Konkani Muslim Wedding and Sarkozy

Yesterday was my husband’s cousin’s Konkani Muslim Wedding at the Haj House near VT station. The men were dressed more or less the same- Pant and Bush Shirt- in simple style and subdued colours. The two men who have a central role to play in a Muslim wedding were dressed a little differently. The groom had a more flamboyant blue shirt on with a corduroy jacket that was promptly removed after the brief ceremony. The Bride’s father had a black coat and a black fur cap (a bit like what Farooq Abdullah wears) on. When the Kazi who was the only bearded man in the hall (and a few others) began to recite the Kalma, the groom donned a white skull cap which was clearly a last minute and unco-ordinated inclusion in his wedding attire. A couple of elders on the stage placed their handkerchiefs on their head. The rest tried to look as solemn as they could with their bare heads. The groom’s father was walking up and down, giving catering instructions on his mobile phone while his son was reciting his wedding wows. It can’t be more humdrum and matter of fact than this.

The scene among the other sex was different. The women were a motley mix. At the middle of the spectrum were the normal Konkani Muslim women of our family- clad in a Banarasi saree and gold Mangalsutra sans bindi. There was a section of women clad in black burkhas- maybe very distant relatives as neither I knew them nor was introduced to them. Then there was this bizarre lot who was dressed in zhakpak salwar kameez and wore shiny imitation jewellery. Among all this, you wouldn’t have missed a huge number of women dressed in Banarasis, mangalsutras with bindis on their foreheads. They were the more family than friends Hindu friends of the family and long standing neighbours, greeting our aunt with the muslim hug. As if this was not enough, you also had my husband’s Bohra Muslim aunt clad in a bright coloured and intricately embroidered Bohra burkha known as a rida.

In short, men and women dressed as they pleased or as they understood/ interpreted the tradition. I did not see any consciously defined uniform pattern. This is how it should be: Let people be. Let them choose for themselves. Give them the freedom to follow their traditions or reject them, as long as they are not causing harm to others.

What would Mr. Sarkozy have made out regarding the Muslim sartorial tradition if he was a guest at the above wedding? He has created a stir by proposing a ban on burkha in France.

How can any state dictate what people should not wear? I am sure there are anti-nudist laws in France, meaning one can not go about completely naked in public, meaning one has to wear some clothes at least. That being the case, who decides the upper limit? Personally, I can’t understand why some Muslim women choose to wear a sac like garment with a face mask. I don’t get the logic of modesty implied here. I also don’t understand the stark contrast in the way men and women dress at the Oscar award ceremony, for instance. Now, either the women must be freezing to near death or the men must be slowing stewing inside their penguin like uniforms. You don’t go about advocating bans on some things you don’t like or understand.

Compare some universities in Uttar Pradesh banning girls from wearing jeans with the French government banning burkhas. Both acts are equally dubious even though the former seems to be imposing restrictions on women while the latter seems to liberate them from restrictions. At a deeper level they commit a similar folly.

I wish both the state and the church would leave people alone in matters of personal choices.