28 November, 2021

Blog

Hate Peddlers Using Burqa To Create Discord Again! 

By Lakmal Harischandra –

Lakmal Harischandra

There is an interesting video having a viral circulation these days of a Burqa clad Muslim woman challenging a man (reportedly a Sinhala Christian), who was videoing her in her garb at Arpico in Wattala. He was pointing accusing fingers at the woman in her Niqab stating that it is prohibited under country’s laws whereas she was seen to be telling him that it is not. When he was saying that he can only see her eyes , the woman appears to be asking him what more does he want to see in her?  She also protested against videoing her which impinges on her privacy.This whole incident has polarized the debate in the social media, projected as Sinhala vs. Muslim, with one side taking up the position that the Muslim woman has in fact acted in a way against the Sinhala race whereas the Man, a Sinhala Christian has acted in defence of the Sinhala race. The social media is agog with hate posts reminding the people of the Eater Sunday attacks by ‘Muslim’ extremists( we forget the fact that those who inflicted those attacks were donned in jeans/slacks and not in burqa. The burqa ban only diverted the attention away from government’s culpability). The other side of the debate however says the women merely acted bravely in defence of her rights to wear what she likes as long as it is not in any way illegal. She says that the prohibition was taken away after a brief period in the aftermath of Easter Sunday tragedy and offers to submit herself to any inspection if there are any security fears. 

I need to state that I have my own reservations about the suitability of this dress for a country like Sri Lanka. According to my limited knowledge and my inquiries from my Muslim friends,  the religion of Islam too does not prescribe this form of dress compulsorily for the Muslim women.; rather it is a matter of choice. Therefore this explains the reason why majority of Muslim women do not wear this form of dress (either Burqa or Niqab). There is a scholarly debate going among Islamic theologians too on this sensitive subject. Even the Ulema Council in Sri Lanka has told the Muslims  to exercise discretion in the matter of face cover in the context of security. In particular, traditionalists and reformists have their own arguments. Anyway, I am aware that Hijab is not a particular design as understood by many. But, Muslim women have the total freedom to choose the colour, design and pattern of their dress according to the changing context. The ultimate purpose is to protect the society as a whole and promote modest dressing and behaviour. It creates a barrier between the sexes and allows us to conduct our lives with modesty, dignity and respect.

Having said this, Muslim women, like any other women of other races have the constitutional right to exercise their cultural and religious identity. If a Muslim woman chose to wear her dress of preference within the confines of the law, there is no legal basis to others to challenge a Muslim woman, initiating another anti-Muslim hate campaign in the process. Whatever our likes and dislikes of a form of dress, the question revolves around the fact whether any citizen has the right to police other citizens on false pretences. It should be left to the law enforcement authorities  to enforce the law. In this case, it is clear that the prohibition against face covers was removed after a brief period of prohibition last year.   In the above case, the Muslim woman was, in a civilized way explaining this reality to the man and says she was acting within the law and that she is willing to go before the Police if the Man wants her to prove this fact.

Despite many misconceptions about Muslim forms of dress include Hijab as well as Burqa, my numerous discussions with Muslim sisters reveal that women who wear hijab point out many benefits to be gained from adhering to the Islamic dress code. Some describe wearing hijab as being “set free” from society’s unrealistic expectations. They are no longer thought of as sexual objects, but are desired for their intellect. They are no longer valued for their looks or body shape but for their personality and character. Women wearing hijab report that it minimises sexual harassment in the workplace. Thus this dress is not imposed upon them as popularly believed; rather those sisters have chosen. This should be respected.

It has been a public nuisance as seen in recent times that several ‘holier than thou’ characters have taken upon themselves to act as un-official Police to enforce their versions of  patriotism, morality, social rules of conduct and ethics on others. Particularly the monks and Sinhala social media warriors are taking the forefront in this regard. This is a dangerous trend and will lead to the re-enactment of  anti- Muslim hate episodes which took a worrying turn after the Post- Easter Sunday developments and also in the context of the present Sinhala supremacist prone government in power.  In the case of  this Burqa incident, it is dangerous to make it out as an affront or a challenge to the Sinhalese race as portrayed in the social media. It is not, as the Muslim woman was clearly re-iterating her rights as a citizen of this country with no malice intentions to the Sinhalese people as her dialogue in Sinhala, proved without doubt. Trying to turn this incident into a racial or religious hate incident by hate peddlers in the guise of social media warriors should be condemned and those responsible should be brought before law for having instigated racial and religious hatred.   

Those so-called Sinhala disciplinarians who attempt to discipline other communities should be asked whether the present day Sinhalese  are adopting Buddhist dress codes. Many distinguished members of the Maha Sangha have lamented about the deteriorating dress codes among young Sinhala girls even when visiting the temples. I have seen these disgraceful sights even at Kelaniya and Bellanwila very often. The monks have praised the Muslim dress codes as much civilized and modest. Perhaps , they want Muslims to adopt ancient Sinhala traditions.

Muslim Women Cover vs. Ancient Sinhala traditions on Women’s Dress!

Not long ago an incident was reported from Peradeniya University in which a fiery feminist fresher from Colombo stood up to a typical campus male senior who tried to rag her, and sent him away with his tail between his legs.The senior male had asked the fresher why she was clad in a tight pair of denim jeans, and advised her to come next day “wearing a gauma (frock) in the traditional Sinhala manner”. The reply was swift and sarcastic:”What d’you mean gauma? Gauma is not Sinhalese; it’s Portuguese. Then I should wear the osariya (Kandyan saree) or perhaps redda-haetta (cloth and jacket). How come you are wearing trouser and shirt? Perhaps, you should wear a sarong or maybe an amude (span cloth) if you want to dress in the true Sinhala manner. Amidst sounds of muted laughter the senior male beat a hasty retreat”.

 The above incident took place about few years ago and is symptomatic of the utter confusion that many people have about what constitutes the authentic national costume or true Sinhala/Tamil dress; despite the fact that it is doubtful whether such a singular mode of dress ever existed at any time in our island’s history. Dr. Nira Wickremasinghe, in an article titled “Some Comments On Dress In Sri Lanka”, reveals some surprising facts, especially on women’s attire in ancient Lanka. She details the topless tradition of Sri Lankan women according to evidence presented by historical sources. The saree and jacket combination that is today worn by women of all classes throughout the island underwent various changes. Apart from some indirect references made to dress in the Mahawamsa, there is hardly any authentic record of the manner in which women are clad in Sri Lanka before the sixth Century Sigiriya frescos. What is certain is that the rule of changelessness did not apply to women’s clothing.” 

“In a Hindu-Buddhist society it is difficult to assess with precision at what point semi-nudity became taboo. The Dhammapadatha Katha relates an incident which took place in the Tenth Century when a lay devotee, Rohini, wore a blouse before Anuruddha Thera only to cover marks left by a skin disease. This indicates that it was still unusual for women to cover their body. Women’s dress was then a cloth round the hip leaving the body bare from waist upwards.” Nira writes that by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries it was acceptable to remain uncovered at home but when going out to wear an upper garment. At this stage the cloth was worn with a separate garment covering the breasts thrown over the shoulders, which evolved into the shawl and breast band. How was it that the Hindu-Buddhist culture in ancient Lanka underwent such changes by the 14th Century so that an upper garment for women became a feature when leaving the house? 

A. L. Bhasham, in his monumental work The Wonder That Was India, notes that for many centuries Indian women did not wear upper garments except during winter in certain parts of northern India. He quotes the example of the Nayar tribal women of south India, who until the mid-20th Century went about topless. Bhasham implies that the Muslim invasions were what altered the dress codes of Indian women. In Sri Lanka one may note that there was a great deal of Muslim influence in the Kurunegala kingdom in the first half of the 14th Century, with even a Muslim monarch ascending the throne as Prince Vaththimi in about 1320 A.D. and ruling for nine years, according to the Kumnegala Vistharaya. Nira also writes of the impact of Western influences from the 16th Century onwards which had the effect of making Sri Lankan women more conservative in their attire.

By the late 19th Century and the early 20th Century came the so-called Hindu and Buddhist reformers, Arumuga Navalar among the Tamils and Anagarika Dharmapala among the Sinhalese, who imposed the puritanical Victorian morality of 19th Century Britain on Sri Lankan society. Even since then the average Sri Lankan is thoroughly confused, believing that the traditional mode of attire is to hide the bodily features as much as possible, when in fact the sensible and liberal tradition of Hindu-Buddhist culture in ancient Lanka, that prevailed from the 5th Century B.C. to the 19th Century A.D., was quite the opposite. (source: http://livingheritage.org/toplessness.htm)

Muslims too should be allowed to wear their traditional clothes!

Modesty, sometimes known as demureness, is a mode of dress and deportment which intends to avoid the encouraging of sexual attraction in others. Most discussion of modesty involves clothing. The criteria for acceptable modesty and decency have relaxed continuously in much of the world since the nineteenth century. Historically, however conservative dressing is most frequently associated with religious adherence. Observant Muslim women often wear a version of the hijab and loose-fitting, figure-obscuring clothing in public settings; and women in traditional Christian communities, from Amish to Mennonite, wear long dresses and, sometimes, some form of head covering. There is no set Buddhist dress codes, although modest clothing is best for both men and women. Thus, Muslim Women too should be allowed to follow their own traditions on dress code. Most wear their commonly known hijab (covering their body except the face and hands) while a miniscule number wear Niqab (covering the whole body except the eyes). If anyone can’ under dress’ as we commonly see, why can’t they ‘over-dress’ too? 

Under international human rights law, everyone has the right to freedom of expression and freedom to manifest their religion or beliefs. The way people dress can be an important expression of their religious, cultural or personal identity or beliefs. As a general rule, the right to freedom of religion or belief and freedom of expression entail that all people should be free to choose what – and what not – to wear. Governments have an obligation to respect, protect and ensure every individual’s right to express their beliefs or personal convictions or identity. They must create an environment in which every person can make that choice free of coercion. States should take measures to protect individuals from being coerced to dress in specific ways by these so-called social media warriors or self-appointed un-official Police in saffron clothes. Under international human rights law, the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and to manifest one’s religion or belief may only be subject to restrictions which meet a stringent three-part test: 

1. they must be prescribed by law; 

2. address a specific legitimate purpose permitted by international law; and 

3. be demonstrably necessary and proportionate for that purpose. Moreover, any restrictions must not be discriminatory or put in jeopardy the right itself or undermine other human rights.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 12
    16

    Wattala area is mostly catholic. So, they have a concern about Burqa.

    • 22
      17

      One stupid woman trying to look like an Arab, and a stupid guy with lots of time to poke his nose in everything is enough to create an ethnic tension in SL.

      • 14
        17

        Very difficult to poke your nose or anything else in when one is wearing a burqa. I suggest that all men and women start wearing it. That will make the Government sit up and do something about this pernicious garment.

        • 21
          7

          Adrian,

          “Very difficult to poke your nose or anything else in when one is wearing a burqa”

          Are you addicted to poking things whenever you see a girl not in Burqa? Better, Govt gives a subsidy to buy you a bike to avoid you using public transportation bro.

          • 8
            5

            Abdul Kader, congratulations. You must be the first man to get pregnant on a CTB bus.

        • 8
          1

          Ha ha ha……Adrian,

          Brilliant point. Actually, the whole country does not need to wear Burqa so the govt. will be forced to ban the garment.

          Just wear one and hang around Parliament grounds and next day the laws will change.

          • 4
            0

            Rtd. Lt. Reginald Shamal Perera, you are right, one would be enough. Any more than that might cause confusion.
            .
            Imagine all these women in burqa shopping at Cool Planet. Their husbands are waiting in their cars. How can a husband be sure that it is HIS wife that gets into his car? His slim attractive wife may enter the shop, but he might drive off with some fat hideous tart with three teeth and a wind problem.
            .
            These are the perils of the burqa. I’m only thinking of what’s best for our Muslims!

            • 4
              0

              I never shop at Cool Planet and you probably can guess why besides the cheap garbage they sell.

              The Muslim men you talk about probably couldn’t care less if they were their own wives or some other woman. Such uncivilized creatures.

              • 5
                6

                Rtd. Lt. Reginald Shamal Perera,

                “I never shop at Cool Planet and you probably can guess why besides the cheap garbage they sell”

                Are you afraid they will put a price tag on you?

                • 2
                  1

                  Abdul Kader, No price for bonus items!

    • 6
      4

      Lakmal Harischandra,

      “Under international human rights law, everyone has the right to freedom of expression and freedom to manifest their religion or beliefs. “

      Thanks for a well-researched and well-written article.

      The Muslim women and the undergraduate freshman, have really shown that opponents are ignorant low-IQ Para-imbeciles, which the country , seems to be teeming with.

      The Muslim women: If Amarasiri was around, would have pitched in with several additional points, to the Christian man, as well as the senior undergraduate, pointing out their, ignorance, jack of knowledge, ignorance, low IQ, and being being suckers for myths etc.

      Same pitch would have been given to the senior undergraduate imbecile.

      At least there is one good thing. Both the Muslim women and the Christian man do not prostrate to saffron clad monks, the tradition followed by Buddha-Agama, like the other imbeciles do.

      Anyway, they , the Muslim woman and the Christian man, have their own unproven myths, to which they have become slaves, guided by the priests and the Ulama.

      “Religion is the opium of the masses “, said Philosopher, lover of wisdom Karl Marx.

      Is religion for imbeciles only, after being thorough brainwashed?

      • 1
        1

        Lakmal,

        Both the Christian man and the Muslim woman are equally brainwashed.

        https://www.utu.fi/en/news/press-release/vitamin-d-deficiency-during-pregnancy-connected-to-elevated-risk-of-adhd

        They both believe in myths and fairy tales, brainwashed into them by the Priests and the Ulama. No wonder their mean IQ is 79. They do not know that Sunlight and Vit D are critical for human healthy, and that during evolution, humans moved about naked in the tropical Africa.

        Both of them believe in the Adam and Eve fairy tales, when there is conclusive evidence from fossils and from human genetics and molecular biology for evolution.

        The question is how do you make brainwashed imbeciles think? Their chromosome number 2 was formed by the fusion of two primate chromosomes.

        Some Indian Holy men who went about naked, getting sunlight on their bodies and Vitamin D had it right.

    • 13
      6

      JD,

      Catholics might have a concern about covering face. But, despite the fact that woman’s face wasn’t seen, she still has the legal right to sue this guy for Invasion of Privacy or Defamation. Another plus point in her side is that the guy is trying to show publicly that she has done a crime or acted against the state’s law, while it is not, and this was also agreed by the store’s staff in the video itself.

      I think she should have started legal process.

      • 6
        5

        S. Chandra L. L. B.

        Tunesia is an Islamic country. Yet, Muslims themselves blew up and, at least at the fourth blowing up, it was a woman wearing a full body cover. Finally Tunesia banned Full body cover.
        Will the Courts or the LAW address that genuine concern too ?
        Does the freedom have limits ? or ids it unconditional ?

        • 2
          1

          JD – SL Govt can do that but not the courts. What Chandra says is, in this woman’s case she has the right to ask for some justice and compensation from the courts on this incident.

      • 3
        3

        S. Chandra, LLB,

        Yes, well articulated.Thanks.

        Since not all Muslim women cover their faces in Burka, and only a very small minority cover their faces, and still many do not wear the hijab, the hair covering, the issue of burka, and hijab is subject to interpretation as a requirement in the religion.

        Furthermore, this was not an issue before the advent of the Wahhabi cultural invasion in the 1970s and 1980s.

        The Quran requests that the women wear modestly, and cover their bosoms. A lot of cultural and tribal practices have crept into Islam, and the Burka and hijab, became the tradition, in order to protect the women from men in the society.

        The initial protection was by keeping the women inside the house. Due to changes in the society and the technology, women were allowed to go out, but the protection was the Burka and the Hijab, thin pieces of cloth. In the Middle Ages, Chastity Belts were used by different societies. Bringing an unknown man and a women closer , was perceived as bringing cotton and fire closer. The passion will burn them both.

        However, in the current context of Wahhabi-Salafi Terrorists, exploding bombs, the objections raised to the Burka is understandable. Why is that only the Wahhabi-Salafism and their clones are terrorists, and Not the Sufi, Shia and Ahmedia Muslims?

      • 7
        1

        Mr. LLB, you are advising to open a can of worms. In a country where the full-face helmet is banned, the bourqa could be a serious issue. I don’t see a difference between the full-face helmet and a bourqa when it comes to security, safety, and protection of either side. Suing may be good for the myopic lawyers but not for the average citizen! We know that we have enough of issues in the country and don’t advise to bring in unwanted and unnecessary issues to the already crammed bin.
        Just like in the so-called LTTE issue the looser will be the Muslims, not the Catholic Sinhalese! Don’t forget that there are many Muslims too who don’t support the bourqa!

      • 10
        0

        S Chandra LLB,

        You must have got your Law degree from the nearest Grocery store. There is nothing called “Privacy” while you are in a Public place.

        Privacy is within your own home. This man has every right to video record the woman because it is a public place. So does all the surveillance cameras inside the Wattala Arpico and so does all the Security cameras at the nearby ATM.

        • 5
          1

          ‘You must have got your Law degree from the nearest Grocery store’

          Ha ha ha a good one.

          • 6
            5

            Adrian, Fools of a feather flock together :-)

            • 6
              1

              Abdul, it’s ‘Birds of a feather flock together.’ For fools you could use
              ‘The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are sometimes right’ (Churchill)

              Have you heard about fools and their money? They say a fool and his money are soon parted. But how did they get together in the first place? :-)

              • 2
                0

                Adrian, then you’re right :-)

            • 2
              2

              Like on Fridays?

        • 4
          7

          Rtd. Lt. Reginald Shamal Perera
          .
          Not sure if grocery stores sell law degrees in your neighborhood, not mine.
          Whatever it may, you have greatly confused yourself with the words, Public & Privacy. Start Googling with “what is privacy?” & move on from there. Sure, it can help civilize yourself a bit including forum posts.
          .
          Stay blessed

          • 5
            0

            Mr LLB,

            That indeed is a great idea. I will refer to google in future whenever I need some legal advice in future. LOL.

            It’s way better than a legal expert like yourself in any case.

    • 7
      5

      If wearing a Burqa or Niqab is a threat to the National Security, then wearing a Saffron Robe is also a threat to the National Security. Remember, a man wearing a Saffron Robe shot and killed Prime Minister SWRD Bandaranayake.

      • 6
        4

        Did the Saffron wearing Monk killed 250 innocent people?

        In any case, our country, our rules. If we chose not to ban the saffron robe, that is OUR prerogative.

        • 0
          1

          Rtd. Lt. Reginald Shamal Perera,

          “In any case, our country, our rules”. Can MR/GR say that in front of Modi so I won’t call you a joker? Shameless idiot, your country, your rules, but unfortunately can never say “Our money” or China, Arabs and EU will be upset?

      • 3
        4

        The Messenger,

        The imbeciles, measured mean IQ 79, prostrate to saffron clad monks who hijacked Buddhism , but no imbecile, Muslim or not will prostrate to the burka clad women,

      • 2
        3

        The messenger,

        The difference is that the saffron clad monk face is not covered, and therefore, identifiable , whereas, the burka women is not.

        Both are brainwashed in their respective myths, beliefs.

        Both originate from a populace with a mean measured IQ of 79, who have been brainwashed in their myths since childhood, and addicted to their myths.

  • 5
    3

    Fortunately, both actions are not by sinhala buddhists. If that happened, it would be trouble. All the human right activists and NGOs would blast them ans it would add another stOry to UNHCR with SIRIYALATHA’S case and NiSHANTHA DE SILVA’S cases. OH LORD. Just saved.

  • 5
    12

    Gota promised to do it can won votes. Now he better do it!

    SL also has to think about India’s new policies on Muslims. Best to adopt them before India turns against SL.

    • 12
      8

      We don’t do things here to please India, at least that is how it should be. India is led by a racist, who looked the other way when thousands of Muslims were raped, tortured and killed by Hindu mobs, and right now his racist policies have resulted in nation-wide protests by people of all religions. It is other nations, and anti Muslim ones especially, that are trying hard to push Sri Lanka to be another Myanmar. Gota’s connections to racist Buddhist monks, is questionable and he has no credibility as a leader who is interested in the security and safety of the minority, all he wants is to use religion as a tool, to win the Buddhist votes. Who knows what was agreed to by the Buddhist Rajapakasa’s and the Hindu nationalist, and whatever it may be does not bode well for the minority.

  • 10
    4

    I cannot quite understand how the author can be certain that the inquisitor was a ‘Sinhala Christian’. Notwithstanding that anomaly, it is totally out of order for him to harass the women who is doing nothing illegal. This is the sort of low key daily antagonism that fosters hate amongst our people. There is too much of it affecting our daily lives. The sooner it is stamped out the better.

  • 20
    5

    The Burqua is not a part of the Sri Lankan muslims traditional dress this is a dress enforced on the Sri Lankan muslims by the Wahabi nutcases from Saudi Arabia.

    I encourage all Sri Lankan Muslims to breack free from these oppressive false prophets from Saudi Arabia.

    • 12
      9

      You are correct and I completely agree with you. These brainwashed Sri Lankan, Dravidian converted Tamil Muslims from South India are now trying hard to behave like pathetic Wahhabi Arab clones from the deserts of Saudi Arabia,. Their own 1000 year old,native Tamil Muslim Sufi Islamic culture is very rich, instead of appreciating this and trying to safeguard it , they want to be pathetic Gulf Arab wannabes , thinking that this will give them prestige and economic benefits. These sorts of garments, unlike the traditional Muslim female garment of wearing a saree with the head covered with the Muthanai or Dupata , does not blend with the Buddhist/Hindu culture of the island , it jars and even not suitable for the tropical environment of the island. Having said this , wearing the Burqa is not illegal and this female has every right to wear this if she wants to and express her religious and what she feels is her cultural right. Her rights supersedes all what we think and our prejudices of what a woman should wear. We must respect her and applaud her for what she had done and her bravery for confronting that male bigot and standing up to him. I laud her for this , everyone else was only watching the fun and not asking that awful man to shut up and get out of the supermarket and take his horrible bigoted views with him. Like she stated she is not harming anyone wearing her burqa and it is her body and her right . Well done. This is what happens when racism and bigotry is sanctioned. This lady can wear the burqa if she wants , the saree or even the bikini . This is her god given right and who the hell are we to questioned her.

      • 11
        1

        Siva,
        I am OK with ladies comming in bickinis to the super market,
        but I cannot tolarate men comming in their underpants.

        • 5
          0

          Wimpy Kid, how about a native Veddah in a loin cloth? Would that be okay?

          • 3
            4

            Adrian
            Aged 13 3/4

            “Wimpy Kid, how about a native Veddah in a loin cloth? Would that be okay?”

            Why not?
            Is it okay if Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi walks into the shop in loin cloth ?

            • 4
              0

              Of course it is okay. Dr Dahanayake said so.

            • 2
              0

              Context is important in these matters.

        • 5
          4

          Wimpy Kid – Do you get aroused when seeing men in underpants? Curious, just share what kind of feeling you get there please.

          • 3
            0

            Abdul Kader, we see your circumcision is still causing you problems. No matter, Hitler had a similar difficulty with his one ball.

            • 1
              1

              Adrian,

              Hitler seems to have mislead you on circumcision. My problem is different; got three. Free to carry one for me?

              • 0
                0

                Too heavy :-)

    • 3
      3

      Wimpy Kid

      “I encourage all Sri Lankan Muslims to breack free from these oppressive false prophets from Saudi Arabia.”

      You must be kidding.
      Most of the Muslims in Sri Lanka are accountable only to the local Mosque.
      Failing, Fatwa will be pronounced on the wrong doers.
      Jealousy prone religious leaders attached to Mosques cannot stand Muslim women/girls talking to men.

  • 3
    2

    Admitted we have no clear law with regard to the extent of body coverage by dress and the exposure required for security purposes. In the same token is there a clear line of demarcation between freedom of expression and hate speech? While this woman is exercising (displaying) her democratic right this non Muslim society has accorded her the social media commenters too are exercising (displaying) their democratic right. After all social media comments are physically non invasive as much as concealing the body is physically non invasive to others. Security aspect is another debate.
    The writer is trying to earn a few brownie points.

    Soma

    • 3
      3

      somass

      “In the same token is there a clear line of demarcation between freedom of expression and hate speech?”

      We aspire to actively defend the right to freedom of speech while in return we get hate speech from racist bigots like you.

      Gota and Mahinda need a riot now.
      Aren’t you going to help them with one?

  • 1
    1

    “Under international human rights law, everyone has the right to freedom of expression and freedom to manifest their religion or beliefs”
    The writer may be unaware that France enacted some new laws barring “public manifestation” of one’s religion. Along with banning hijab in public they also included wearing crucifixes.
    Any comments Mr Lakmal?

    Soma

    • 6
      2

      Soma,

      ““public manifestation” of one’s religion”

      Let the French worry about France’s laws. In SL, we can’t do that as “Pirith nula” also will come under this category.

    • 2
      0

      What about the Dharma Chakkare?

    • 3
      3

      somass

      “The writer may be unaware that France enacted some new laws barring “public manifestation” of one’s religion.

      You should check French law regarding wearing the veils, burqas and niqābs, the Jewish kippa, and large Christian crosses in public then add your typing.
      Even as a card carrying racist you have the right to express “your opinion” however others also have their right to be themselves.

      • 2
        0

        NV
        From Wikipedia:
        //
        As of 11 April 2011, it is illegal to wear a face-covering veil or other masks in public spaces. Veils, scarves and other headwear that do not cover the face are unaffected by this law. The law imposes a fine of up to €150, and/or participation in citizenship education, for those who violate the law. The bill also penalises, with a fine of €30,000 and one year in prison, anyone who forces (by violence, threats, or abuse of power) another to wear face coverings; these penalties may be doubled if the victim is under the age of 18.

        As a result of the law, the only exceptions to a woman wearing a face-covering veil in public will be if she is travelling in a private car or worshiping in a religious place.
        //

        Soma

        • 2
          1

          somass

          You typed earlier:
          “Along with banning hijab in public they also included wearing crucifixes.”

          Hijab – A head covering worn in public by some Muslim women.

          From your above para:
          Veils, scarves and other headwear that do not cover the face are unaffected by this law.

          Why are you rushing to type what you think is the point whereas you are wrong, wrong, and wrong all the time.

          Hijab is not banned in France.
          Are you trying to impress your partner?

  • 5
    1

    “a great deal of Muslim influence in the Kurunegala kingdom in the first half of the 14th Century, with even a Muslim monarch ascending the throne as Prince Vaththimi in about 1320 A.D”.
    My dear friend, please don’t twist the historical facts. Prince Vathhimi’s mother was a Muslim woman and it doesn’t mean he was a Muslim. When the king died, the cabinet of ministers allowed him to rule the country but due to the fact that he was a teenager, his Muslim mother influenced him to the level that the cabinet could not tolerate her undue influence on many decisions. Finally he was killed and the exiled heir to the thrown Prince Parakramabahu became the king. If you have time, watch the film ‘Siri Parakum’ for details of this interesting historic event.

    • 0
      2

      Raj. don’t be a moron.

      The writer is not saying it. He is only quoting Nira wickramasinghe an expert when he writes

      “a great deal of Muslim influence in the Kurunegala kingdom in the first half of the 14th Century, with even a Muslim monarch ascending the throne as Prince Vaththimi in about 1320 A.D”.
      just read carefully

  • 3
    3

    Despite the fact that it is not a smart thing for anyone to cover their faces this way, in this land of ethnic tensions, ignorance, and hate, he had no right to criticize her that way, and should realize there are security personnel there to address the issue.
    The two parties represent the influences of racism, and that of Wahabism.
    Both preventing this nation from being united, and peaceful, which we need badly.
    Both stubbornly standing their ground, but getting nowhere.

    In a country where ethnic violence against the minority flares up often, why are these women unable to realize that following the laws of a primitive nation like Saudi Arabia, are unsuitable and more important only brings negative attention to the consistent ethnic tensions. IF the Quran has not mentioned face cover, why do they keep insisting on following Saudi’s primitive laws, unsuitable for our hot climate, and basically get more attention by doing so? People look twice when a person covers their face attracting more attention. One cannot live in a multi religious nation, and insist on wearing face cover that has been an issue to the security of the nation. It is not culturally ours to begin with, but more than that, it is for the good of your security and safety, and that of your family, to think practically.

    • 5
      4

      Menik you are 100% correct , at least the Sinhalese and Buddhism is native to the island , but this does not excuse their racism , especially towards the Tamils who are as indigenous and native as them, but Wahhabism and Arabic culture, language and dress forms do not belong to the island and these stupid Dravidian Tamil Muslims of Sri Lanka are now trying to impose this on the rest of the island and create unnecessary tensions. One Muslim Idiot even wanted the national anthem to be sung in Arabic. Arabic ! What has Arabic got to do with the island or even its Muslims who are Indian Tamil by ethnicity? If there is a native Muslim culture , dress form , it is the Tamil Muslim culture and dress forms , that blended and created no stress or friction for all these centuries , unlike these alien Arabic culture, dress and forms of Islam that are very aggressive and intolerant. Moreover most women in the Arabian Gulf , do not wear the Burka, only a very small minority. This woman has the right to wear this very uncomfortable black garb or sack cloth and that man had no right to abuse her but did she realise , that this alien aggressive dress form covering her entire face other than the heavily made up eyes , is really provoking people , annoying them , creating suspicion and hatred towards the Muslims. This is the reason most people in the supermarket both Sinhalese and Tamils , Buddhists , Hindus and Christians, quietly watched but silently agreed with what this man stated. It looked like she deliberately did this to provoke. Here I am with this extreme alien Wahhabi Arabic dress form , portraying fundamentalist Islam . This is now my right to wear it and flaunt it , just like the way the Muslim woman did that in a Hindu school in Trincomalee. Do what you want.

      • 4
        4

        Rohan,

        “Tamils who are as indigenous and native as them”

        If Tamils are indigenous & native, why is their language is borrowed or from Tamil Nadu? If Tamils are indigenous & native, why is their culture a borrowed one or from TN? Sinhalese also claim similar period as their existence, but with their own language and culture.

        Did we have the talentless people who couldn’t innovate a language for themselves for over 2500 years? Or, centuries ago, did SL Tamils see TN people as present day Wahabbies of Muslims?

        • 3
          5

          Sinhalese extremist and pretend Muslim have nothing to say to you, as you are brainwashed extremist Sinhalese idiot ,cunningly coming here and posting under a Muslim identity to deliberately create , discord between the Tamils and Muslims. Idiotic goat Tamil culture and language is one and belongs to all Tamils and no one borrowed it from the other , it belongs to all Tamil and this includes the Tamil Muslims. This island was part the ancient Tamil homeland. It is the Sinhalese who have borrowed everything from the Tamils, food, dress, dance, culture, festivals, the gods worshipped, even 40% of their vocabulary and 100% of the Tamil grammar, syntax and lexicon. You even borrowed our kings and aristocracy and called them yours. Idiotic creature . Tamil has been existence in the island for around 3000 years minimum . Sinhalese that evolved from Tamil from around 6 AD

        • 0
          0

          ghost
          You are a real fool and idiot for not knowing that without the use of many Tamil words and expressions, the Sinhalese language would be an absurd meaningless gobbledygook!

      • 4
        0

        Every one has the right to dress however they wish, but if they dress like a bank robber, they will be treated like a bank robber. You can’t wear the professional uniform of bank robbers and expect to be treated as a decent person.

    • 5
      1

      ——————————–and should realize there are security personnel there to address the issue.——————-

      Menik,

      You couldn’t be a very intelligent person. If the security personnel had indeed addressed the issue, the woman wouldn’t be inside the store in the first place.

      The man had to care about his own safety. So, does every diligent citizen. If it was me, I would have made a Citizens arrest and called the Police to takeover the arrest.

      Citizens do have the right to arrest when there is no civil police at hand. And they must start doing so.

      Religious freedom can go to hell with itself, we must live first.

      • 0
        0

        Rtd. Lt. Reginald Shamal Perera /

        The man was drunk he sees evry one as terroris after he is drunk

      • 0
        0

        Lt. Perera
        You are truly hilarious . Thank you for keeping us entertained.

  • 2
    1

    Thses days covering is allowed in all supermarket due to the coronovirous hand eye contacts or if they sneeze front of the foods stuffs they will eat curry dish of corona.
    In Wuhan, China, the center of the outbreak, face masks were made mandatory in late January.

  • 8
    11

    In PUBLIC no on has a right to PRIVACY. This is the law of any land that is democratic and free. This is the law in Europe, America, and many other countries except in crazy, lunatic lands like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. The woman in the video cannot be allowed, not can anyone else who decides to go out in the public be allowed to expect privacy.

    Its a matter of safety and security that everyone has a right to see who the other person is facially in public. Lanka must clarify and enact strict laws about this matter immediately. These women who cover themselves will soon become the next wave of Easter Sunday type suicide bomber. There is absolutely no time to lose.

    • 11
      1

      Jay Chambers,

      This time you didn’t describe how China handled such cases with Uyghurs, and also kept it very brief. Boss doesn’t pay as agreed?

  • 1
    1

    Mr.Harischandra,
    Dinos non existence is because they could not adopt to the changing situations the animal human adopted and still exist and develop, so each of us has to get adopt to the conditions for the moment also to those which are essayed as good manners by the society if not one has to face such unwanted circumstances, example can i go shopping naked ?will you your self not point your finger at me ? as to your argument it has to be possible is it not so ?
    I think too about individual freedom as you write with the exceptional that one has to adopt with out being stupid and become spot and to face the provocations and disgrace just because such dresses.
    Last point that his is not the traditional dress of Sri Lanka “Marakkala” society this is from Arab tradition.

    When you are in Rom ———–? ( fill the blank Mr. Harischandra)

  • 4
    5

    Its funny when u think of it, Sri Lanka banned the niquab, and now every one is wearing the niquab, even at the airport all the security officers were in niquab. i even saw gnansaraya and rathne wearing niquab. The idiot who says niquab is not suited for sri lanka should go through history, The curse of stopping it comes back to the oppressor. it has happened in china/france now sri lanka. should be carefull what u say or do, Allah will punish severely the racist.

  • 6
    2

    That Muslim woman shouldn’t have covered her face. Looking at the make up in her eye-lash I can say that she is a ‘wannabe Arab’ type, and it is not even case that she has misunderstood what religion says and covering her face.

    Meanwhile, we’re living in a very dangerous society, if anyone can video someone, then post on social media, finally that video gets viral because of communal nature in it.

    • 5
      0

      Fatima,
      When you think of it that way I recommend all communities irrespective of gender including children to cover their faces not to prevent men being aroused but to escape from FACE BOOK.

      • 2
        0

        “I recommend all communities irrespective of gender including children to cover their faces”

        Escape from FB might be true in your case as “wimpy” & being aroused don’t mix well, LOL.

  • 2
    0

    indeed a very intersting & important facts by Mr Harischandra.Reading the article came to know a lot facts about our history.I dought thr average buddhist know these history of Sri Lanka.

  • 5
    2

    This is incident is unwanted.
    Niqab is not fitting to this counties and this society and this world at all.
    Personal choices should go alone with national laws and national trends .
    It is not prescribed in Islam to do so ..
    It creates so many trouble and problems..
    This idiot does not care about it .
    She creates problems.
    Is it a set up ?.

    • 4
      2

      Lankan, it doesn’t seem like a setup. Look at her mother’s looks, how she speaks, and the makeup she wears in her eyes alone. And Arab women also wears a lots of makeup in her eyes and keeps her fingers as attractive as possible since those are the areas open for ‘public’. This stupid girl is also doing the same. There is nothing Islam or modesty in her, it is all that she wanted to look like an Arab woman.

  • 4
    1

    Once we forget all the past, after some time, the next easter attack may be women wearing Hijabs and all those full body cover.

    • 7
      1

      Yes Yes You are right
      I dont like people covering their face in public places.
      It scares me, small children think it is a goni billa.

      We dont want this nonsense in Sri Lanka.

      On the same note motorcycle helmets should be removed when entering shops.

      Full face helmets were banned in 1989 because most of the JVP/militia assassins were wearing them to conceal their identity.

  • 7
    1

    Living and working in the Middle East for almost 10 years, I can safely say, that this is not something mandatory for Muslim Women to follow. Here in the Middle East Muslim Women walk with their faces mostly visible even though the head is covered. Then again the Virgin Mary too, wore a shawl around her head is is very often depicted that way. Islam, in SL has been construed and adopted to suit the ideologies of certain sects like the Taliban.

  • 4
    1

    We don’t want history of dress

    we don’t want religions

    We want women to be women, throughout the world. To fashionably expose …..

    Unless they’re brain washed.

    • 1
      1

      Real Revolutionis

      What is the limit of expose

      • 3
        2

        rbh, don’t you know Real Revolutionist is a cleavage guy?

      • 2
        0

        rbh

        Limit of exposure?

        Unlimited

        They (women) enjoy the right to decide in an environment where religions aren’t applied for women.

        • 0
          0

          Real Revolutionist
          Environment where religions aren’t applied for women.

          Naked kigdom

  • 4
    0

    No doubt Allah created the Coronavirus so that all women would wear burqas and preserve their modesty. What a great guy.

  • 8
    2

    The full face cover (burqa and niqab) should be banned world wide in all non-muslim nations.
    The line has to be drawn somewhere. You cannot walk around in public hiding your face. Its not only very anti-social but potentially a serious security threat also.
    If muslims have a problem with it, they can migrate to countries like saudi arabia.

  • 0
    0

    The full face cover (burqa and niqab) should be banned world wide in all non-muslim nations.

    This burqa And Niqab is emerging with the another name , A 2016 study from New South Wales suggested people touched their faces about 23 times an hour.

    Jonathan Ball, professor of molecular virology at the University of Nottingham, said: “In one well controlled study in a hospital setting, the face mask was as good at preventing influenza infection as a purpose-made respirator.” Dr David Carrington, of St George’s, University of London, told BBC News “routine surgical masks for the public are not an effective protection against viruses or bacteria carried in the air”, which was how “most viruses” were transmitted, because they were too loose, had no air filter and left the eyes exposed

    • 2
      0

      rbh

      Don’t worry, animals, including people have immune systems.

      Don’t come up with silly excuses.

      It’s exposure that enhances immune strength.

    • 5
      0

      rbh,
      .
      Whether Muslim women or non-Muslim women, they love to show their beauty, in some cases the shapes, and in some extreme cases the curves. It is the nature and if a religion or her men folks stop her, you’re taking away her rights

  • 1
    0

    The purpose of burqa is to prevent men from staring. Burqa works if most of the women are wearing it. However, if burqa wearers are a minority, the opposite occurs – suddenly they draw even more attention to themselves. If there are 10 trees, and the average height is 12 m, the single tree that is 24 m will stand out. That is what you see in the video. Had she not worn a burqa, no one would have noticed her. No doubt, women are vulnerable and burqa might be considered a defensive strategy. But there are other defensive strategies as well, that women can learn. For example, using the leg to aim at a certain region. Or carrying a whistle. Physically able women can be taught to fight. Even if the man is stronger, the woman can be taught to have an advantage in speed and agility.

  • 0
    1

    Real Revolutionist

    exposure that enhances immune strength not enough that why people are dying, screening for letting the forein bodies to enter you body sharing each other’s germs

  • 1
    0

    People who are not enforcing the law should not interfere with any attire worn by any person. Police or members of armed forces in uniform should stop the person hiding behind any face covering and do a full boy search because a terrorist (I wonder if there were any Muslim terrorists who played havoc) could use such disguise to avoid detection. That is all people. We need to know who is behind that face covering. Check for ID.

    • 3
      0

      Omar,
      I agree , what the FB man did was illegal
      FB black mail is a serious crime.
      New laws should be enacted and enforced against this type of harresment.
      Police checks should be done without violating the person(suspect) proper guidelines and procedures should be in place before thinking of doing full body searches.

  • 3
    0

    It is time that the Govt come clean on this matter. If the face mask is banned so be it the law. Govt must prevent the confusion that runs in the public. High time the Govt understood the sentiments of the majority and make a clear statement. besides the Muslims themselves are expected to reach the middle ground and appease the majority rather than remain in the extremes of the faith.

    • 2
      0

      Despite the facts Islams doesn’t say to cover a woman’s face, and majority of Muslims themselves along with non-Muslims hate this practice, why should govt delay to ban this burqas once and for all?

      • 1
        0

        Why should wait till govt. do it?

        It’s Muslim men’s grip that should be removed.

  • 0
    2

    I admire the courage of that Muslim lady! It is elements like him who should be eradicated immediately. As a citizen she has every right to where what she chooses. That man should be reprimanded by the police for inciting hatred,

  • 1
    1

    This is a well written article, the writer has done a lot of research on the dress code of Sri Lankan women. It also promotes ethno religious harmony.
    However It didn’t address the reasons why wearing burka has become a big issue in many countries including Sri Lanka. As many as fourteen countries including three Muslim majority countries have banned burka, the stated reason being threat to security. There seems to be another reason which is that Muslim people are unwilling to blend into the society they live in. The third argument proffered against wearing burka is that it is not a rigid islamic code of conduct and Islamic women have the choice of other modest dresses.
    These and other matters must be dealt with by Muslim scholars and rulers. Two points among others when addressing this issue, must be taken into consideration and be addressed sympathetically.
    1. Why the woman had the urge to wear burka knowing fully well that there will be possible negative reaction in public places.
    2. Why the man decided to enforce the non existent law in a nonviolent but intrusive manner.

  • 4
    0

    Gentlemen,

    If you happen to live in a jurisdiction where wearing this type of nonsense is an offense and if you see someone breaking this law, do your duty as a good citizen.

    Carry a pair of handcuffs with you, exercise your constitutional right to do a citizens arrest in the event there is no law enforcement officers, put this thing into the ground, hand cuff this thing and immediately call the Police.

  • 2
    3

    Jay Chambers,
    Your pee brain that is trapped in your anal cavity is what makes you talk BS. The law of the West in most countries that you state except for France which is unconstitutional and is being challenged as we speak does not discriminate the dress code. This goes against the religious freedom, freedom of expression and civil liberties. If the law in the West is as asinine as you dumb MF’s state, a Christian Nun or a nurse who we call head nurses or sisters would not be allowed to ware there head dress whether part of a dress or uniform. so go F yourself you f’ing ignoramus racist PRICK!

    • 4
      0

      Condom Lisa Priceless,

      In Canada’s Quebec province it is illegal for Public employees to wear this god damn nonsense of a Garb that doesn’t allow anyone else to identify who the hell you are.

      That’s why whenever I visit Quebec, I carry a pair of Handcuffs. If I see any public employee wearing this nonsense in front of me in Quebec, I will see if there is Law enforcement close by. If not, all bets are off. I will overpower this thing onto the ground, read it it’s god damn habeas Corpus rights, arrest this law breaker myself and call 911.

      Extra ordinary problems need extra ordinary solutions. This bloody nonsense has to stop.

      • 2
        0

        Rtd. Lt. Reginald Shamal Perera, just make sure it is not an Arab, a Pakistani, a black or a tough looking guy’s wife. These people are too fit and tough by nature, by genes. Your LT training won’t save your remaining few teeth. Or even better wait till police come to resolve the matter without you getting into trouble. We need you machan..

        • 0
          0

          Now in china every one is covering and looking for halal food what is to eat and not eat. how dress , sneezes, much like the flu virus spreads, droplets can land in the eyes mouths or noses of people who are nearby, or possibly be inhaled into the lungs.

      • 0
        0

        Rtd. Lt. Reginald Shamal Perera

        I will overpower this thing onto the ground, read it it’s god damn habeas Corpus rights.

        In china all are wearing the even Handcuffs will not stop the viruses, God have shown the protection and benifits in advance because the virus are teching lesson, Over power will not work the viruse will make people to grouund

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 5 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.