Home

News

Blogs

Urdu Blogs

Urdu Articles

Useful Links

Books & Articles

Multimedia

more...

EMPEROR AURANGZEB: TRUTHS ABOUT A

RULER
8/30/2015

0 Comments

Hello, I am Brijendra Singh; I have done my PGDM course from I.I.S.E Business
School Lucknow. I am not a student of history but I like to read history due to my
interest. In this article I have tried to provide some facts related to Emperor
Aurangzeb. His image as a person and as a ruler is negative among the Indian
citizens, but I am sure when you will go through this article your attitude will change
towards this ruler.

Aurangzeb Alamgir was the sixth & the last great mughal emperor of India. He ruled
India from 1658 to 1707 AD. He was one of the greatest mughal emperors & lived a
very simple life. He lived on a small quantity of food, he used to write the quran with
his own hand & sell them to earn extra wage. If he wanted, he could have lived a life
of extra-ordinary luxury as the, emperors, kings, nawabs, rajas, maharajas did in
those days.

He was a well-read man; he kept up his love of books till the end. He wrote beautiful
Persian prose. A selection of his letters (Ruqat-i-Alamgiri) has long been a standard
model of simple but elegant prose. He understood music well but he gave up this
amusement in accordance with Islamic injunctions.

Emperor Aurangzeb is considered as the greatest of all the mughal kings. The mughal
state reached its height under his leadership. The state has 29.2% of the world
population under its flag (175 million out of 600 million in 1700 AD) & was one of
the richest states the world had ever seen, with a world GDP of 24.5% ($ 90.8 billion
out of $ 371 billion in 1700).

Of all the Muslim rulers who ruled vast territories of India from 712 to 1857AD,
probably no one has received as much condemnation from western & Hindu writers
as Aurangzeb. He has been castigated as a religious Muslim who was anti-Hindu,
who taxed them, who tried to convert them, who discriminated them in awarding high
administrative positions, & who interfered in their religious matters. This view has
been heavily promoted in the government approved text books in schools & colleges
across post partition India (i.e., after 1947). These are fabrications against one of the
best rulers of India who was pious, scholarly, saintly, un-biased, liberal,
magnanimous, tolerant, competent & far sighted.

Fortunately, in recent years quite a few Hindu historians have come out in the open
disputing those allegations. For e.g., historian Babu Nagendranath Banerjee rejected
the accusation of forced conversion of Hindus by Muslim rulers by stating that if that
was their intention then in India today there would not be nearly four times as many
Hindus compared to Muslims, despite the fact that Muslims had ruled for nearly a
thousand years. Banerjee challenged the Hindu hypothesis that Aurangzeb was anti-
Hindu by reasoning that if the latter was truly guilty of such bigotry, how could he
appoint a Hindu as his military commander -in chief? Surely, he could have afforded
to appoint a competent Muslim general in that position. Banerjee further stated: No
one should accuse Aurangzeb of being communal minded. In his administration the
state policy was formulated by Hindus. A number of non-Muslims including Hindus,
Sikhs, Marathas & Jats, were employed by him in his court. He did not compromise
on the fundamentals of Islam, which are infact the moving spirit of every faith.
Historical facts must be interpreted in their true & objective spirit & not subjectively
as expressed by the Hindu writers.

Dr. BISHAMBHAR NATH PANDES VIEW

The late scholar & historian, Dr.Bishambhar Nath Pandes research efforts exploded
myths on Aurangzebs rule. They also offer an excellent example of what history has
to teach us if only we study it dispassionately. Mr. Pande was ranked among the very
few Indians & very fewer still Hindu historians who tried to be a little careful when
dealing with such history. He knew that this history was originally compiled by
European writers whose main objective was to produce a history that would serve
their policy of divide & rule.

In his famous Khuda Bakhsh Annual Lecture (1985) Dr. Pande said: Thus under a
definite policy the Indian history text books were so falsified & distorted as to give an
impression that the medieval (i.e., Muslim) period of Indian history was full of
atrocities committed by Muslim rulers on their Hindu subjects & the Hindus had to
suffer terrible indignities under Muslim rule and there were no common factors
(between Hindus & Muslims) in social, political & economic life.

Therefore, Dr.Pande was extra careful. Whenever he came across a fact that looked
odd to him, he would try to check & verify rather than adopt it uncritically. He came
across a history text book taught in the Anglo-Bengali College, Allahabad, which
claimed that three thousand Brahmins had committed suicide as Tipu wanted to
convert them forcibly into the fold of Islam. The author was a very famous scholar,
Dr.Har Prasad Shastri, head of the department of Sanskrit at Kolkata University.
(Tipu Sultan (1750-99), who ruled over the South Indian state of Mysore (1782-99),
is one of the most heroic figures in Indian history. He died on the battle field, fighting
the British.)

Was it true? Dr. Pande wrote immediately to the author & asked him for the source on
which he had based this episode in his text-book. After several reminders, Dr. Shastri
replied that he had taken this information from the Mysore gazetteer. So Dr. Pande
requested the Mysore university vice- chancellor, Sir Brijendra Nath Seal, to verify
for him Dr. Shastris statement from the gazetteer. Sir Brijendra referred his letter to
Prof. Srikantia who was then working on a new edition of the gazetteer. Srikantia
wrote to say that the gazetteer mentioned no such incident and, as a historian himself,
he was certain that nothing like this had taken place. Prof. Srikantia added that both
the prime minister & commander-in-chief of Tipu Sultan were themselves Brahmins.
He also enclosed a list of 136 Hindu temples which used to receive annual grants
from the sultans treasury.

It inspired that Shastri had lifted this story from Colonel Miles, History of Mysore,
which Miles claimed he had taken from a Persian manuscript in the personal library
of Queen Victoria. When Dr. Pande checked further, he found that no such
manuscript existed in Queen Victorias library.

FALSE HISTORY PROVIDED BY BRITISHERS

British historian Sir Henry Elliot remarked that Hindus had not left any account
which could unable us to gauge the traumatic impact the Muslim conquest and rule
had on them? Since there was none, Elliot went on to produce his own eight-volume
history of India with contributions from British historians (1867). His history claimed
Hindus were slain for disputing with Mohammedans, generally prohibited from
worshipping and taking out religious processions , their idols were mutilated , their
temples were destroyed , they were forced into conversion & marriages , & were
killed & massacred by drunk Muslim tyrants. Thus Sir Henry, & scores of other
empire scholars, went on to produce a synthetic Hindu verses Muslim history of
India, & their lies became a history.

Lord Curzon(Governor General of India 1895-99 & Viceroy 1899-1904(d.1925) was

told by the secretary of state for India, George Francis Hamilton , that they should
so plan the educational textbooks that the differences between community &
community are further strengthened. Another Viceroy, Lord Dufferin (1884-88), was
advised by the secretary of state in London that the division of religious feelings is
greatly to our advantage , & that he expected some good as a result of your
committee of inquiry on Indian education & on teaching material . We have
maintained our power in India by playing off one part against the other, the
secretary of state for India reminded yet another viceroy, Lord Elgin (1862-63), &
we must continue to do so. Do all you can, therefore to prevent all having a common
feeling?

MYTH RELATED TO DESTRUCTION OF TEMPLES

Some of the Hindu historians have accused Aurangzeb of demolishing Hindu

temples. How factual is this accusation against a man, who has been known to be a
saintly man, a strict adherent of Islam? The Quran prohibits any Muslim to impose
his will on a non-Muslim by stating that There is no compulsion in religion.(Surah
al-Baqarah 2.256). The Surah al-Kafirun clearly states: To you is your religion & to
me is mine. It would be totally unbecoming of a learned scholar of Islam of his
caliber, as Aurangzeb was known to be, to do things that are contrary to the dictates
of the Quran.

Interestingly, the 1946 edition of the history textbook Etihash Parichaya (introduction
to history) used in Bengal for the 5th & 6th graders states: If Aurangzeb had the
intention of demolishing temples to make way for mosques, there would not have
been a single temple standing erect in India. On the contrary, Aurangzeb donated
huge estates for use as temple sites & support thereof in Benaras, Kashmir &
elsewhere. The official documentations for these land grants are still extant.

A stone inscription in the historic Balaji or Vishnu temple, located north of Chitrakut
Balaghat, still shows that it was commissioned by the emperor himself. His
administration made handsome donation to temple of Pandharpur seat of deity
Vitthal. Historian the late D.G Godse has claimed that trustees of Vitthal temple were
more worried about marauding Maratha armies than the mughal one.

The proof of Aurangzebs land grant for famous Hindu religious sites in Varanasi can
easily be verified from the deed records extant at those sites. The same textbook
(Etihash Parichaya) reads: During the fifty year reign of Aurangzeb, not a single
Hindu was forced to embrace Islam. He did not interfere with any Hindu religious
activities. Alexander Hamilton, a British historian, toured India towards the end of
Aurangzebs fifty years reign & observed that everyone was free to serve & worship
god in his own way.

The Mughal emperor Aurangzeb is the most reviled of all the Muslim rulers in India.
He was supposed to be a great destroyer of temples & oppressor of Hindus, & a
fundamentalist too. As chairman of the Allahabad municipality (1948-53), Dr.
Bishambhar Nath Pande had to deal with a land dispute between two temple priests.
One of them had filed in evidence some firmans (royal orders) to prove that
Aurangzeb had, besides cash, gifted the land in question for the maintenance of his
temple. Might they not be fake, Dr. Pande thought in view of Aurangzebs fanatically
anti-Hindu image? He showed them to his friend, Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru, a
distinguished lawyer as well a great scholar of Arabic & Persian. He was also a
Brahmin. Sapru examined the documents & declared they were genuine firmans
issued by Aurangzeb. For Dr.Pande this was a new image of Aurangzeb, so he wrote
to the chief priests of the various important temples, all over the country, requesting
photocopies of any firman issued by aurangzeb that they may have in their
possession. The response was overwhelming; he received copies of firmans of
Aurangzeb from the great temples of Mahakaleshwara, Ujjain, Balaji temple,
Chitrakut, Umanand temple Gauhati, & the Jain temple of Shatrunjai & other temples
& gurudwaras scattered over northern India. These firmans were issued from 1659 to
1685AD. Though these are only few instances of Aurangzeb generous attitude
towards Hindus & their temples, they are enough to show that what the historians
have written about him was biased & is only one side of the picture. India is a vast
land with thousands of temples scattered all over. If proper research is made, I am
confident; many more instances would come to light which will show Aurangzebs
benevolent treatment of non-Muslims.

Aurangzeb did not indiscriminately destroy Hindu temples, as he is commonly

believed to have done so, & that he directed the destruction of temples only when
faced with insurgency. This was almost certainly the case with the Keshava Rai
temple in the Mathura region, where the Jats rose in rebellion & yet even this policy
of reprisal may have been modified, as Hindu temples in the Deccan were seldom
destroyed. The image of Aurangzeb as an idol breaker may not with stand scrutiny,
since there is evidence to show that, like his predecessors, he continued to confer land
grants or jagirs (large parcel of agricultural lands) upon Hindu temples, such as the
Someshwar Nath Mahadev temple Allahabad, Jangum Badi Shiva temple in Varanasi,
Umanand temple in Gauhati & numerous others. He did not harm to the famous Alura
temples (a huge complex of Ancient temples) in his conquest of Deccan.

DEMOLITION OF KASHI VISHWANATH TEMPLE

Dr. Pandes research showed that Aurangzeb was as solicitous of the rights & welfare
of his non-Muslim subjects as he was of his Muslim subjects. Hindu plaintiffs
received full justice against their Muslims respondents &, if guilty, Muslims were
given punishment as necessary.
One of the greatest charges against Aurangzeb is of the demolition of Vishwanath
temple in Varanasi. That was a fact, but Dr. Pande unraveled the reason for it. While
Aurangzeb was passing near Varanasi on his way to Bengal, the Hindu Rajas in his
retinue requested that if the halt was made for a day, their Ranis may go to Varanasi,
have a dip in the Ganges & pay their homage to Lord Vishwanath. Aurangzeb readily
agreed. Army pickets were posted on the five mile route to Varanasi. The Ranis
made journey to the palkis. They took their dip in the Ganges & went to the
Vishwanath temple to pay their homage. After offering puja (worship) all the Ranis
returned except one, the Maharani of Kutch. A thorough search was made of the
temple precincts but the Rani was to be found nowhere.

When Aurangzeb came to know about this, he was very much enraged. He sent his
senior officers to search for the Rani. Ultimately they found that statue of Ganesh (the
elephant headed god) which was fixed in the wall was a moveable one. When the
statue was moved, they saw a flight of stairs that led to the basement. To their horror
they found the missing Rani dishonored & crying deprived of all her ornaments. The
basement was just beneath Lord Vishwanaths seat.

The Raja demanded salutary action, & Aurangzeb ordered that as the sacred
precincts have been despoiled, Lord Vishwanath may be moved to some other place,
the temple be razed to the ground & the Mahant (head priest) be arrested &
punished.

EMPLOYMENT FOR NON-MUSLIMS

Aurangzeb has often been accused of closing the doors of official employment on the
Hindus, but a study of the list of his officers shows this is not so. Actually there were
more Hindu officers under him than under any other Mughal emperor. Though this
was primarily due to a general increase in the number of officers, it shows that there
was no ban on the employment of Hindus.

In his administration the state policy was formulated by Hindus. Two Hindus held the
highest position in the state treasury. Some prejudiced Muslims even questioned the
merit of his decision to appoint non-Muslims to such high offices. The emperor
refuted them by stating that he had been following the dictates of the Shariah (Islamic
law) which demands appointing right persons in right positions. During Aurangzebs
long reign of fifty years, many Hindus, notably Jaswant Singh, Jay Singh, Raja
Rajrup, Kabir Singh, Arghanath Singh, Prem Dev Singh, Dilip Roy & Rasik Lal
Crory, held very high administrative positions. Two of the highest ranked generals in
Aurangzebs administration, Jaswant Singh & Jay Singh, were Hindus. Other notable
Hindu generals who commanded a garrison of two to five thousand soldiers were
Raja Vim Singh of Udaypur, Indra Singh, & Achalaji & Arjuji. One wonders if
Aurangzeb was hostile to Hindus, why would he position all these Hindus to high
positions of authority, especially in the military, who could have mutinied against him
& removed him from his throne?
Most Hindus like Akbar over Aurangzeb for his multi-ethnic court where Hindus
were favored. Historian Shri Sharma states that while Emperor Akbar had 14 Hindu
Mansabdars (high officials) in his court, Aurangzeb actually had 148 Hindu high
officials in his court (Ref : Mughal Govn.). But this fact is somewhat less known.

If Aurangzeb was so ferocious a communalist, why is it, some historians have asked,
that the number of Hindu employed in positions of eminence under Aurangzebs reign
rose from 24.5% in the time of his father Shah Jahan to 33% in the fourth decade of
his own rule?

JIZYA AND OTHER TAXES

Now let us deal with Aurangzebs imposition of the Jizya tax which had drawn severe
criticism from many Hindu historians. It is true that Jizya was lifted during the reign
of Akbar & Jahangir & that Aurangzeb later reinstated this. Before I delve into the
subject of Aurangzebs Jizya tax, or taxing the non-Muslims, it is worthwhile to point
out that Jizya is nothing more than a war tax which was collected only from able-
bodied young non-Muslim male citizens living in a Muslim country who did not want
to volunteer for the defence of the country. That is, no such tax was collected from
non-Muslims who volunteered to defend the country. This tax was not collected from
women & neither from immature males nor from disabled or old male citizens. For
payment of such taxes, it became incumbent upon the Muslim Government to protect
the life, property & wealth of its non-Muslim citizens. If for any reason the
Government failed to protect its citizens, especially during a war, the taxable amount
was returned.

It should be pointed out here that zakat (2.5% of savings) & ushr (10% of agricultural
products) were collected from all Muslims, who owned some wealth (beyond a
certain minimum, called nisab). They also paid sadaqah, fitrah & khums. None of
these were collected from any non-Muslim. As a matter of fact, the per capita
collection from Muslims was several fold that of non-Muslims. Further to
Aurangzebs credit is his abolition of a lot of taxes, although this fact is not usually
mentioned. In his book Mughal administration, Sir Jadunath Sarkar, foremost
historian on the Mughal dynasty, mentions that during Aurangzebs reign in power,
nearly 65 types of taxes were abolished, which resulted in a yearly revenue loss of 50
million rupees from the state treasury.

Other historians stated that when Aurangzeb abolished 80 types of taxes, no one
thanked him for his generosity. But when he imposed only one (jizya), & not heavy at
all, people began to show their displeasure.

While some Hindu historians are retracting the lies, the textbooks & historic accounts
in western countries have yet to admit their error & set the record straight.

SOME IMPORTANT POINTS RELATED TO CHARACTER OF AURANGZEB

Just think a man such, character, caliber that cares and concern for public can be
unjust, cruel. Just imagine a king such cruel & unjust to the majority could rule a
huge country, for about 50 years, where high majority members serving highest
position & comprising 80% in the military.

He was so pious best character person noble & just. You cannot find a single one in
the present leaders.

His personal piety however is undeniable. He led an exemplary simple pious life. He
cares for the royal treasury as public treasury & for public. The present leaders
considers public treasury to personal treasury.

Unlike his predecessors, Aurangzeb did consider the royal treasury as a trust of the
citizens of his empire & did not use it for personal expenses.

He was Subedar in Deccan & Gujarat. He didnt destroy any temple. His period was
peaceful & prosperous, called golden period.

Despite more than two decades he campaign as subedar in Deccan & Gujarat there is
no record of temple destruction in the region. He continued to confer Jagirs to Hindu
temples. His period was golden period & relatively peaceful, prosperous in his tenure.

He was maligned that he was against art & music. He was the accomplished musician
playing VEENA. The largest numbers of books on classical Indian music in Persian
were written during Aurangzebs reign. He banned all nude dances.

Aurangzeb cruelty as mere rumors or at best lies invented by Hindu bigotry & British
historians who wanted to weaken India by their divide & rule policy. Bankim
Chatterjee, who served his whole life to British government, was a tool of this
conspiracy and dividing.

He was so concern about duties; he did not miss prayer during the ongoing war.

He spread his prayer rug & prayed in the midst of battle ground, brought him much
fame. He stopped all bad things, which today everybody want. Why government
banned bar balayien, dances of Rakhi Sawant & Mallaika. Why sattabazi is illegal?

Today we pay more than 66% of our income as taxes. The present government is
worse than Aurangzebs.

He forbade sati, drinking, gambling, prostitution, devadasies, dancing in brothels,

ashrams & mutts. He put jizya to Dhimmis (non-believers) which around 2.5% like
Muslim pay their Zakat, 2.5% eligible person should pay. The old, women, children
were exempted. Only the young man who didnt want to serve in the army should pay
the jiziya. Indian parliament still hung the bill of Lok Pal, whereas Aurangzeb the
only ruler who appointed Lok Pal to control corruption in Judiciary, Finance & other
departments.

He appointed Muhattasib (lok pal) censors to control injustice & atrocities. The
Brahmans & higher caste Hindus now found themselves facing Islamic law courts for
the atrocities on lower castes Hindus.

He was best knowledgeable & brilliant administrator. He never tolerates injustice. He

was a brave soldier & best commander in the field. He was the only who control
Deccan & Bijapur dynasty. Under his leadership, in particular, he led Mughal forces
in the conquest of the Deccan, seizing first the Golkunda & Bijapur Sultanates, &
then attacking the Maratha chieftains. He annexed all the Maratha territories. He left
Shivaji because he was no threat to his kingdom.

These are the few evidence of his greatness. The Brahmans & higher caste were
subject to Aurangzeb justice. They maligned & created, invented, fabricated these &
all other baseless stories.

This is all about emperor Aurangzeb. I am confident that when you will go through
all these facts & figures your perception towards this Mughal emperor will change.
Our medieval history consists of various false stories. Our nation had never seen an
emperor like Aurangzeb. I need your feedback about this article. What should I do to
change the perception of people? I want to know merits, demerits, area of scope &
any suggestion related to this article from your side.

Source: http://www.yoindia.com/shayariadab/inspirational-stories-and-real-life-
incidences/emperor-aurangzeb-t98568.0.html
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

Leave a Reply.
Enter your email address:
Delivered by FeedBurner

Deoband Online - Blogs

o WHY APEX COURTS PROPOSAL ABOUT BABARI MOSQUE NOT

PRACTICAL?

o Obituary: Hadhrat Maulana Shaikh Abdul Haq Azami (1928-2016)

o Darul Uloom Deoband's Fatwa About Maulana Saad Kandhlawi of Tabligh

o Muslims Cannot Surrender Their Claim On BABRI MASJID

o Muslim Womens Empowerment; UCC, Triple Talaq and Polygamy: Myths vs.
Facts

o The Big question: who will decide the boundaries of madrasa curriculum?

o National Elocution Competition in English for Madrasa Graduates

o Book Review: 'Life and Thoughts of Hujjat al-Islam Imam Muhammad Qasim al-
Nanawtawi'

o Prophet Muhammad needs to be understood as a compassionate human being, a

well-wisher of all

o Open Letter to Jamiat Elders from the graduates of Darul Uloom Deoband and
Markazul Maarif

Categories

All
Beliefs
Comparative Religions
Education
Eidul Adhha
Fiqh
General
Hadith
Hajj
Islamic
Morals
Muharram
News
Prayers
Quran
Qurbani
Ramadan
Society
Ulama
Women

Archives

March 2017
January 2017
December 2016
October 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
March 2014
January 2014
December 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
March 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
July 2012
June 2012
April 2012
February 2012
January 2012
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
May 2010
February 2010
December 2009
May 2009
April 2008
February 2008
May 2007
December 2006
November 2006
February 2006

View My Stats

Powered by
http://www.deoband.net/blogs/emperor-aurangzeb-truths-about-a-ruler