Taslima Unbound: Writings on Feminism, Secularism, and Human Rights

By Taslima Nasrin

Internationally acclaimed Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasrin brings together for the first time in English a compelling collection of her work written over a period of thirty years. In this powerful selection of essays, Taslima confronts issues of women’s oppression and gender inequality, freedom of speech, and religious violence. In bold, pragmatic style, her language of protest challenges the androcentric paradigms that have dictated the female experience for millennia. Taslima unflinchingly questions long held views on marriage, effects of religious rituals on women, prostitution, genital mutilation, divorce, and sexual assault, among many other crucial issues.

Forced into exile after being expelled from Bangladesh for her frank and brave writing, Nasrin has been a heroic and courageous voice throughout the world, with many of her works topping the bestseller lists. Taslima Unbound captures the essence of her life’s work and is key for those seeking to gain a deeper understanding of this celebrated feminist writer.

Taslima Nasrin has been the recipient of the Woodrow Wilson Fellowship, the UNESCO-Madanjeet Singh Prize for the promotion of tolerance and non-violence, the Simone de Beauvoir Prize, an honorary doctorate from the American University of Paris, among many other important recognitions.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Global Collective Publishers
• Release date: Apr 22, 2022
• ISBN: 9781734401936

Taslima Nasrin

Taslima Nasrin is a Bangladeshi writer, feminist, secular humanist, and human rights activist. Most famous for her feminist writings, Nasrin has been living in exile since 1994, when she was expelled from Bangladesh for the publication of Shame (Lajja) which was critical of Islam. Her works include My Bengali Girlhood, All About Women, Fallen Prose of A Fallen Girl, The Opponent, Tell Him The Secret, Shame Again, and Getting Even. Nasrin has been the recipient of the Woodrow Wilson Fellowship, the UNESCO-Madanjeet Singh Prize for the promotion of tolerance and non-violence, the Simone de Beauvoir Prize, and an honorary doctorate from the American University of Paris, among many other important recognitions.

Book preview

BOUNTY ON MY HEAD

Around the beginning of the nineties, during the reign of Begum Khaleda Zia, the then Prime Minister of Bangladesh, three Islamic murderers had announced a bounty on my head. They offered to give a huge sum of money to anyone who could behead me and bring them my head. The government didn’t take any action against those ruthless killers and brutal Islamic murderers for exhorting and inciting the citizens of a country to murder another fellow citizen of the same country. Instead, they were happily welcomed and inducted into political parties of the country, like the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the Awami League (AL). They were officially given tickets to fight elections on behalf of such political parties. They were probably offered ministerial positions in the Cabinet as well!

A Muslim cleric conducted a Waz Mahfil (a religious sermon) that day. He openly preached and provoked his disciples by saying ‘whoever criticizes Islam, should be chopped to pieces.’ Will that Maulavi ever get punished? Will he ever get arrested or be given a stern warning at the least? No, he will not. Nobody will do that, because the Prime Minister of Bangladesh believes in the same principle. Exactly like that Muslim cleric, the Prime Minister also believes that any criticism of Islam should be dealt with severe retribution. Hence, when the killers achieve their goals of murdering the critics of Islam, the Prime Minister chooses to remain silent, to show her support for such actions and gives her silent endorsement and consent to such heinous crimes.

I sometimes think that maybe even 1400 years ago, the fundamentalist murderers didn’t get to enjoy as much privilege and luxury for killing innocent people as they do now!

NAMAZ-ROZA

Nobody ever forced us for Namaz or Roza at our home. Before going to bed my mother would ask every member of the family, ‘Who’s planning to keep Roza tomorrow?’ Those who would choose to keep Roza would inform her and those who would choose not to keep Roza would also inform her about it. My mother would then only wake those people up who had chosen to keep Roza and ask them to have food (Sehri) at the end of the night. And those who said no would be allowed to have their uninterrupted sleep. The ones having Sehri would make sure the other sleeping members weren’t disturbed and so would make less noise.

Even the rules for Namaz were the same. Those who wished to read Namaz would do so, and those who didn’t wish to wouldn’t be forced to read it. No one would scorn or scoff at each other for their choices. Those who were willing to read Namaz wouldn’t force those not interested to follow suit and stand in the line for Namaz. And those who weren’t interested wouldn’t pull away anyone interested to come out of the line either. These rules in our family were neither written nor verbal. They were more like those natural, organic laws. Whoever is hungry will have food, whoever is thirsty will drink water, whoever is feeling sleepy, will sleep, whoever wants to study, will read….

My mother would call everyone to have food when it was time for Iftar in the evening. We would all sit around the dining table and my mother would serve Iftari to everyone with equal love. The food in the plates of both, the ones keeping Roza and the ones not keeping Roza, would be the same. I might not have understood then, but today I fully realize that ours was truly an ideal household.

The sound of Azaan from the Masjid couldn’t be heard from our house. During the 60s and 70s, even during the 80s, there weren’t as many Masjids in our country. But whoever chose to read Namaz at home wouldn’t have much of a problem following the time. There was a wall clock at our home. My mother could even figure out the time for Namaz by watching the movement of the sun and observing the intensity of the sunshine on our courtyard.

I read in the Quran, ‘ ’ (La Ikraha fid Deen). It means, ‘There’s no force or compulsion in religion.’ I feel that’s the most important Ayat in the Quran. If you believe in this Ayat with all your heart, you can easily create a world of peace and joy. Islamic scholars explain Ayat as: "Islam doesn’t support force or coercion, and has no connection whatsoever with persecution or any other form of destructive activity. Such actions are absolutely unIslamic, anti-Islam. ‘Deen’ or Religion depends on faith and willingness from the heart, or at least on a sincere desire. Islam can never endorse provoking someone or support the act of forcing someone to follow it using coercive measures. Creating riots and fights or participating in conflicts and quarrels has been announced as absolutely impermissible in our religion. To create terror or to unfairly kill someone is considered an unforgivable crime in Islam." Now the pertinent question is, how many people follow this explanation?

I don’t know why Muslims don’t discuss what’s written in the Quran, that which they say they are so proud of! Allah has said, there’s no compulsion or coercion in religion. The believers of Allah will follow Allah’s advice. Isn’t that what everyone should expect of them? But what’s happening here? The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has passed a new law: if anyone eats or drinks anything outside of their homes during the month of Ramadan (Ramzan), they will have to pay a huge fine and will have to spend a month in jail! In the month of Ramadan, even in Bangladesh, food shops and restaurants aren’t allowed to operate during the day. If someone tries to open their shops or restaurants, the Rozadars (those who follow Roza) break and wreck their shops with sticks and stones. Do thirsty non-Muslims have no right to sit somewhere and have a glass of water in the scorching heat? Even if someone goes to have a little water somewhere, the Rozadars forcibly coerce them, persecute them, and shamelessly carry out such destructive activities like vandalizing stores. Those who don’t follow Roza are scared and exasperated with fear due to these Rozadars. A lot of Rozadars feel if someone has food or drinks in front of them it means they are deliberately insulting them. But I used to have a stomach full of food in front of my Rozadar mother. My mother used to feel happy thinking I must’ve felt so relieved to have a good meal. There were so many days when my mother would feed me with her own hands while she was fasting and keeping her Roza. Did she ever feel insulted? Never. She never felt I was insulting her! Nor did I ever feel my mother loved me any less because I didn’t choose to keep Roza. My mother was an honest and devout follower of the religion, a truly religious person. And so she gave a lot of importance to the freedom of choice in whether one wishes to keep Roza or not.

Today’s religious people tremendously lack this quality. They think intolerance and anarchy is necessary for their religion. On the Day of Judgment the Rozadars will achieve the ‘Grace of God.’ Isn’t that enough? Why do the Rozadars want respect from the non-Rozadars or non-Muslims as well? And why shouldn’t we look at the perspective of non-Rozadars too? Why should they be forced to show respect to the Rozadars at the cost of their human rights? As far as I know, respect is mutual. If you show me respect, I’ll automatically return it. Isn’t that what it should be? Is respect so shallow that it’s lost simply by seeing someone eat or drink in front of you during your Roza? My mother used to say, if you can control your desire to eat or drink, even as you see someone eating or drinking in front of you, your Roza then gets stronger! Can no one think like her these days?

Scary shouts and sounds can be heard in Bangladesh during the month of Ramadan in a bid to wake people up before dawn. Due to such monstrous screams, everyone is forced to wake up. Those who don’t wish to wake up to have Sehri are also forced to wake up. Don’t they have the right to sleep? The same goes with Azaan too. In those days when there were no alarm clocks or mobile phones, the neighborhood guys waking everyone up might have helped those who wished to have Sehri. But now in the era of such technological advancements, howling and shouting is absolutely meaningless.

Those who wish to keep Roza have the right to keep Roza. Similarly, those who don’t wish to keep Roza should also have the right to not keep Roza. Every human being has the right to be religious and equal rights to be non-religious. Across the world I see that people have all the rights to practice religion and religious rituals. Not only that, religious people also have the right to criticize those who aren’t religious. But non-believers have no right to criticize the religious believers. If they do criticize, they face insults, court-cases, are jailed or exiled, or might even get killed. Religion is each person’s individual and private affair. Whoever wishes to practice it can practice it, whoever doesn’t should be allowed the freedom to do so as well. Why should a nation or a state or society coerce or force someone to observe or practice religion if the person doesn’t wish to do so? Will religion never show a way to freedom, will it always enslave people with iron chains? The nation is for everyone. It’s for the religious majority as well as the minority. And it’s the responsibility of the government to treat the minorities and the majority equally.

The government of China has banned the observation of Roza in the Muslim inhabited areas of China. Barring official government employees, leaders of the Communist Party, workers and students, the restrictions aren’t imposed on the remaining population though! Students shouldn’t indulge in keeping Roza due to their health probably, the leaders and workers of the Communist Party are bound by the preconditions of following Communism and being an atheist, so even they should be exempted from keeping Roza. But what about government officials and staff? They aren’t all atheists. If they wish to keep Roza, why should they be stopped from doing so? The government might argue that since keeping Roza can make one feel exhausted, it might then hamper the work done in an office during the day. But there are many who can observe Roza and yet not feel exhausted and thus can easily and tirelessly work in an office. Why shouldn’t they be allowed to observe Roza then? All people who keep Roza don’t necessarily feel drowsy in their offices. Hence I fully criticize this prohibition and banning of Roza announced by the Chinese