What's new

"Wearing Hijab Is Indiscipline": Karnataka Minister On Students' Protest

That's wrong info... Be it a men or women, covering their aurat is must/compulsary in islam.. you can do that or don't do that but that doesn't make it optional..

I am talking about Hijab I know which is the garment/head scarf. I am not going on the religious or colloquial translation of what “hijab” means in religious books. That’s not my area or expertise.
 
You are half right. A Muslim lady needs to cover her modesty from the neck to the toes or ankles. It is optional to cover the hair and face. Most scholars agree that the burkha or niqab is unnecessary where as the hijab seems to have gained in popularity over the last decade or something. It is also true that many Muslim people especially Pakistanis and Indian's want to be like Arab's these days due to some complex they have. Covering up need not be in abaya's or jibab's when a salwar kameez is just as good.

What i learned from madrassa is covering their hair is must, only inner-hand and face is optional, maybe I'm wrong... and i really want niqab should be banned...
 
I am talking about Hijab I know which is the garment/head scarf. I am not going on the religious or colloquial translation of what “hijab” means in religious books. That’s not my area or expertise.

That it is.. as far i know it's must..
 
You are half right. A Muslim lady needs to cover her modesty from the neck to the toes or ankles. It is optional to cover the hair and face. Most scholars agree that the burkha or niqab is unnecessary where as the hijab seems to have gained in popularity over the last decade or something. It is also true that many Muslim people especially Pakistanis and Indian's want to be like Arab's these days due to some complex they have. Covering up need not be in abaya's or jibab's when a salwar kameez is just as good.

That blind copy mentality is really the problem in our society.
 
What i learned from madrassa is covering their hair is must, only inner-hand and face is optional, maybe I'm wrong... and i really want niqab should be banned...

Every madrassa teaches different things. Many are operated by extremists brainwashing kid's who have no basic understanding of classical Islam. The Islam is a spiritual path more then anything else. Ask the likes of the great Allama Iqbal or Bulleh Shah who were much more knowledgeable about the classical Islam. The great Allama Iqbal was a great critic of Mullah culture. This Madrassa culture is mostly prevalent in Pak, India and even Africa because poor people are easier to brainwash. Madrassa's are about controlling people more then anything else whilst the teachers do exactly what they tell others not too if not worse.
 
Last edited:
That blind copy mentality is really the problem in our society.

Most Pakistanis want to be Arabs like most Indian ape the west. For me Allah is my only judge not some corrupt Arab who is perhaps even a worse sinner then me!:klopp I am not envious off them at all and never dress like them. There is no uniform code in Islam other then to dress modestly. My salwar kameez do me fine when I am indoors or even outdoors in Pak or Dubai.
 
Because in Indian culture no one thinks of a teacher as a non-mehram male or female. The Guru (teacher) are given same stature as parents.

Indian culture has no bearing on Islamic observance. If the female is a practicing muslima be it in US, UK, France, Arabia, India, Malaysia she cannot be seen without a hijab (head cover hiding hair) outside of her immediate male family members.

It is different from Burqa or Niqaab.

So please keep your ill informed thoughts to yourself.
 
Indian culture has no bearing on Islamic observance. If the female is a practicing muslima be it in US, UK, France, Arabia, India, Malaysia she cannot be seen without a hijab (head cover hiding hair) outside of her immediate male family members.

It is different from Burqa or Niqaab.

So please keep your ill informed thoughts to yourself.

All this has no bearing on the Indian constitution. Keep them for a theocratic state.

In India, a teacher is considered a guardian of his students. Infact in certain circumstances he can even sign off as a guardian if parents are absent.

Local ulema was of the same opinion. So we are not taking dictation from our western neighbours.
 
Last edited:
All this has no bearing on the Indian constitution. Keep them for a theocratic state.

In India, a teacher is considered a guardian of his students. Infact in certain circumstances he can even sign off as a guardian if parents are absent.

Local ulema was of the same opinion. So we are not taking dictation from our western neighbours.

Doesnt your constitution provide freedom of religion?

What do you think your court will decide on this matter? The court, I know what you would like to happen.
 
Indian culture has no bearing on Islamic observance. If the female is a practicing muslima be it in US, UK, France, Arabia, India, Malaysia she cannot be seen without a hijab (head cover hiding hair) outside of her immediate male family members.

It is different from Burqa or Niqaab.

So please keep your ill informed thoughts to yourself.

Hijab etc are not banned in islamic schools in india.
This protest isn’t happening in an Islamic school.

It is happening in a neutral institution where there is a dress code so that everyone looks the same. That’s the point.
 
Doesnt your constitution provide freedom of religion?

.

No power is absolute.

Let me put it this way a restaurant declining to serve someone food on ethnicity, religion etc is a crime.

However a restaurant feels like someone is misbehaving, drunk etc etc they are well within their rights to refuse serving.

There are individual rights and there are institutional rights.

Not everything starts and ends with religion.

If religion is interfering with the constitution, the constitution overwrites it. Simple.

So many amendments have been made to Hindu laws since 1947 and mostly for the good. Example: giving equal property among boys and girls etc etc.

May be in Pakistan Islam is the ultimate driving force. In India or most secular countries, constitution can override a practice if it is harmful or inconvenient for the majority.

How can you not know this or have an idea of this living in England is the bigger mystery.
 
No power is absolute.

Let me put it this way a restaurant declining to serve someone food on ethnicity, religion etc is a crime.

However a restaurant feels like someone is misbehaving, drunk etc etc they are well within their rights to refuse serving.

There are individual rights and there are institutional rights.

Not everything starts and ends with religion.

If religion is interfering with the constitution, the constitution overwrites it. Simple.

So many amendments have been made to Hindu laws since 1947 and mostly for the good. Example: giving equal property among boys and girls etc etc.

May be in Pakistan Islam is the ultimate driving force. In India or most secular countries, constitution can override a practice if it is harmful or inconvenient for the majority.

How can you not know this or have an idea of this living in England is the bigger mystery.

England is nothing like India lol.

There is nothing secular about India apart from the delusion of Some Indians. They claim to know what secular is but have an extremist Hindu government in power.

Wearing a headscarf is a simple , non-violent, non-hurtful and personal expression of faith. If Sikhs can wear turbans on their head, Muslim women should also be allowed to cover their head.

I think you need to research more on your constitution, why such religious freedom laws were made . It will help you understrand religious tolerance in India is a must. Its already a ticking time bomb of religious violence.

Lets see what the court decides, this decision is huge in regards to India's future communal and relgious peace.
 
All this has no bearing on the Indian constitution. Keep them for a theocratic state.

In India, a teacher is considered a guardian of his students. Infact in certain circumstances he can even sign off as a guardian if parents are absent.

Local ulema was of the same opinion. So we are not taking dictation from our western neighbours.

What are rambling about. I was responding to the poster who was telling me who is a mehram or non mehram.

India can do whatever it pleases. It wants to ban Hijab or Azaan or any other Muslim ritual have at it....
 
All this has no bearing on the Indian constitution. Keep them for a theocratic state.

In India, a teacher is considered a guardian of his students. Infact in certain circumstances he can even sign off as a guardian if parents are absent.

Local ulema was of the same opinion. So we are not taking dictation from our western neighbours.

What are rambling about. I was responding to the poster who was telling me who is a mehram or non mehram.

India can do whatever it pleases. It wants to ban Hijab or Azaan or any other Muslim ritual have at it....
 
Hijab etc are not banned in islamic schools in india.
This protest isn’t happening in an Islamic school.

It is happening in a neutral institution where there is a dress code so that everyone looks the same. That’s the point.

I was responding to your assertion that in Indian culture definition of non mehram. Now you are going off into a different tangent.
I don't care whether India bans Hijab or azaan or any other Muslim rituals. It is their prerogative to persecute and marginalize their 200+ Million muslim population however they see fit.

By banning the Hijab you are asking an observing muslim to either erode her beliefs or forego her education. What better way to disenfranchise not only the current generation but also generation to come.
 
India has turned Muslims into a 'persecuted minority': Noam Chomsky
APP Published February 12, 2022 - Updated 3 days ago 45
Renowned scholar Professor Noam Chomsky on Thursday said that Islamophobia has taken a “most lethal form” in India, turning some 250 million Indian Muslims into a “persecuted minority”.

“The pathology of Islamophobia is growing throughout the West — it is taking its most lethal form in India,” the famed author and activist, who is also Professor Emeritus at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said in a video message to a webinar organised by the Indian American Muslim Council, a Washington-based advocacy organisation.

Apart from Chomsky, several other academics and activists took part in the webinar on “Worsening Hate Speech and Violence in India”.

Chomsky also said that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s right-wing Hindu nationalist regime has sharply escalated the “crimes” in Indian-occupied Kashmir (IoK).


“The crimes in Kashmir have a long history,” he said, adding that the state was now a “brutally occupied territory and its military control in some ways is similar to occupied Palestine”.

The situation in South Asia, Chomsky said, was painful in particular not because of what was happening but because of what was not happening. There was, however, hope and opportunities to solve South Asian torment but not for long, he added.

Annapurna Menon, an Indian author and lecturer at the University of Westminster, urged the international community to focus on the status of press freedom in India as, under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government, the situation has become a cause of concern.

“The situation on [the] ground is extremely alarming as four journalists have already been killed in 2022, simply for doing their job,” Menon said, adding journalists, especially women, have been exposed to all kinds of reprisals including harassment, illegal detention, police violence and sedition charges.

“The situation in IoK is even dire, where the journalists routinely face police questioning, ban on reporting, suspension of internet services and financial constraints in line with BJP’s recent ‘media policy’. The family of award-winning Srinagar-based photojournalist Masrat Zahra was subjected to harassment and intimidation by the Indian Police as a crackdown on the press in IoK continues to escalate," she said.

Fahad Shah, a renowned Kashmiri journalist who is the founder and editor of ‘‘The Kashmir Walla’’, was arrested recently by the police in Pulwama under terrorism and sedition laws, Menon pointed out. Similarly, Sajad Gul, another journalist of ‘‘The Kashmir Walla’’, was also arrested at the beginning of February 2022.

John Sifton, Asia Advocacy Director at Human Rights Watch (HRW), said the greatest threat to the Indian constitution was the promotion of majority religion by the Indian government at the expense of minorities.

“BJP and its affiliates are making hateful remarks against Muslims to gain Hindu vote around elections,” he said.

The BJP government had adopted laws and policies that systematically discriminate against religious minorities and other groups and it also stigmatises its critics, the HRW official said. He added the government enacted the ‘Citizenship Act’ to target the minorities, particularly Indian Muslims.

Social media platforms such as Facebook, YouTube and Tiktok, Sifton said, had failed to control hatred spread through their platforms.

The US Congress, he said, must weigh on the Indian government to convey their concerns vis-a-vis the violation of human and minority rights in India.

Angana Chatterji, an Indian anthropologist and scholar at Berkeley University, California, said prejudices embedded in the government of the ruling Hindu nationalist BJP had infiltrated independent institutions, such as the police and the courts, empowering nationalist groups to threaten, harass and attack religious minorities with impunity.

“Hindu spiritual leaders are involved in [the] ethnic cleansing of Muslims,” she said, adding BJP leaders and affiliated groups have long portrayed minority communities, especially Muslims, as a threat to national security and to the Hindu way of life. They had raised the bogey of “love jihad” claiming that Muslim men lure Hindu women into marriages to convert them to Islam, labelled Muslim immigrants as extremists and accused them of hurting Hindu sentiment over cow slaughter.

Since Yogi Adityanath became Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh (UP) in 2017, Chatterji said the culture of violence and impunity had taken root, pointing out that UP police had carried out hundreds of extra-judicial killings of suspected criminals belonging to minorities, particularly Muslims.

By the time protests against the Citizenship Amendment Bill spilt out on the streets of UP in December 2019, the police manhandled protesters, behaved in a vulgar manner with women, arrested whomsoever it wanted and framed prominent activists in criminal cases, she said.

As hundreds of thousands of farmers of various faiths began protesting against the government’s new farm laws in November 2020, senior BJP leaders, their supporters on social media, and pro-government media blamed the Sikhs as ‘Khalistani terrorists’, Chatterji said.

February 23, 2022, marks the two year anniversary of the communal violence in Delhi that killed 53 people, 40 of them Muslim.

Harsh Mander, a former Indian civil servant and human rights activist, said that while Mahatma Gandhi upheld the principles of non-violence, the Hindu supremacist ideology was currently being propagated by Indian leaders.

“Hate crimes have increased by a thousandfold during [the] BJP regime,” he said. BJP stigmatises and openly incites crimes against minorities, even Mother Teresa had been vilified, he added.

Muslims, Mander said, were falsely projected as bigots, unpatriotic, Jihadis and oppressors, adding that even Modi followed some of the hate mongers and refused to denounce them.

IoK, he said, was the most militarised region of the world.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1674696/india-has-turned-muslims-into-a-persecuted-minority-noam-chomsky
 
Doesnt your constitution provide freedom of religion?

What do you think your court will decide on this matter? The court, I know what you would like to happen.

Freedom of religion with reasonable restrictions. Institutions have their rights too.
 
What are rambling about. I was responding to the poster who was telling me who is a mehram or non mehram.

India can do whatever it pleases. It wants to ban Hijab or Azaan or any other Muslim ritual have at it....

He is telling you why local ulema didn't consider teacher as non mehram.
 
The responses of most of my fellow indian posters here have been shameful. Forget all these debates about freedom of religion and how much religious attire one can wear at public institutes. Answer me one simple question. If hijab is banned, the most likely outcome will be a lot of girls from more backward families, will stop coming to school or college due to family pressure. How does a law which restricts access to education can be supported. The comparisons with army is stupid. It's not necessary that everyone go to army, but to prosper a nation must try it's best to make education more accessible to everyone.
 
I went to the Masjid until the age of about 11 then stopped after learning the Qur'an. I simply once asked the Mullah "why should I obey you?" to which he really had no answer. Many teachers at the Masjid can be seen clubbing at the weekends:shan

The problem we have is that everyone these days has an opinion that can be shared via the net. Even when that opinion is **. And now that every Indian from rajasthan to calcutta has access to media they think they know everything about everything.

What's happening in India is not a surprise. It is and will always be a "hindu" nation. As soon as the British began their plans for exit the Hindus wanted their raj. Its not a secret. This is just the next step to the total hinduisation of the country.

What's deeply disturbing is that Muslims have failed to create a cohesive form of political resistance. The slave mentality has seeped into them. Today they will take off their hijabs. Tomorrow they will stop the azan. Then jummah then wudu. Then reading the quran in private. It's happened before in Spain but that was 500 years ago. It kind of shows you how backward the paajeet is. Threatened by a woman in a scarf. They are so insecure about their own way of life that they have to oppress another's..

In Spain it was the same. The catholics couldn't convert Muslims in the majority they wanted. Muslims would secretly remain Muslim and would pretend in public. Ultimately they were ethnically cleansed.
India will do the same. No Muslim or self respecting Muslim will ever accept a Hindu way of life. Just not gonna happen. Therefore they will have to ethnically cleanse them. And they will..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
the Great Khan;11418541 The problem we have is that everyone these days has an opinion that can be shared via the net. Even when that opinion is **. And now that every Indian from rajasthan to calcutta has access to media they think they know everything about everything. What's happening in India is not a surprise. It is and will always be a "hindu" nation. As soon as the British began their plans for exit the Hindus wanted their raj. Its not a secret. This is just the next step to the total hinduisation of the country. What's deeply disturbing is that Muslims have failed to create a cohesive form of political resistance. The slave mentality has seeped into them. Today they will take off their hijabs. Tomorrow they will stop the azan. Then jummah then wudu. Then reading the quran in private. It's happened before in Spain but that was 500 years ago. It kind of shows you how backward the paajeet is. Threatened by a woman in a scarf. They are so insecure about their own way of life that they have to oppress another's.. In Spain it was the same. The catholics couldn't convert Muslims in the majority they wanted. Muslims would secretly remain Muslim and would pretend in public. Ultimately they were ethnically cleansed. India will do the same. No Muslim or self respecting Muslim will ever accept a Hindu way of life. Just not gonna happen. Therefore they will have to ethnically cleanse them. And they will..[/QUOTE said:
What I find strange is the behaviour of some of the muslim leaders in India like the guy Owaisi. In one of interviews he kept saying 'Pakistan jaye bahadh mein' and don't worry about us indians. The common pakistani is not bothered about these leaders, they feel with the commoms muslim indians like this gril Muskaan.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The responses of most of my fellow indian posters here have been shameful. Forget all these debates about freedom of religion and how much religious attire one can wear at public institutes. Answer me one simple question. If hijab is banned, the most likely outcome will be a lot of girls from more backward families, will stop coming to school or college due to family pressure. How does a law which restricts access to education can be supported. The comparisons with army is stupid. It's not necessary that everyone go to army, but to prosper a nation must try it's best to make education more accessible to everyone.

How can a law that changes the secular nature of an educational institution be supported?

Should we give into the blackmail of one community? No. Thats not going to happen.

There are muslim run educational institutions, as you are from Bengal, let me tell you about AL ameen school, so many from that school get into medical colleges..

There are Saraswati vidya mandir Ramkrishna mission and future foundation schools that are run by hindu institutions.

Sikhs have their Khalsa and Gurunanak schools.

Christians have missionary schools.

Anyone who wants that the school should have a relaxed attitude towards their religion and allow religious attire they have the options.

Why change the rules if a secular institution?
 
Doesnt your constitution provide freedom of religion?

What do you think your court will decide on this matter? The court, I know what you would like to happen.

25. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion
(1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion
(2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law
(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice

This is the law. As you see it doesn't give absolute rights and is subject to restrictions.
 
How can a law that changes the secular nature of an educational institution be supported?

Should we give into the blackmail of one community? No. Thats not going to happen.

There are muslim run educational institutions, as you are from Bengal, let me tell you about AL ameen school, so many from that school get into medical colleges..

There are Saraswati vidya mandir Ramkrishna mission and future foundation schools that are run by hindu institutions.

Sikhs have their Khalsa and Gurunanak schools.

Christians have missionary schools.

Anyone who wants that the school should have a relaxed attitude towards their religion and allow religious attire they have the options.

Why change the rules if a secular institution?

Not sure, but maybe good religious institutes are not available in the vicinity ? I mean secularism is a good concept, but it has to come from inside. Look, i agree that hijab is patriarchal in nature, but forcing it from outside is not going to work. The best way is to make scientific education available to everybody. If the girls get educated , they themselves will realise hijab is a sign of opression and leave it behind. On the other hand if hijab ban is enforced it will only push them towards identity politics. Also even in all secular schools Saraswati Puja is celebrated, the Brahmins wear thread, married women wear mangalsutra and the likes.. burkha should be banned because it lessens face to face contact, but no such issue with hijab. The main point of secularism was to let our minorities live with dignity, not to marginalize a community which lags behind in most social indexes even more. I mean if you want them to live a modern life which is not dependent on religion in every step, the only way is through letting them study more, not less
 
By the way one thing this latest debacle showed that political intelligence wise bjp is miles ahead of its opponents. They turned this into a hijab vs saffron scarf issue, and our left liberals almost knowingly went on with religious freedom, secularism and what not. But that's their playground , we will always lose in that game. There was genuine anger after the farmers protest. The unemployed youth were rioting in Bihar. With a clever stroke bjp made all of them go into the background. The left politics should be based on class struggle, identity politics can be part of it but never the main focus.
 
Last edited:
Not sure, but maybe good religious institutes are not available in the vicinity ? I mean secularism is a good concept, but it has to come from inside. Look, i agree that hijab is patriarchal in nature, but forcing it from outside is not going to work. The best way is to make scientific education available to everybody. If the girls get educated , they themselves will realise hijab is a sign of opression and leave it behind. On the other hand if hijab ban is enforced it will only push them towards identity politics. Also even in all secular schools Saraswati Puja is celebrated, the Brahmins wear thread, married women wear mangalsutra and the likes.. burkha should be banned because it lessens face to face contact, but no such issue with hijab. The main point of secularism was to let our minorities live with dignity, not to marginalize a community which lags behind in most social indexes even more. I mean if you want them to live a modern life which is not dependent on religion in every step, the only way is through letting them study more, not less

Hijab is sign of oppression?

Looks as if people in India are messing up another term, “oppression”
 
The problem we have is that everyone these days has an opinion that can be shared via the net. Even when that opinion is **. And now that every Indian from rajasthan to calcutta has access to media they think they know everything about everything.

What's happening in India is not a surprise. It is and will always be a "hindu" nation. As soon as the British began their plans for exit the Hindus wanted their raj. Its not a secret. This is just the next step to the total hinduisation of the country.

What's deeply disturbing is that Muslims have failed to create a cohesive form of political resistance. The slave mentality has seeped into them. Today they will take off their hijabs. Tomorrow they will stop the azan. Then jummah then wudu. Then reading the quran in private. It's happened before in Spain but that was 500 years ago. It kind of shows you how backward the paajeet is. Threatened by a woman in a scarf. They are so insecure about their own way of life that they have to oppress another's..

In Spain it was the same. The catholics couldn't convert Muslims in the majority they wanted. Muslims would secretly remain Muslim and would pretend in public. Ultimately they were ethnically cleansed.
India will do the same. No Muslim or self respecting Muslim will ever accept a Hindu way of life. Just not gonna happen. Therefore they will have to ethnically cleanse them. And they will..

We have often been presented Spain example from Hindutvas, “how Islam was was obliterated from Spain”.

Initially, I was of an opinion that India will never walk with ease toward ethnic cleansing due to their love for $$ but won’t be surprise anymore.
 
Hijab is patriarchal, hence oppression. Simple really.

Simple and the complicated answer for those who do not understand what Hijab means to many Muslim female would be, NO!
 
Last edited:
This thread has tought me something new!
My whole thinking was wrong.

Proper secularism is when people have to toe the line...
One dress code for all is what proper freedom is all about!

Fascism is actually secularism

How could I have been so wrong?
 
Hijab is patriarchal, hence oppression. Simple really.

Typical woke and secular indian triggering a pavlovian response when hearing some key words like patriarchy. Patriarchy can have inequality between genders, but there is difference between oppression and inequality.

I wanted to rant more but whats the point. it will be wasted on sickulars.
 
Typical woke and secular indian triggering a pavlovian response when hearing some key words like patriarchy. Patriarchy can have inequality between genders, but there is difference between oppression and inequality.

I wanted to rant more but whats the point. it will be wasted on sickulars.

You've been missed :)
 
He is telling you why local ulema didn't consider teacher as non mehram.

Yeah not up to your sarkari ulema to change the definition. Share a link to whoever has declared an adult male teacher who is not your blood relation as Mehram for a Muslima.

It is not a Pakistani thing or an Indian thing or a Malaysian thing. It is how a Mehram is defined in Islam. You can choose to observe it or not, that is up to you but cannot issue an edict that it is not applicable.
 
"Hecklers' Veto Cannot Be Allowed": Students To High Court On Hijab Row

The right to use hijab or headscarves in educational institutions cannot be blocked citing public order, the Karnataka High Court was told today. Senior advocate Devadatt Kamat, who was representing students who challenged the bar on head scarves, said courts have earlier recognised the fact that "hecklers' veto cannot be allowed".

He also asked the court to rethink its interim judgment to barring religious attire, saying it amounts to a "suspension of the fundamental rights" -- to education and religious freedoms -- and allowing it is only a small adjustment.

Since the court issued its order barring hijab in institutions that have no dress code, many students have not been allowed entry to schools and colleges. This is interfering with their right to education, he said, adding that the Education Act has no provision to expel a student for not adhering to uniform.

"If the state says if somebody wears a head scarf it will lead to trouble, therefore we cannot allow it, that is an impermissible argument... The state... has to create a positive environment facilitating enjoyment of rights," he added.

That a government order had left it to colleges to take a call on the use of hijab depending on "public order" came in question yesterday. Religious freedoms are guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution and can be barred only if violation of "public order" is involved.

The state had contended that "public order" is not an accurate translation of the Kannada word used in the government order. The senior advocate said today countered the argument, saying he has consulted the vernacular version of the Constitution where the words appear nine times, every time to mean public order.

"The state says that the word "savrajanik suvyavasthe" in the government order does not mean "public order". The official Kannada translation of the Constitution uses this word "sarvajanik suvyavasthe" for "public order". I am surprised the State made this argument," he said. "Very categorically 'sarvajyanik suvyavasthe' means public order and it cannot have a different meaning. I rest my case there," he added.

The hearing will resume tomorrow.

The hijab row started in Karnataka's Udupi last month as some students protested against the bar on it. It drew retaliation from other students who insisted on coming in saffron scarves.

The confrontation spread rapidly through the state. Protests were held and Muslim girls heckled, forcing the state to close schools and colleges temporarily and drawing calls for peace from the court.As schools re-opened yesterday, social media was flooded with visuals from various schools where the students were forced to remove headscarves before entering campuses. Unwilling to comply, many chose to return home.

Comments
The Pre University Colleges from where the controversy had started will be opened from tomorrow along with other colleges after almost a week of closure.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/hec...-hijab-row-2769829#pfrom=home-ndtv_topstories
 
Yeah not up to your sarkari ulema to change the definition. Share a link to whoever has declared an adult male teacher who is not your blood relation as Mehram for a Muslima.

It is not a Pakistani thing or an Indian thing or a Malaysian thing. It is how a Mehram is defined in Islam. You can choose to observe it or not, that is up to you but cannot issue an edict that it is not applicable.

Not upto you or foreigners to decide what our ulemas tell and define. They have said something after proper thought. Not only them but some other experts have also said the same.
 
This thread has tought me something new!
My whole thinking was wrong.

Proper secularism is when people have to toe the line...
One dress code for all is what proper freedom is all about!

Fascism is actually secularism

How could I have been so wrong?

Definition of secularism:
"Secularism is the principle of seeking to conduct human affairs based on secular, naturalistic considerations. It is most commonly defined as the separation of religion from civic affairs and the state — which in accordance with religious pluralism defines secularism as neutrality (of the state or non-sectarian institution) on issues of religion as opposed to total opposition of religion in the public square as a whole — while other views may broaden it to a position concerning the need to remove or minimalize the role of religion in any public sphere."

If you go by this definition, India's constitution has some privileges for certain religions (most of them for Islam). That needs to go.
 
Last edited:
Not upto you or foreigners to decide what our ulemas tell and define. They have said something after proper thought. Not only them but some other experts have also said the same.

Please remove your jingoistic glasses and understand It is not up to your "ulema" whoever they are to change Islamic Doctrine. Like I have said in earlier posts , BJP and the Hinduvta acolytes can use whatever means to persecute their muslim populace, that is their prerogative. Just don't justify it with buzzwords of secularism or conformity.

Share a link to the fatwa given by these so called ulema that you keep referencing to?


This is just a start. Every election cycle, BJP will find another goal post to move.
 
I don’t know about everyone else, but I want BJP in power for many years. The West had already banned Modi, rightly so, a religious terrorist, but with BJP in power the West’s decision to ban the butcher of Gujrat is now vindicated.

Roll on Yogi, civil war in fragile India will expose the realities of Hindutva and will further carve India into pieces. No more operation Blue Star; Pakistan’s job job made easy. Hot knife through butter.

Time Hinduism extremism is exposed for what it really is.

Bring it on. :)
 
Not upto you or foreigners to decide what our ulemas tell and define. They have said something after proper thought. Not only them but some other experts have also said the same.

‘Our Ulemas’ - they are ‘our’ because they agree your perverted political driven narrative, either out of fear or trying to prevent deaths of many minorities but let’s not kid yourself and others. Lol

any way it is waste of time to engage any Hindutva henceforth - y’all trying and defining minorities religion for them, perverting the definition of secularism to shape and support Hindutva ideology.
 
The most hilarious aspect of this thread/topic is that Hindutva apologists have no idea what secularism means. No wonder said lot are delusional.

Oxford English Dictionary - says hello. So many puns, not even worth listing.

HA to the HE to the HO.
 
And the usual suspects are still trying to justify it stopping girls from attending college with a Hijab on.

Seems the tide is turning in the courts, how will these posters react if the courts over turns it, does that mean the courts have rejected "secular India"?
 
There is no such thing as Secular India.

For one, 99% wannabe-self proclaimed educated Indians so they can move out of the illiterate boundaries do not know what Secularism means.

Secondly, Hindutva apologists can cite a paper worthless constitution claiming India is secular, is no different to Amreekans citing their constitution when it comes to killing a non-white in the name of defence.

Nobody cares about constitutions, these have been broken in the past, present, and will be in the future; thus it would be better for India to claim it is a Hindu Republic instead of pretending it’s secular and pluralistic.

India seeking Western justification and approval sums it all up. India is not independent, but still a slave to Western values.

There’s a reason why Indians are desperate to flee ‘incredible’ India in their droves - hint, it is not the Indian constitution.

:)
 
Last edited:
And the usual suspects are still trying to justify it stopping girls from attending college with a Hijab on.

Seems the tide is turning in the courts, how will these posters react if the courts over turns it, does that mean the courts have rejected "secular India"?
Secularism is defined by the constitution. No other definition is accepted except that of the constitution.

Religious freedom will exist as long as it doesn't clash with the part III of Indian constitution.
 
I feel they are making an issue out of a small thing here, just let the girls wear the Hijab, its not that much of an issue, nothing really.

However I am against all these different laws, such as; the hindu law, muslim law and christian law, they should have 1 law for all people, India struggles to be secular as it seems to lead to pseudu secularism, its time for 1 law for all..
 
The Hijab ban is a clear Islamophobic law, which is no surprise giving the thugs in power.

If you want to ban religious symbols in school fine, but when you single out only Hijab, and not the religious symbols of others like the Sikh turban, then its clear what the agenda is.
 
The Hijab ban is a clear Islamophobic law, which is no surprise giving the thugs in power.

If you want to ban religious symbols in school fine, but when you single out only Hijab, and not the religious symbols of others like the Sikh turban, then its clear what the agenda is.

I thought Hijab was more of a cultural symbol ? Does the Quran openly states that a female must wear a Hijab >? If so, can you show me.

Thanks
 
I thought Hijab was more of a cultural symbol ? Does the Quran openly states that a female must wear a Hijab >? If so, can you show me.

Thanks

You are thinking of the dupatta, which is the a cultural symbol. As far as Hijab goes, their is nothing in the Quran that says women must cover their head.

In Islam women are supposed to dress modestly. What exactly is modest depends on the person. In my family whether in Pakistan or the West most women do not wear a hijab, let alone a burkha. However a few do.

In the same Muslim family some women might choose to cover their head, and others wont. Best option is to let women decide on whether she wants to wear a hijab or not.
 
You are thinking of the dupatta, which is the a cultural symbol. As far as Hijab goes, their is nothing in the Quran that says women must cover their head.

In Islam women are supposed to dress modestly. What exactly is modest depends on the person. In my family whether in Pakistan or the West most women do not wear a hijab, let alone a burkha. However a few do.

In the same Muslim family some women might choose to cover their head, and others wont. Best option is to let women decide on whether she wants to wear a hijab or not.

Thanks

and Agreed on the bolded.
 
7 pages on on what women should and shouldn't be allowed. Non Muslims want to "free" Muslims and yet they do it by targeting the marginalised Muslim women. India under its current government is full of hate for Muslims....how does a cloth covering one's hair impact anything? I am sick of India's hate towards Muslims, sick the of world's silence on this matter and using women to make a point. 7 pages of going around in circles....just admit India has a major problem and it needs to be addressed.

This is it. They think that Muslim women dont have the agency to decide for themselves. They believe they are saving them.
 
And the usual suspects are still trying to justify it stopping girls from attending college with a Hijab on.

Seems the tide is turning in the courts, how will these posters react if the courts over turns it, does that mean the courts have rejected "secular India"?

Have you followed the court proceedings? If not, please do not comment on basis of selective reports.

Also just one side, the petitioners have argued, the respondents are yet to start.

If court allows this, as they allowed Sikh turban, then thats that. Thats the law of the land.
 
Day after students asked to wear uniform instead of burqa, villagers attack Murshidabad school

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hi...k-murshidabad-school-101644684707494-amp.html

Now they want burkha or else they will use violence. If this is not stopped now and secular rules implemented, the next demand will be namaz rooms, then fridays as holidays, then separate teachers, separate class rooms, separate meals.

A small cross section of 180mn people cannot hold 1.35 bn to hostage. The law must take its course.
 
Senior schools reopened in the Indian state of Karnataka on Wednesday a week after authorities closed them in the face of protests against a ban on female students wearing the hijab.

A court is deliberating the recent ban on schoolgirls wearing the hijab imposed by Karnataka authorities, the latest issue of contention involving India's Muslim minority, who make up about 13 per cent of the Hindu-majority country's 1.3 billion people.

Students wearing olive-green uniforms, some in the hijab, walked hand-in-hand on Wednesday into the Government Girls Senior School P. U. in Udupi district, where the protests started this month. Male and female police stood guard.

All of the students were allowed, including the girls in hijabs, despite a ruling from the state's High Court last week that schools should bar any religious clothing in classrooms until further instructions. The court will hear further arguments on Wednesday.

Senior district official Kurma Rao M said talks were underway in the community on the court ruling.

“We have held a meeting with all religious leaders, various stakeholders on the implementation of the court's interim order,” he was quoted as saying by ANI.

The southern state of Karnataka is governed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party and the uproar comes as it campaigns for several important state assembly elections this year.

Karnataka's state election will be held next year while India is due to hold its next general election by May 2024.

Muslim families in Karnataka say the ban on the hijab marginalises them and led to some schools refusing entry to girls and women wearing it.

Some Muslim students and parents protested against the ban drawing counter-protests from Hindu students who hung saffron-coloured shawls around their necks. The colour is generally worn by Hindus.

“This is so unfair,” student Afra Ajmal Asabi told reporters, referring to the ban.

“We've always been attending classes wearing the hijab.”

Junior and middle schools reopened on Monday after authorities closed them too last week because of the protests.

DAWN
 
Have you followed the court proceedings? If not, please do not comment on basis of selective reports.

Also just one side, the petitioners have argued, the respondents are yet to start.

If court allows this, as they allowed Sikh turban, then thats that. Thats the law of the land.

lol really?
Weren't you blabbering about demanding "Equality" in schools? What happened to that?
 
Day after students asked to wear uniform instead of burqa, villagers attack Murshidabad school

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hi...k-murshidabad-school-101644684707494-amp.html

Now they want burkha or else they will use violence. If this is not stopped now and secular rules implemented, the next demand will be namaz rooms, then fridays as holidays, then separate teachers, separate class rooms, separate meals.

A small cross section of 180mn people cannot hold 1.35 bn to hostage. The law must take its course.

How are 180 million people holding anyone hostage? Are you being forced to wear hijab or pray namaz? Lol

So religious article aren’t allowed in your school except Sikhs are.

Earlier you try to redefine the religion for the others.

So if one were to read the thread from the beginning and clearly notice you devolution, Secularism to court order to Sikh religion to redefining others religion to we will be held hostage. Lol

Just come out as a man, not that you need as it evident by your comments and bigotry excuses, admit you have e a problem with Muslims of India practicing their natural human right to exist in India.

“We will be held hostage” Hahahah hahaha lol
 
lol really?
Weren't you blabbering about demanding "Equality" in schools? What happened to that?

It was and never will be about equality in Hindutva India, it is about subjugating and marginalizing the particular minority for reverting to Islam.

There’s nothing attractive about Hindutva in 2022.
 
A group of students (campus front) said they were supporting the girls fighting for their rights. Their propaganda news channels are now fooling their TV-viewers and are saying this is a political plot only.
Never seen such rubbish journalism, must be the worst journalists in world.
Journalists should be neutral and listen to both sides, but they have selected a side as usual. Blood boiling.
 
How are 180 million people holding anyone hostage? Are you being forced to wear hijab or pray namaz? Lol

So religious article aren’t allowed in your school except Sikhs are.

Earlier you try to redefine the religion for the others.

So if one were to read the thread from the beginning and clearly notice you devolution, Secularism to court order to Sikh religion to redefining others religion to we will be held hostage. Lol

Just come out as a man, not that you need as it evident by your comments and bigotry excuses, admit you have e a problem with Muslims of India practicing their natural human right to exist in India.

“We will be held hostage” Hahahah hahaha lol

They are attacking an institution for enforcing their rules. They don't like they can change the school. But no, they resorted to violence.

I don't redefine any religion, i want that laws of my country be followed. Any religion isn't above the laws.

I don't need any certificates from you. But as usual some pakistanis think they have the right to tell and judge people.And that everything has to be according to your religious convenience else its wrong.Thank God that the leaders of India agreed on partition rather than giving into the demands of M.A Jinnah.

Well, they may try to hold the country hostage but it will not work, as they saw during CAA protests. CAA was passed and nobody can do a thing about it.
 
A group of students (campus front) said they were supporting the girls fighting for their rights. Their propaganda news channels are now fooling their TV-viewers and are saying this is a political plot only.
Never seen such rubbish journalism, must be the worst journalists in world.
Journalists should be neutral and listen to both sides, but they have selected a side as usual. Blood boiling.

Do you know what campus front is?
 
How are 180 million people holding anyone hostage? Are you being forced to wear hijab or pray namaz? Lol

So religious article arenÂ’t allowed in your school except Sikhs are.

Earlier you try to redefine the religion for the others.

So if one were to read the thread from the beginning and clearly notice you devolution, Secularism to court order to Sikh religion to redefining others religion to we will be held hostage. Lol

Just come out as a man, not that you need as it evident by your comments and bigotry excuses, admit you have e a problem with Muslims of India practicing their natural human right to exist in India.

“We will be held hostage” Hahahah hahaha lol

Look who is holding hostage whom ?

One month ago, there was no issue, but now this has been made a issue just for election purpose. For one party to be elected, they have hold hostage an entire country's harmony and peace. If anyone is holding hostage then it is BJP who is holding the entire India for their own selfish reason.

 
Look who is holding hostage whom ?

One month ago, there was no issue, but now this has been made a issue just for election purpose. For one party to be elected, they have hold hostage an entire country's harmony and peace. If anyone is holding hostage then it is BJP who is holding the entire India for their own selfish reason.


Please get something better than a you tube blogger.

According to school authorities, till December the girls were coming without hijab.
 
A student movement I guess. I knew you would comment on this, nice. So tell me, what wrong did Adeel Akram say?

Who said what?

Campus front is the students wing of a extremist Islamist organization PFI. Various governments of different parties have arrested PFI extremists for illegal activities.
 
Who said what?

Campus front is the students wing of a extremist Islamist organization PFI. Various governments of different parties have arrested PFI extremists for illegal activities.

I have told everything, did you forget to watch your favourite debate today? Go and figure out.
 
They are attacking an institution for enforcing their rules. They don't like they can change the school. But no, they resorted to violence.

I don't redefine any religion, i want that laws of my country be followed. Any religion isn't above the laws.

I don't need any certificates from you. But as usual some pakistanis think they have the right to tell and judge people.And that everything has to be according to your religious convenience else its wrong.Thank God that the leaders of India agreed on partition rather than giving into the demands of M.A Jinnah.

Well, they may try to hold the country hostage but it will not work, as they saw during CAA protests. CAA was passed and nobody can do a thing about it.

You believe 180 million people are holding you hostage because some female want to wear Hijab and here you are lecturing Pakistan and Indian Muslims.

What are you on about?

Come out swinging as Avengers of Hindutva and you might get some respect as in believing what you’ve written -lol.

What a joke!!
 
I have told everything, did you forget to watch your favourite debate today? Go and figure out.

Are you supporting the ideology of PFI and campus front?

Its OK if you state that you don't know about them but since you support them, your ideology and principles, at least the basic ones should reside with the PFI and CFI.
 
lol really?
Weren't you blabbering about demanding "Equality" in schools? What happened to that?

Equality will be defined by the entity which the constitution has bestowed the jurisdiction. That will be high court and eventually Supreme Court.

Pakistanis may not have high regards, trust, proud and dignity in the jurisdiction system due to the dire situation that Pakistani courts are in but in India, the integrity and dedication has been held in greater standard throughout history.
 
Equality will be defined by the entity which the constitution has bestowed the jurisdiction. That will be high court and eventually Supreme Court.

Pakistanis may not have high regards, trust, proud and dignity in the jurisdiction system due to the dire situation that Pakistani courts are in but in India, the integrity and dedication has been held in greater standard throughout history.

It is difficult to explain, democracy, judiciary, secularism to people who grow up in a military controlled theocratic state. Religious concessions can be a privilege bestowed upon at the pleasure of an institution, its not a right, certainly not in a secular institution.

A man is killed in pakistan for blasphemy. Not even 100 posts. But hijab issue in another country and 700 posts.
 
I didn't wanted to comment on this thread as it related to India's internal matters however I thought I would point out the blatant hypocrisy. As per many Indian posters the hijab ban is a representation of "equality" amongst the students. Further, as to many the university should not be allowing religious symbols as these call out for special treatment hence not equality. Now this is blatant hypocrisy because this has only been extended to hijab and not to anything else. This is a broad brush and can carry implications that would be up for debate and rightly so.

Lets start with religious equality here. According to Indian posters hijab means someone is different hence equality amongst students is not there (Sikh's turban is allowed due to court ruling). Now let's talk about other religious symbols; what about the thread brahmins wear? What about the bangle sikh men wear on wrists? What about the the cross Christians wear as a chain? The common thing amongst all these religious symbols is that not all men/woman do these however the same logic applies to hijab some girls do and other don't (every man/woman makes their own decisions). Now these symbols aren't banned but only hijab is, isn't it minority persecution? If you can't see the blatant hypocrisy in here then you are looking through some heavy tainted lens.

Let's take this a step further in the name of equality because that is the desired goal isn't it. So lets talk about cultural symbols as well to take this further as it deepens inequality too. What about people with tattoos? What about students who flaunt designer stuff and luxury cars? You would be thinking that how is this relevant but if we are talking about the issue in hand then these cultural differences cut way deeper than religious differences when it comes to inequality. A student from a poor background is always in the shadow or treated lesser than the rich kid, so how is the university/college going to bridge this equality gap?

As I said above banning hijab on the name of equality can open a pandora box and the blatant hypocrisy would be out in the open. Removing inequality in any aspect of this world is unavoidable as that is the nature of lives where no 2 persons are equal. The best and only example of equality is what you find during Hajj (I'm sure in each religious pilgrimage there would be a similar law of equality followed) however to bring equality in our daily lives i.e. university/work/relationships does simply not work as that is the nature of mankind history.
 
If something isnt mandatory, it isn't protected by article 25 of the constitution.

Good that you are happy with where you live. But if you are so happy why is that you are so interested in India.

Is pagri mandatory in Sikhism? Yet I have met many sikhs who dont use pagris and cut their hair. So that means its not compulsory and yet Indian army officers who are sikhs wear it. If Indian army can allow it so can schools and if sikh turbans can be allowed, then so can hijab.

I dont care how you want to wiggle your way out of defending this but this is exactly what people are calling it out for. Its discrimination of a certain "dangerous" minority in India.. nothing else.
 
It is difficult to explain, democracy, judiciary, secularism to people who grow up in a military controlled theocratic state. Religious concessions can be a privilege bestowed upon at the pleasure of an institution, its not a right, certainly not in a secular institution.

A man is killed in pakistan for blasphemy. Not even 100 posts. But hijab issue in another country and 700 posts.

Yet the "military controlled theocratic state" is the one that goes the extra mile for allowing Sikhs pilgrimage privileges to their country and have allowed them to wear turbans in the army despite being such a small minority and the so called "democratic and secular" state is trying to ban hijab for their largest minority, something which is well known for centuries as their identity?
lol
 
Are you supporting the ideology of PFI and campus front?

Its OK if you state that you don't know about them but since you support them, your ideology and principles, at least the basic ones should reside with the PFI and CFI.

I talked merely about an interview one of your channels did with a campus front leader. The 'journalist' put some words in his mouth and all of the sudden they made a big news out of that, that this whole hijab row was merely a political plot. This is what I posted. I don't know more about PFI and CFI than that.

And I have discussed Arnab's way of leading debates with you previously. Are you still saying he is a neutral journalist?
 
Bengaluru: Karnataka's Hijab row played out for the fourth day in the High Court on Wednesday, with the Chief Justice hearing arguments from Muslim girls who have challenged restrictions on wearing the religious headscarves in classrooms.

Arguing on behalf of one of the petitioners, advocate Ravi Varma Kumar asked the judges why the Hijab was being singled out when there were "hundreds of religious symbols from dupattas, bangles, turbans, crosses and bindis" worn by people every day.

"I am only showing the vast diversity of religious symbols in all sections of the society. Why is the government picking on hijab alone and making this hostile discrimination? Bangles are worn? Are they not religious symbols? Why are you picking on these poor Muslim girls?" he said.

"This is only because only of her religion that the petitioner is being sent out of the classroom. A bindi wearing girl is not sent out. A bangle wearing girl is not. A Christian wearing cross is not touched. Why only these girls? This is a violation of Article 15 of the constitution," Mr Kumar said.

"Ghoongats are permitted. Bangles are permitted. Why only this (Hijabs)? Why not the turban of a Sikh, the cross of the Christians?" he said.

"No other religious symbol is considered... Why only hijab? Is it not because of their religion? Discrimination against Muslim girls is purely on the basis of religion and hence a hostile discrimination," Mr Kumar argued.

Protesting instances where students were punished or removed from class for wearing the hijab - even on Wednesday, the lawyer said, "We are not permitted. We are not heard but punished straight away. Can it be more draconian? Can they be called teachers?"

"It is full of prejudice because of the religion. No notice, straight away sent out of the classroom, by persons without authority," he said.

"Judicial note is to be taken that Muslim girls are least represented in classrooms. If they are shut out on this pretext, it will be very draconian," Mr Kumar said.

The arguments in the case come amid simmering tension in Karnataka where late last year, students were prevented from wearing the Muslim headscarf, sparking protests and counter demonstrations involving saffron scarves that have since spread to other states.

In an attempt to calm tensions, Karnataka's state government temporarily closed schools last week but have been opening gradually over the last two days.

The Karnataka High Court has imposed a temporary ban on the wearing of all religious symbols in schools while it considers the headscarf ban.

NDTV
 
I didn't wanted to comment on this thread as it related to India's internal matters however I thought I would point out the blatant hypocrisy. As per many Indian posters the hijab ban is a representation of "equality" amongst the students. Further, as to many the university should not be allowing religious symbols as these call out for special treatment hence not equality. Now this is blatant hypocrisy because this has only been extended to hijab and not to anything else. This is a broad brush and can carry implications that would be up for debate and rightly so.

Lets start with religious equality here. According to Indian posters hijab means someone is different hence equality amongst students is not there (Sikh's turban is allowed due to court ruling). Now let's talk about other religious symbols; what about the thread brahmins wear? What about the bangle sikh men wear on wrists? What about the the cross Christians wear as a chain? The common thing amongst all these religious symbols is that not all men/woman do these however the same logic applies to hijab some girls do and other don't (every man/woman makes their own decisions). Now these symbols aren't banned but only hijab is, isn't it minority persecution? If you can't see the blatant hypocrisy in here then you are looking through some heavy tainted lens.

Let's take this a step further in the name of equality because that is the desired goal isn't it. So lets talk about cultural symbols as well to take this further as it deepens inequality too. What about people with tattoos? What about students who flaunt designer stuff and luxury cars? You would be thinking that how is this relevant but if we are talking about the issue in hand then these cultural differences cut way deeper than religious differences when it comes to inequality. A student from a poor background is always in the shadow or treated lesser than the rich kid, so how is the university/college going to bridge this equality gap?

As I said above banning hijab on the name of equality can open a pandora box and the blatant hypocrisy would be out in the open. Removing inequality in any aspect of this world is unavoidable as that is the nature of lives where no 2 persons are equal. The best and only example of equality is what you find during Hajj (I'm sure in each religious pilgrimage there would be a similar law of equality followed) however to bring equality in our daily lives i.e. university/work/relationships does simply not work as that is the nature of mankind history.

The thread that brahmins wear is wore under the shirt and is not visible. So just as no one is checking anyone's underwear, no one is checking whats wore under the shirt inside the clothing. Its not visible.

If the cross or locket or whatever is not visible no one is objecting as no one is asking anyone to open their clothes and show what they are wearing inside their clothes.

So your comparison doesn't work.
 
The most hilarious aspect of this thread/topic is that Hindutva apologists have no idea what secularism means. No wonder said lot are delusional.

Oxford English Dictionary - says hello. So many puns, not even worth listing.

HA to the HE to the HO.

What is even more hilarious is some of the most staunch hindutvas are still trying to define their actions as secular, thus proving their own subjugation to western ideals. Nothing wrong with that in itself, but if you want to resurrect Hindu power, you should have the confidence to do it through your own lens instead of trying to justify your bigotry by using western definitions such as secularism which have nothing to do with either Hindu priniciples or Indian culture.
 
Back
Top