Muslim Cleric Slams Nushrratt Bharuccha For Ujjain Temple Visit; Calls It a Violation of Shariat

Entertainment

oi-Prakash KL

In
a
clash
between
personal
faith
and
orthodox
religious
decree,
Bollywood
actress
Nushrratt
Bharuccha
has
found
herself
at
the
center
of
a
national
controversy.
The
actress,
known
for
her
roles
in
films
like
Pyaar
Ka
Punchnama,
recently
visited
the
historic
Mahakaleshwar
Temple
in
Ujjain
to
seek
blessings.
However,
what
began
as
a
spiritual
journey
has
spiralled
into
a
heated
debate
over
religious
freedom,
gender
bias,
and
the
limits
of
clerical
authority
in
modern
India.

The
“Gunaah-e-Azeem”:
A
Clerical
Condemnation

The
controversy
erupted
shortly
after
Bharuccha
shared
images
of
her
visit
to
the
Mahakal
temple
on
December
30.
Following
the
release
of
the
photos,
Maulana
Shahabuddin
Rizvi
Barelvi,
President
of
the
All
India
Muslim
Jamaat,
issued
a
stern
condemnation.
In
an
interview
with
ANI,
the
Maulana
labeled
her
actions
as
a
“grave
sin”
(Gunaah-e-Azeem)
under
Shariat
law.

The
Maulana’s
grievance
was
specific:
he
cited
her
participation
in
the
puja,
the
pouring
of
water
(Jal),
the
wearing
of
a
ceremonial
shawl,
and
the
application
of
Chandan
(sandalwood)
on
her
forehead
as
violations
of
Islamic
principles.
He
went
as
far
as
to
issue
a
“Farman”
(decree),
demanding
that
the
actress
repent
(Tauba),
seek
forgiveness
(Istighfar),
and
recite
the
Kalma
to
re-affirm
her
faith.

Nushrratt
Bharuccha,
who
belongs
to
the
Dawoodi
Bohra
community,
has
never
hidden
her
pluralistic
upbringing.
In
a
recent
podcast,
she
reflected
on
her
secular
roots,
stating
that
she
has
visited
temples,
gurdwaras,
and
churches
since
childhood.
From
fasting
for
Santoshi
Maa
to
performing
Namaz
and
visiting
Kedarnath
and
Vaishno
Devi,
Bharuccha
has
consistently
modelled
a
“best
of
both
worlds” approach
to
Indian
spirituality.
On
her
Instagram,
she
simply
captioned
her
temple
visit:
“Jai
Shree
Mahakal.”

The
Maulana’s
decree
has
triggered
a
wave
of
indignation
across
social
media,
with
many
pointing
out
a
glaring
double
standard
in
how
male
versus
female
celebrities
are
treated.

One
viral
comment
highlighted
the
silence
of
the
clergy
regarding
male
superstars:
“Shahrukh
Khan
prays
at
Vaishno
Devi,
Salman
Khan
celebrates
Ganesh
Chaturthi,
and
Aamir
Khan
visits
the
Golden
Temple.
The
Mullahs
are
silent.
But
the
moment
a
woman
prays
at
Mahakal,
a
Fatwa
is
issued.
Patriarchy
is
sobbing
in
the
background.”

Another
user
demanded
state
intervention,
arguing
that
the
Maulana
should
be
charged
under
hate
speech
laws:
“Every
Indian
citizen
is
free
to
pray
wherever
they
want.
This
Mullah
intends
to
enslave
a
woman
and
deserves
to
be
arrested.”

Critics
also
drew
parallels
to
global
movements,
slamming
“liberal”
silence
on
the
anti-hijab
protests
in
Iran
while
orthodox
elements
in
India
attempt
to
“leash”
women.
“This
reminds
me
of
the
fatwas
against
Sania
Mirza
for
her
tennis
skirts
while
actors
in
underwear
went
unnoticed.
It’s
about
controlling
women,”
another
observer
remarked.

The
backlash
reflects
a
growing
weariness
toward
“one-way
secularism.”
Many
commentators
expressed
frustration
that
while
Hindus
frequently
visit
Mazaars
and
offer
Chaadars,
the
same
spirit
of
inclusivity
is
often
met
with
hostility
by
orthodox
clerics
when
a
Muslim
individual
reciprocates
that
respect.

As
of
now,
Nushrratt
Bharuccha
has
not
officially
responded
to
the
Maulana’s
demands.
However,
the
overwhelming
public
support
for
her
suggests
that
in
the
court
of
public
opinion,
her
right
to
faith-in
all
its
diverse
forms-outweighs
the
decrees
of
the
orthodox.