‘The Trial of Dara Shikoh’ - A Thought-Provoking Play
Prof. Akbar Ahmed’s three-act play ‘The Trial of Dara Shikoh’, a beautifully illustrated and printed version of which has been brought out by Pakistan Link Publications, is a compelling drama that stimulates the query as to the shape of things in communal relations in India had Dara Shikoh, instead of Aurangzeb, ascended the Mughal throne after their father Shahjahan. Also, it echoes the rift between the rigid extremists and the open moderates within Islam that keep impacting Muslim societies till today. The play is a highly powerful metaphor for the current crisis of accommodation between the two major faiths of the world.
The play was broadcast early this year and staged in March at the American University, Washington, before sold out crowds.
Dara Shikoh, a poet, religious scholar and a mystic with an open mind was the eldest son of emperor Shahjahan and was declared the heir apparent to the mighty Mughal throne. Aurangzeb was a few years younger, ambitious and totally committed to the orthodox version of Islam.
Shahjahan’s nomination of Dara Shikoh to succeed him was unacceptable to Aurangzeb who fought, defeated and arrested Dara. He also imprisoned his father Shahjahan, the builder of Taj Mahal, accusing him of profligacy, and became the emperor himself.
Dara was tried in a court in the summer of 1659 and sentenced to death for committing apostasy. His crime: rejection of a rigid view of Islam in favor of a more open interpretation.
While historians tend to view the conflict between the two brothers as a mundane struggle for the throne, Dr. Akbar Ahmad has presented it in his play as a clash between the orthodox and liberal ideologies of the two brothers. Dara was charged of being an apostate for having authored “The Mingling of Oceans” and “The Great Secret” which convey “the common source, common bonds and indeed common character of Islam and Hinduism. That, in essence, they are similar, one and the same”.
Dara is further accused of having a high regard for the founder of the Sikh religion, Guru Nanak, who derogated Islamic clerics for being hypocrites and Muslim judges (Qazis) for being corrupt. Dara, on the other hand, placed Nanak at par with tens of thousands of religious reformers sent by God for the reformation of different communities. This was a clear case of blasphemy to the radical and orthodox Islamists. Further, he was charged of arranging the translation into Persian of Hindu scriptures that were in Sanskrit language – Bhagavad-Gita and the Upnishads in particular - so that they could be widely read and understood.
Dara Shikoh was convinced that different religions, following different paths and rituals arrived at the same destination and worshiped the same God. Islam and Hinduism, says Dara in the play, meet at the source and there is much in common. Of course, their history, their rituals and even their forms are different. The aim of a great religion like Islam, or indeed Hinduism, is to produce pious, compassionate, and concerned individuals. Allah and Prabhu are the names of the same entity, maintained Dara.
Akbar Ahmed has been fairly honest in presenting both points of view, which constitutes a very strong aspect of the play. He has used historical facts to present in a dramatic form the ill effects of dogmatism, religious intolerance and the lack of interfaith accommodation and harmony.
A great advocate of inter-faith dialogue, Dr. Ahmed contends that if we are to prevent the world from lurching towards one crisis after another, then we must radically rethink the relationship between Islam and other religions - a radical reassessment of each other.
It was perhaps his consciousness of the need for a reassessment of the situation on the ground, and having always been a man of action apart from being acknowledged as the foremost Islamic thinker and scholar, that led him to launch a journey through several Muslim countries in the Middle East, South Asia and the Far East. He took with him some of his more enthusiastic students and the team visited colleges, universities, and religious institutions, met concerned academics, attended seminars and informed discussions. They supplied copies of a provocative questionnaire to students and others to seek their true feelings. Their replies and the notes taken by members of the team served as the basic raw material for the illuminating book “Journey into Islam – Crisis of Globalization”.
The book essentially documents the conflicts within the Islamic societies apart from dealing with the external challenge of Globalization. The Trial of Dara Shikoh is, in a way, an illustration from the past of the internal dissensions dogging the precepts and practices of Islam.
As a result of his team’s intensive research, Dr. Ahmed found Muslim societies of today divided into three categories. Using South Asian terms, he calls them (i) Deobandi, (ii) Ajmeri, and (iii) Aligarh. The Deobandis (alumni of the seminary at Deoband, in northern India, who follow Ibn Taymiyya of the 14th century and Abdul Wahab of the 18th century) are traditionalists who want to actively defend Islam and recreate the purity of early Muslim society. The Ajmeris are the mystics (Sufis) who reach out to other faiths and lay emphasis on spiritual attainments through intense worship and esoteric practices. Followers of the Aligarh model try for equilibrium between the spiritual and the worldly - between the pull of the market and of the mosque.
Dara Shikoh falls in the Ajmeri category, while Aurangzeb may be referred to as belonging to the Deobandi sector. The other characters in the play may be classified as ordinary mortals minding their own business.
The play sets one thinking as to the shape of things in South Asia had Dara Shikoh emerged successful in the war of succession and become the emperor instead of Aurangzeb. Would that have put an end to communal conflict and promoted a composite religious and cultural creed? No, in all probability. Emperor Akbar tried this by having a Hindu lady as his queen, and by introducing even a new religion, Din-i-Ilahi, which he thought would be acceptable to all major communities of India. It was abhorred, instead, by almost all of them. By avoiding Akbar’s mistake of launching a new religion, and by sticking to the path of saints and Sufis, Dara might have developed a better rapport and harmony between the major communities.
Although the playwright has meticulously avoided any value judgment on the conduct of Aurangzeb, the impression that emerges is quite negative. The trial was to rationalize his decision to eliminate Dara Shikoh to preclude the possibility of any challenge to his rule. Aurangzeb did expand the boundaries of the Mughal Empire and ruthlessly crushed all uprisings against it. He died in 1707 after half a century of rule, marking the beginning of the end of the Mughal Empire (1526-1857).
A few years back when I visited his tomb, I marveled at its simplicity. The great Mughal monarch, who built the world’s biggest mosque in Lahore, lies buried, according to his own will, in a grave without even a dome over it. Yet, his ruthless and intolerant rule, his orthodox and radical beliefs, started the meltdown of the mighty empire. The inner verve and coherence (called ‘Asbiya’ by Ibne Khaldun) had, anyway, started waning and even Dara Shikoh might not have been able to leave behind a thriving, throbbing empire.
Arifhussaini@hotmail.com
