Sunday, June 24, 2007

Hilarious -- Pseudosecular wag on the purdah

Some wonk (dhimmi? pseudosecular? uber-liberal?) at the ToI-let paper claims that the imposition of purdah on women is not courtesy Islam!
When UPA presidential nominee Pratibha Patil mentioned that the purdah had been in existence since Mughal times, she was being historically inaccurate, but voicing a commonly held misconception.

In fact, according to N R Farooqi, professor of History at Allahabad University, the Mughals probably borrowed purdah from the Rajputs. Historian Harbans Mukhia, in his book, The Mughals of India, cites the Baburnama and the Humayunnama to state that the Mughals were never in purdah. Farooqi says Mughal women were introduced to the purdah only after Akbar married a Rajput princess, who may have brought this custom along with her.
Mughal women were not covered! Yeah, right -- they cavorted around freely -- much like women in islamic nations today do.

This would be funny if it had not been pathetic.

Fortunately, not too many have fallen for this rubbish: many of the replies note -- with sources -- that the purdah is mandated in Islamic scriptures.

1 comment:

bly243001 said...

These guys are truly pathetic.
So let me understand- if purdah is a vile tradition borrowed from Hindus (like any other evil, by default, has its orgin in Hinduism), then what's the harm in banning it? Why should superseculars and Mohammadens protest it? Shouldn't they support it and put another nail in the coffin of evil hindu influence?

Truly truly pathetic.