com
http://lostislamichistory.com/aurangzeb-and-islamic-rule-in-india/
Promotion of Islam
One of Aurangzebs main goals was to bring true Islamic governance to the Mughal Empire. Previous emperors, while all Muslim, had not all ruled according to Islamic law. His great grandfather Akbar, for example, regularly went against Islamic beliefs by adopting many non-Islamic religious beliefs and practices in his personal life as well as in his rule of the empire. Aurangzebs insistence on Islamic rule was based on his previous education and his strong religious convictions. Aurangzeb took power before his father, Shah Jahan, had passed away. Despite the respect he had for his father, Aurangzeb vehemently disagreed with many of his fathers actions, considering them to be wasteful and extravagant. An example of his religious mindset was his criticism of the Taj Mahal, which was a tomb built by Shah Jahan for Aurangzebs mother, Mumtaz Mahal. Aurangzeb considered it to be against the religious laws of Islam to build a structure over a grave, particularly one that was so ornate and expensive. He declared the
lawfulness of a solid construction over a grave is doubtful, and there can be no doubt about the extravagance involved. He also made it a point to publicly oppose excessive veneration of the graves of Sufis, as he noted that it was developing into a cult-like practice, away from the beliefs and practices of Islam. In order to practice Islamic law in the empire correctly, Aurangzeb insisted on compiling Islamic law into a codified book that could be much more easily followed. He thus brought together hundreds of scholars of Islam from all over the Muslim world to organize such laws. The result was a landmark text of fiqh (jurisprudence) in the Hanafi school, known as the Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, meaning The Religious Decrees of Alamgir. It was known as the Fatawa al-Hindiya ( ) in the rest of the Muslim world and is well-respected as a compendium of Hanafi law. Using the Fatawa-e-Alamgiri as a guidebook, Aurangzeb sent officials throughout the empire to enact Islamic law and end socially corrupt practices. As such, alcoholism, gambling, and prostitution were combated by the imperial government. Taxes that were not in line with Islamic law were also abolished, a policy that was very popular with the Mughal Empires subjects.
To make up for the loss in tax revenue, Aurangzeb adopted a very simple lifestyle and did not live in a lavish manner as his father had. Royal traditions that he considered extravagant were abolished, such as court musicians and festivities on the emperors birthday.
torn down. 1 So if Aurangzeb did not demolish temples for religious reasons, why did he do it? The answer lies in the political nature of temples in the 1600s. Hindu and Sikh temples (unlike Muslim mosques) were not just places of worship. They also had political significance. Temples acted as political offices and state property, and the priests that were in charge of them were in the employ of the government. When seeking to get the support of Hindus in a particular area, Mughal emperors (and even Hindu kings in nonMughal areas) would rely on the priests to rally the local population through the temple. As such, a temple was more than just a religious building, it was also a potentially powerful political tool.
With this understanding of temples and their significance, we can move on to understand Aurangzebs destruction of certain temples. No historical records show that he had an indiscriminate policy of temple destruction across India. The temples he chose to destroy were carefully selected and a small fraction of the total Hindu houses of worship in India. This is because when Aurangzeb chose a temple for destruction, it was a politically motivated act, not a religious one. Seeing the opulence and subsequent financial strain of the Mughals during the reign of Shah Jahan, numerous local governors and priests decided to rebel against Mughal authority during the reign of Aurangzeb. When a rebellion broke out in one part of the empire, the local temple was the natural political entity that rebels could rally against. So long as the rebel leaders and their client temples existed, the threat to the Mughal government existed. It thus became a policy when fighting rebellions against central authority, that the temple that spawned that rebellion also be destroyed. An example of this was a 1669 rebellion in Banaras led by a political rival, Shivaji, who used the local temple to rally support to his cause. After capturing Shivaji, Aurangzeb destroyed a temple in Banaras that was used as a political recruiting ground against his reign. Another example occurred in 1670 in Mathura when Jats rebelled and killed a local Muslim leader. Again, to end the rebellion Aurangzeb had to destroy the temple that had supported it.
Aurangzeb Reading Quran Overall, the policy of desecrating temples was used as a political punishment for disloyal Hindu officials, not as a sign of religious intolerance as some may argue. A further argument that the lack of mosque desecration means he was religiously bigoted also holds no ground, as mosques did not double as political institutions as temples did. While the policy of obliterating a political opponents base of operations is one that may have its detractors, the arguments that Aurangzebs actions were religiously motivated are clearly baseless. Instead,
Aurangzeb was a religiously-minded leader who strove hard to ensure an Islamic character permeated through all his actions as leader. This did not however mean religious intolerance as he followed guidelines for protection of non-Muslims that is mandated by Islamic law.
Footnotes: Eaton, Richard. Temple Desecration and Indo-Muslim States. Frontline. (2001): n. page. Print. . Bibliography: Hodgson, M. G. S. The Venture of Islam, Conscience and History in a World Civilization. 3. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1974. Holt, P.M., Ann Lambton, and Bernard Lewis. The Cambridge History of Islam. 2A. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1970. Print. Eaton, Richard. Temple Desecration and Indo-Muslim States. Frontline. (2001): n. page. Print. . Ikram, S.M. Muslim Civilization in India . New York City: Columbia University Press, 1964. Web.