Row over Kanthapuram directive limiting women’s public participation grows as Samastha defends ‘right to preach’

The row over Islamic scholar Kanthapuram A.P. Aboobacker Musliar’s remarks on Muslim women has taken a new turn, with his rival Samastha faction defending his right to preach religious doctrine as the debate widens to include religion, public life and political intervention.

Syed Mohammed Jifri Muthukoya Thangal, who heads the rival Samastha Kerala Jamiyyathul Ulama headquartered at Chelari, broke his silence on Wednesday evening (September 2, 2026), saying religious scholars should not be attacked or disparaged for explaining religious teachings to their followers.

Though he did not name Mr. Kanthapuram or Keralam Chief Minister, his remarks came after V.D. Satheesan criticised the scholar and said his position amounted to a misinterpretation of Islam.

Muslim Jamaat condemns Keralam Chief Minister’s remarks on Kanthapuram, seeks apology K.T. Jaleel backs Kanthapuram, links remarks to IUML woman leaders’ conduct Munavvar Ali Thangal seeks to play down Kanthapuram circular controversy “Accept if you can; otherwise, you are free to reject.

But do not disparage them,” Mr. Jifri Thangal said, adding that people in India were free to follow their faith and religious leaders were free to explain its teachings. His intervention is significant as the two Samastha factions are rivals.

It shows how the controversy has moved beyond Mr. Kanthapuram’s remarks to the wider question of religious authority. The controversy began with a circular issued by Mr. Kanthapuram, general secretary of the Samastha Kerala Jamiyyathul Ulama, along with its president E.

Sulaiman Musliar, on the conduct of Milad celebrations marking the 1,501st birth anniversary of Prophet Muhammad. As Milad programmes expanded from mosques and madrasas to public venues and clubs, the circular called for them to follow Islamic norms, including restrictions on women’s participation.

Mr. Kanthapuram later defended the position at a gathering in Kochi, saying that bringing women onto public platforms could lead to “chaos”. The remarks drew criticism from CPI(M) leaders like P.K.

Sreemathy, K.K. Shailaja, A.K. Balan and Paloli Mohammed Kutty, as well as some Congress leaders. Mr. Mohammed Kutty said religious leaders should advise men, not women, on gender equality.

Mr. Satheesan entered the debate after several days of criticism and rejected Mr. Kanthapuram’s position, saying the cleric had “misinterpreted Islam”. He also said Keralam’s tradition of social progress could not accept restrictions on women’s participation in public life.

The Chief Minister’s stand was welcomed by progressive sections but angered sections of the traditional Sunni community. The Kanthapuram faction demanded that he withdraw his remarks and apologise.

Leaders including Syed Ibrahim Khaleel Bukhari and Perode Abdurahman Saqafi met Mr. Satheesan on Wednesday night (September 2, 2026) and urged him to reconsider his position. He is understood to have assured them of a more restrained approach.

The CPI(M) leadership has not taken a formal position, even as leaders within the party have differed. T.K. Hamza said he neither supported nor rejected Mr. Kanthapuram’s remarks, noting that religious scholars had long advised followers on matters of conduct.

“Religion should not be misused for political gains,” he said. Opposition Leader Pinarayi Vijayan has not commented yet. The Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) has also taken a cautious line.

Its president Syed Sadikali Shihab Thangal defended Mr. Kanthapuram, saying he may have been speaking out of concern for women’s safety. IUML State Secretary Abdurahman Randathani said the remarks should not be seen as opposition to social progress.

“He was speaking as a religious scholar, likely out of concern for women’s safety, as Sadikali Thangal pointed out,” he said. Former Higher Education Minister and CPI(M) leader K.T.

Jaleel also defended Mr. Kanthapuram’s right to speak, noting that the cleric was addressing his followers. “He has the freedom to preach religion; others have the freedom to disagree,” he said.

However, Dr. Jaleel used the occasion to attack the IUML. “Whenever the Muslim League is in power, it never bothers about Muslim unity,” he said.