and again found that the government
was making my life impossible. A criminal case was filed for my previous
writings, an arrest warrant was issued, and I was granted bail again, like I
had been in 1994. I did not want to leave, but when a group of Bangladeshi Talibans were captured,
a list showed that I was number one of four persons on the list that was to be
killed. Asked by a European embassy to leave, I did so to save my life.
When my mother died, no Muslim man led
the funeral ceremony. Nobody came from any mosque. My mother was a devout
Muslim, her only crime being that she was my mother.
Ban in
From the time I left
In West Bengal, India, on
The Unique
situation: the writers and intellectuals, the progressives who asked to ban my
book in both
The third part of my book is called Ko,
was published in
He used to give
me deep sexual pleasure. Like all other men, he was not interested in finding
out whether I was aroused or not. But I taught him to do so. I told him to
arouse me by touching every inch of my body. He started to get pleasure by
giving pleasure to me. Men always enjoy women. I was a victim of men’s pleasure
before. But this time it was different. It was me who enjoyed him.
It is this kind of sexual narration in
the book that has drawn the acerbic criticism. "This is not literature,
this is pure pornography," some of the male critics said. My little story
was big enough to make men oppose me and call me a whore. A big hatred campaign
began, started by some of the mainstream media as well as tabloids, became of
my having described my intimate relationships both in
Two writers who are considered to be
progressive, one of whom is from
My answer to
the patriarchal question
“Freedom
is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently."
Rosa
Luxemburg
Homeless Everywhere
When I look back, the years gone by
appear dry, ashen. Suddenly, a half-forgotten dream tears itself from that
inert grey mass and stands before me, iridescent, obtrusive. Odd memories
tiptoe into my solitary room. Confronting me, they make me tremble, make me
cry, drag me back towards the days left behind. I cannot help but walk down the
serpentine, shadowy alleys of my life, foraging for remembered fragments. To
what end? The past is past, irrevocably so. The dreams that are long dead are
unrecognizably dead. What good can it do to dust the cobwebs off them with
tender fingers? What is gone just isn’t here anymore.
Although I am aware of this my life in
exile makes me reach back into my past, again and again. I walk through the
landscape of my memories like someone possessed. Each night brings with it
nightmares, its own thick blanket of melancholy. It is then that I start
telling the story of that girl. A shy, timid girl, who grew up in a strict
family, uncomplaining, constantly humiliated. A girl encircled by boundaries,
whose every desire, every whim was thrown away as garbage. A girl whose small,
frail body was prey to many dark, hairy hands. I have narrated the story of
that girl. A girl with modest adolescent dreams, who fell in love and married
in secret, hoping to live the ordinary life of an ordinary woman. I have told
her story. A woman betrayed by her dearly beloved husband, whose convictions
came crashing down like a house of straw, a woman who knew sorrow, pain,
mourning, and bereavement. A woman who was tempted to follow the terrible road
to self-destruction. I have told her agonizing tale in simple words. A woman who then gathered up the broken pieces
of her dreams and tried to live again, to make a little room of her own in the
midst of a cruel, heartless society. A woman who surrendered to a guardian
called "man" because society demanded it of her. But the hurt, the
pain kept growing, the traumatic pain of losing an unborn child, wounds that
left her bloodied and sore, onslaughts of malice, distrust and unbearable
humiliation. All that I have done is to tell the story of that trampled and
bruised girl.
That girl who, with whatever strength remained in her body and mind,
stood up again, without anyone’s help, turned away from all shelter, trying to
be her own self once more, her own refuge; a woman who refused to renounce and
retreat from the world that had deceived and rejected her, a woman who refused
to heed people’s taunts and sneers. I have narrated the story of this girl, of
this woman standing upright. A woman who refused to obey society’s diktats, its
rituals and traditions. A woman whose constant stumbling, falling, being
thrown, taught her to stand strong. Whose stumbling steps taught her to walk,
whose wanderings showed her the way. Slowly, gradually, she witnessed the
growth of a new consciousness within her, a simple thought took hold of her –
“This life was her own and no one else’s. She was the one who could rule over
it, no one else." I have told the story of that girl, of the circumstances
that shaped her. It is the story of a girl who came out of the furnace of
patriarchy, not reduced to ashes, but as burnished steel.
Have I done wrong? Even if I don’t think so, many people think today
that it was wrong of me to tell this story. Today, I am standing in the
prosecution box waiting for the verdict. It wouldn’t have been such a terrible
crime if I had not disclosed the identity of that girl. The girl was I,
Taslima. Had I used my imagination, I could have done whatever I pleased –
written page after page of fancy and all would have been forgiven. But it is
forbidden to stake my claim in this real world. To be a
flesh and blood woman and announce audaciously – “I am that girl; after those
turbulent years of sorrow I am standing up again; I have vowed to live my life
as I see fit." Why would the world accept this bold stance? No woman
should have this kind of courage. I am completely unfit for a patriarchal society.
In my own country
Yet even if the publication of Dwikhandito (
of experiences. I have spoken about my
philosophy, my hopes and despairs, my beauty and my ugliness, my happiness and
sorrow, my anger and tears, my own deviation from my ideals. I have not chosen
a titillating or sensitive subject. I have simply chosen my own life to write
about. If this life is a stimulating and exciting life, then how can I make it
less so? I am told this volume has been written to raise a hue and cry. Does
every conception have to have a petty motive? As if honesty, simplicity, cannot
be adequate reasons. As if courage, something that I am told I have in
abundance, cannot be a good enough reason.
Controversy about my writing is nothing new. I have been familiar with
it from the very time I was being published. Actually, isn’t the truth rather
simple? It is just this: if you don’t compromise with a patriarchal society,
you will find yourself at the center of a storm? There are many different
definitions of what constitutes an autobiography. Most of us easily accept
those autobiographies that are idealistic and describe only good and happy
events. Generally, great men write about their lives to inspire other lives, to
reveal the truth and the path of righteousness. I am neither a sage, nor a
great, erudite being, and I write not to show light to the blind. I am simply
unmasking the wounds and blights of an ordinary human life.
Even though I am not a great litterateur or a remarkable personality,
momentous things have happened in my life. Certainly mine is no ordinary life
when, because of my beliefs and ideals, thousands take to the streets asking
for my death; or when my books are banned because they carry my opinions; or
when the state snatches away the right to live in my own land for speaking the
truth! When it is all right for others to constantly describe my life, and add
color to their portrayal, why shouldn’t it be all right for me to take the
responsibility to describe it myself, fully, truthfully? Surely no one else can
know my life the way I know it. If I don’t reveal myself, if I don’t depict the
whole of myself – especially those events that have shaken me - if I don’t talk
of all that is good and bad in me, of my weaknesses and my strengths, my happiness
and sorrow, my generosity and cruelty, then I don’t think I can stay true to
the responsibility of writing an autobiography. For me, literature for
literature’s sake, or literary niceties for their own sake, cannot be the last
word; I place a greater value on honesty. Whatever my life may be, however
contemptible or despicable, I do not deceive myself when I sit down to write
about it. If the reader is disgusted or appalled by my tale, so be it. At least
I can be satisfied that I have not cheated my reader. I am not presenting a
fictitious narrative in the guise of an autobiography. I narrate the truths of
my life, the ugly as much as I do the beautiful, without hesitation. I can’t
change my past. The ugliness and the beauty must both be accepted. I won’t lie
and say, “It didn’t happen."
The sharp arrows of mockery come flying at me from every direction. The
mud of slander and humiliation is flung to soil me. There is only one reason
for this assault. I have spoken the truth. Not everyone can bear the truth. The
truths of Amar Meyebela and Utal Hawa can be borne; Dwikhandito’s
is insupportable. In Amar Meyebela, when I described my ignoble
childhood, people said sympathetically, “How terrible!” In Utal Hawa,
when I described being cheated on by my husband, they expressed their sympathy.
But in Dwikhandito, when I spoke openly of my relationships with various
men, they began to point fingers at me. We can draw only one conclusion from
this: As long as a woman is oppressed and defenseless, people like her and
sympathize with her. But when she refuses to remain exploited or suppressed,
when she stands up, when she straightens her spine, establishes her rights,
breaks the rotten social systems that chain her so as to free her body and mind
– she is no longer admirable, she becomes hateful. I knew this character of our
society; even then I was not afraid to speak freely about myself.
One of the main reasons for the controversy regarding Dwikhandito
is sexual freedom. Since most people are immersed neck-deep in the traditions
of a patriarchal society, they are irritated, angry, and outraged at the open
declaration of a woman’s sexual autonomy. This freedom is not something that I
simply talk about; rather, I have established it for myself, in and through my
life. But this freedom is not license; men cannot touch me whenever they
please. I decide. Our society is not yet ready for such freedom in a woman. It
refuses to accept the fact that a woman can sexually engage with and enjoy any
man she desires, and yet rigorously decide where to draw the line in any
encounter.
Our renowned, famous, well-heeled writers delight in slandering me by
calling me a fallen woman, a whore. In doing this they only prove themselves to
be the figureheads of this disgusting, dirty patriarchal society! They first
use "fallen women" for their enjoyment and then deploy the words
"fallen woman" as a term for abuse! There is really nothing novel in
the use of women as sexual slaves.
Although in this volume of my autobiography I have spoken about my
personal struggle against patriarchy, spoken about the torture meted out by
society on women and religious minorities, nobody talks of the fact that I have
spoken of such things. They only notice my relationships with men. They notice
the audacity that I have in opening my mouth about the deep, secret, ugly and
repulsive subject of what happens to sexuality in a patriarchal society.
Whenever, in the history of the world, in times of darkness, a woman
stands up against patriarchy, speaks about emancipation, tries to break free
from her chains, she gets called a "fallen woman." Many years ago, in
the preface to my book, A Fallen Woman’s Fallen Prose‚ I wrote, ‘ I am delighted
in calling myself a fallen woman. It is because I know that whenever a woman has protested against
oppression by the state, by religion, or by society, whenever she has become
aware of all her rights, society has called her a whore. I believe that in this
world, for a woman to be pure, to be true to herself, she has to become a
fallen woman. Only when a woman is called a whore can she know that she is free
from the coils of society’s diktats. The fallen woman is really a pure and
pristine human being. I truly believe that if a woman wants to earn her
freedom, be a human, she has to earn this label. This title, coming from a
fallen, degenerate society, should be seen as an honor by every woman.’ Till now, of all the prizes I have received, I
consider this honor to be the greatest recognition of what I have done with my
life. I have earned it because I have given a mortal blow to the decaying,
rotten body of patriarchy. This is the true measure of the worth of my life as
a writer, of my life as a woman and the long years of my struggle to be the person
I am.
A
writer in
Many Bengali writers love playing games with women, and even if they
hesitate to mention these escapades in their autobiographies, the characters
they create boldly commit such acts. Nobody has ever questioned them, but if a
woman talks of sexuality, in a fictional work or in her autobiography, eyebrows
are raised. Sexuality is a man’s prerogative, his "ancestral"
patrilineal property. Being a woman, I could not possibly write like men. I
must write more discreetly.
I am a woman after all. Only a man possesses the right to discuss a
woman’s body, her thighs, her breasts, her waist and her vagina. Why should a
woman do it? This patriarchal society has not given me that right, but since I
have thumbed my nose at this rule and have written about it, however sad or
poignant my tale may be, I have crossed the limits. For a man, a playboy image
is something to be proud of. When a woman writes about her love and sexuality
with honesty, she becomes a suspect, a "characterless" woman. I have
talked of certain things in my autobiography that I should not have. I have
muckraked; I have crossed the limit allowed to me.
One
should not discuss what happens inside the bedroom or between two individuals
because such events are unimportant. But I consider them important because all
those incidents have shaped the Taslima that I am today – this woman with her
beliefs and disbeliefs, mores and thoughts, and her own sense of her self. The
world around her has created her brick by brick, not as a chaste domesticated
angel, but as an ardent, renegade, disobedient brat. Then they say: I can
destroy my own reputation, but why do I have to destroy the reputation of
others? This question has come up, although I am writing about what is after
all my own life. I fail to understand why those who are so self-consciously
respectable do things that they consider contemptible? They say that I have
broken their trust. But I never promised anyone my silence. People tell me
there is an unwritten rule, but only those afraid my revelations will destroy
their saintly images uphold this code of discretion. And then they try to
intimidate me with their furious wrinkled brows! But what if I want to reveal
whatever I consider important? What if I decide that what I am talking about is
not obscene, at least to me? Who creates these definitions of obscenity and
sets out the limits? I decide what I should write in my autobiography, how much
to reveal, how much to conceal. Or should I not? Should I wait for instructions
from X, Y, and Z, from some Maqsud Ali, some Keramat Mian, or from some
Paritosh or Haridas Pal? Should I wait for them to tell me what to write, how
much to write? Critics want to characterize my freedom as self-indulgent
license. This is because our likes and dislikes, our sense of right and wrong,
sin and virtue, beauty and ugliness are moulded by thousands of years of
patriarchy. So, patriarchy has taught us that the true characteristics of a
woman are her diffidence, her timidity, her chastity, her lowered head, and her
patience. Therefore, the critic’s habituated, controlled perceptions are afraid
to face harsh truths, and quickly shut their ears in disgust. “Is she a real
writer? Does she have the right to an autobiography?” they ask in anger. I
think that everyone has a right to talk about their lives, even the pompous
critic who regards a pen in my hands as an outrage! I have been called
irresponsible. I may be irresponsible, I may be irrational, but I refuse to
give up the right to be so. George Bernard Shaw once said, “A reasonable man
adapts himself to the world. An unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt
the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends upon the unreasonable
man." Taslima Nasrin is one of those unreasonable human beings. I do not
claim that progress depends upon me; I am simply an insignificant writer. In
the eyes of the wise, I am happy to be labeled an unreasonable or imprudent
person. It is because I am foolish that I have not kept my mouth shut, I have
stood my ground even as an entire society has spat upon me. I have remained
firm when patriarchy’s ardent supporters have come to tram-ple me. My naïveté,
my unreasonableness, my irrationality are my greatest assets.
The question of religion has also come up. Those who know me also know
that I always speak out against religious conventions. Religion is thoroughly
patriarchal. If I insult religion or religious texts, why should men tolerate
it, especially when these same men use religion and religious texts to suppress
others? It is these pious gentlemen who have forced me to leave my country. I
have paid the price for truth with my own life. How much more should I pay? As
is presently the case in
Exile
While hiding in
I had to leave my own family, my friends,
my society, my country, my everything. The reason I am still not allowed to go
back to my country? The reason is that I criticized religion because it is
oppressive to women. I had spoken out, and am still speaking out, about the
fact that women must not live under any religious system, because no
religion gives woman the freedom to live as a human being. It is as simple as
that. I have written twenty-seven books of poetry, prose, novels, and
autobiography so far. In every book, I have been focusing more or less on the
same issue, that we have to overcome religion in order to obtain a better
family of values, to have a better society of equality and justice, to raise
the standards to better humankind.
Well, I have not just been sitting around
doing nothing while the religionists have rattled their swords. The sword I
have chosen is my pen. Well, actually, my computer. My fight has been waged
with words. With words I have challenged the religious teachings about
patriarchy. With words, I have written to inspire men and women to respect
human rights, to change old views that were never right. With words, I have
struggled to change the human heart, the human mind.
Not only has my freedom of expression has
been violated, but the Government of Bangladesh
has violated my rights as a
citizen. My father, deathly sick in 2002, wanted so much to see me in his last
days. I tried, and cried, to return to my country to see him for the last time.
But the government did not let me return home. My father died alone without me.
I now realize that in my lifetime I will
not be able to return to the land where I was born. I have no home, no country.
Instead of being able to live in the area of the world in which I was born, I
am being given the alternative of living in the West where I feel like an
outsider. I am a stranger in my own country and a stranger here in the West
where I now live!
Where can I go? Nowhere. Exile, for me,
is a bus stop where I am waiting for a bus to go home. I have been in exile for
such a long time that I have the helpless feeling that I no longer feel any
home is my home, any country my country.
Sometimes I ask myself, Is this true, do
I have no home? No, it is not really true. I do have a home. My home is love.
The love I receive from my many friends is my home. The love I receive from
oppressed women all over the world is my home. The love I receive from
rationalists, freethinkers, secular humanists, and ethical humanists from all
over the world is my home.
I do not regret doing anything I have done or writing anything
I have written. It does not matter what happens, I will never be silenced. Come
what may, I will continue to fight uncompromisingly against religious fundamentalism. I am all the more
and determined, all the more committed to
my cause.