The Mint paper's Saturday supplement (Lounge) on 15 January 2011 had an article on a play titled Dara, being performed by the Ajoka theatre group from Lahore. This play is based on the life of Dara Shikoh, who was Shah Jahan's eldest son and his favourite; Dara was imprisoned and executed by his brother Aurangzeb.
Dara was a poet, painter and a Sufi and his conflict with Aurangzeb mirrors the ongoing conflict between extremist and moderate forces everywhere, especially within Islam.
I have often wondered about what attracts people to extremist ideals and leaders. I would think that in the battle for hearts and minds, the extremists would be starting with a significant disadvantage as they are often oppose so many things that bring pleasure and enjoyment - music, dance, arts, cinema, wine & spirits, a relaxed approach to life with fewer rules / restrictions.
I suppose that in societies where people are struggling to obtain basic necessities of life (food, clothing, shelter, security), the ability of extremists to oppose corrupt governments that have failed in delivering these basics makes them popular with the people. It is also likely that only the rich/ruling classes may be enjoying these "better things in life" and the extremists can therefore position these may also be positioning these pleasures as being associated with the corrupt rulers (and therefore guilty by association).
In some respects this is similar to the willingness of people to accept dictatorships as long as they deliver the basic necessities in life and continue to deliver on the promise of material development.
In well-to-do societies (for e.g. in the middle east, as opposed to Afghanistan), extremists may be appealing to a person's desire to live up to some ideals or to be part of something larger than themselves. Also the desire to preserve and project their identities as being distinct from the rest of society would lead them to embrace the more extreme form of religion that accentuates their differences and glosses over the commonalities.
My guess is that Islam in India too is seeing a struggle between the tolerant forms which assimilated with the majority Indian culture (for e.g. Sufi Islam) and the extreme versions that develop under the middle eastern influence (for e.g. Wahabi Islam). It is easy to take sides (or form opinions) in some cases - for e.g. there was the story some months ago of a Muslim girl and her family in a village in Kerala having to withstand pressure from the religious community in order for her to take up a job. Most of us would support the girl and her family in this situation.
However there are other situations where there is more grey instead of just black and white. Which side do we take when we see more and more overt signs of religious conservatism? For e.g. based on my limited observations from a few visits in the past couple of years and based on whatever I read and heard, it appears that more and more Muslim women in Kerala, even from middle-class families are opting to wear burqas, hijabs etc as compared to earlier. Should we be worried by this trend, assuming that it indeed exists? Or should this be interpreted as a positive development in that the community no longer thinks it necessary to fit in and instead are confident/comfortable in asserting their identity? And shouldn't the rest of us respect the community's freedom to dress as they choose?
On a related note, I had attended a lecture by M.J. Akbar at IIMB some months ago, where among other things, he talked about the French law that bans veils covering the face (loosely referred to as the burqa ban). M.J Akbar was critical of this law and argued that the ban was ridiculous for various reasons - covering the head as a sign of modesty is a cultural tradition (even all the pictures of Mother Mary show her with her head covered), the hijab is very similar to the habit worn by nuns etc.
While I agreed with a lot of what he said, I wasn't so sure about this point. While the government may have had other intentions, my understanding is that the ban was also to prevent communities from pressurizing muslim girls/women into wearing such clothing; in other words, once it is declared illegal, the community leaders cannot insist that women folk adopt this form of dressing. However it is also possible that women (and their families) who may have felt comfortable moving in public or taking up jobs when dressed in such attire, may opt to remain at home when the comfort of donning such attire is taken away from them.
