Have a look at this…
"What right does she have to come here and poke her nose into our history?"
This is a Hindu nationalist heckler berating Dr. Audrey Truschke, an associate professor
of South Asian history. She’s delivering a lecture on this book she wrote…
It’s about one Muslim Indian Mughal Emperor. It’s called ‘Aurangzeb: The life and legacy of India’s
most controversial king.’ It’s clear that this guy is not happy with this historian’s presentation,
even though she’s not even praising him.
‘Folks, I study Aurangzeb, I do not glorify him. There is a huge difference’
Here’s this other guy talking about Aurangzeb:
"And whether that bigot, that bigoted fanatic Mogul emperor, Aurangzeb,
had destroyed the temple. Hindu's are denied even today more than 350 years later the right to worship their deities, even today"
There are so many videos like this where Aurangzeb’s character is put on trial
repeatedly in front of the public of India. Some have even heatedly debated whether to strip the
Mughal emperor’s name from a major thoroughfare in Delhi. Even the founding father of modern India,
Jawaharlal Nehru, rebuked Aurangzeb as “a bigot and an austere puritan.” in his book ‘Discovery
of India’ published in 1946. I think it's safe to say that these people are no fans
of Aurangzeb Alamgir. This is no accident and there is an agenda behind all the drama.
But… Why? Who’s this Mughal emperor? Why is he so controversial? And why does he matter today?
Well in order for us to know we must first recover the character of Aurangzeb from
the depths of history and dust the biases and myths away. So, let the trial begin…
If you live in the great Indian Subcontinent, chances are you already know Aurangzeb Alamgir,
especially recently. But, if you live outside of India then you probably have never heard of him.
So who is he? Well, here’s a profile…
Muhi al-Din Muhammad, or commonly known as Aurangzeb, was born third oldest to
the fifth Emperor of the Mughal Empire Shah Jahan in 1618. His mother was Mumtaz Mahal who
was so deeply beloved to shah Jahan that when she passed away, he built this tomb for her…
Yes, that's the Taj Mahal.
Growing up as a young Mughal prince came with specific perks but also responsibilities
and expectations. Right from the get go, Aurangzeb was educated in Jurisprudence,
Quran, Hadith and other religious texts in both Arabic and Persian language.
He was brought up by the likes of Saifudin Ibn Muhammad, the great grandson of Ahmad Sirhindi.
Not to mention he excelled in horsemanship and chivalry oftentimes showing bravery in the face of
danger. Like when his father Shah Jahan called for an elephant fight, a favourite royal pastime. Shah
Jahan and his sons were spectating on horseback when one of the elephants fell into a rage
and charged at Aurangzeb. Instead of dodging the charge, Aurangzeb speared it right into its head,
further enraging it. The elephant then knocked Aurangzeb off from his horse and onto the ground.
Thankfully the elephant became distracted by its opponent and left Aurangzeb alone.
His spectating father was amazed with his son's brave performance to say the least.
That’s why, at the age of 16, Shah Jahan sent Aurangzeb to help run the empire and fight wars
in Balkh, Bundelkhand, and Qandahar and administer Gujarat, Multan and Deccan for 22 long years.
He proved to be adept at administering and his military achievements were numerous.
However, Aurangzeb was constantly frustrated by decisions made from Delhi
that were seemingly designed to undermine his success.
Right at the moment of victory, Aurangzeb was arm-twisted into withdrawing his troops
in Deccan. This was an order from his father made at the behest of his brother Dharashukoh.
You see, while Aurangzeb was battling in Deccan, his older brother enjoyed leisures of the court in
Delhi. This was because Darashukoh held a higher position in the Mughal ranking system. But why
would Darashukoh set his eyes on destroying Aurangzeb? His younger brother, well that’s
because the Mughal empire was different to your regular 17th century empire. Let me explain,
So when a Mughal sultan passes away, he doesn’t just get to choose one of his sons to replace him,
NO. You see, in Mughal India, All sons have equal right to the throne. Ya takht ya tabut -
‘Either the throne or the grave’ this is the mantra of Mughal kingship and this is
why Darashukoh was sabotaging his brother and his biggest opponent to the throne.
So when Shah Jahan became sick, the news spread all across the empire, like a disease.
Although their father wasn’t dead yet, it was already too late. Aurangzeb and
his brothers began to mobilise their armies and prepare for battle, ‘The battle of succession’.
Unfortunately, this chapter in Aurangzeb's life is dark to say the least. What's even
more tragic is that battles of succession are common in Mughal history and often resulted in
thousands of lives lost. Why? Because Ya takht ya tabut - ‘Either the throne or the grave’.
When the dust had settled, Aurangzeb had emerged victorious. In typical Mughal fashion,
he had sentenced his brother Darashukoh to death. Although harsh to modern tastes,
his brothers would have no less acted the same. Niccoli Manucci, an Italian traveller,
reported that on the day of his death, Aurangzeb asked Darashukoh what he would do if the roles
were flipped. Seeing the writing on the wall, Dhar sneered at Aurangzeb
and said that he would have Aurangzeb’s body split and displayed on the four main gates.
Now Aurangzeb didn’t go to the same extent as his brother but instead buried him in a tomb in Delhi.
So on July 31, 1658, Aurangzeb held a coronation ceremony and adopted the title ‘Alamgir’ meaning,
'Caesar of the world’. He welcomed his brother's troops and chief advisors into his armies,
pardoning them fully. As for his father, Shah Jahan, Aurangzeb had him imprisoned in his room
and left his sister to take care of him until his final days. Aurangzeb never came to terms with his
handling of his father and will haunt him for the rest of his life and even helped shape his piety.
This manifested itself truly in the second decade of his reign where he withdrew imperial patronage
from certain practices such as dismissing musicians from many public court rituals.
He found it hard to fund anything within his court that wasn’t theological text and thus opted to
focus on esoteric rather than external things. However it is important to note that many things
remained in continuity with Mughal culture including royal court rituals and patronage.
The 1670s saw large scale imperial projects with imprints of Aurangzeb’s own interest. The most
impressive of those was the massive intellectual project Fatawa- Alamgiri, a synthesis of Hanafi
legal judgements, in 1675 after eight years of labour. This reflects two things, the king's
piety and his preoccupation with justice which inspired him to provide a clear legal code. Also,
he built Badshahi Mosque in Lahore, the world's largest mosque at the time. He even supported
a vast imperial library and spent one million rupees to preserve his manuscript collection.
Aurangzeb took pride in himself for upholding justice, like for instance he held court daily
and sometimes even twice a day. One Hindu member of his administration humorously points out
that when Aurangzeb held court once a day, there weren’t that many complaints
but after holding court twice a day, the complaints grew greater. His persistent
pursuit of justice made him obsessively involved with many administrative details,
personally. He truly wanted to know what was under every rock that laid in his empire. This is due
to his deep concern with basic security across Mughal territory, although to limited success.
He repeatedly wrote to his sons and important nobles about ensuring the safety of the roads
and scolded them for failing to prevent theft and other crimes against ordinary subjects.
One son even dared to respond that it wasn’t his responsibility. Aurangzeb reduced his rank
and noted: ‘If it had been an officer other than the prince, this order would have been
issued after an inquiry. For a prince the punishment is the absence of investigation.’
However impressive all these admirable achievements are, that didn’t stop Aurangzeb
from being the most ambitious expansionist sultan in the history of Mughal India.
Aurangzeb used diplomacy to extend, solidify and consolidate Mughal power. However,
he didn’t hesitate to resort to force to enlarge Mughal domains. You see,
for Aurangzeb, violence was not only permissible but necessary and even just
insofar as it encouraged stability and cooperation within the Mughal kingdom.
He crushed rebellions, waged wars of expansion and personally oversaw sieges. One of the most famous
and quite controversial was when dealing with the ninth Sikh Guru, Tegh Bahadur. Aurangzeb executed
the guru in 1675 for causing unrest in Punjab. Even his own son rebelled against him in 1681
and was chased through Deccan and escaped to Iran where he died in 1704. When it came to rebellions,
disobedience and the ultimate good of the Mughal state, Aurangzeb had no mercy.
Often times Aurangzeb went against his own ideals regarding ethics
and justice, such as overthrowing his father and even waged wars against Muslim kingdoms.
This would trouble Aurangzeb throughout his reign and would later remember these events with regret.
Remember that Italian foreign traveller? He said that Aurangzeb ‘was of a melancholy temperament,
always busy at something or another, wishing to execute justice and arrive
at appropriate decisions.’ Now I know what you’re thinking, you’re thinking: ‘That’s pretty
contradictory and confusing’ Well that’s because it is. Aurangzeb was an enigmatic, complex and
oftentimes contradictory figure. This incidentally lands Aurangzeb in hot waters when brought up in
contemporary issues. Which is why people get so heated when talking about the sultan today.
Today, Aurangzeb is accused of crimes including: Unjustly killing the ninth Sikh Guru
because he peacefully protested. The persecution of Hindus within the Mughal
state by means of mass force conversion campaigns and desecration of thousands of Hindu temples.
So, then we must ask: ‘Is this true?’ Did Aurangzeb commit these crimes?
Well… No. Not at all actually, and in order to be convinced we must look at Aurangzeb's policies
and general attitudes towards non-Muslims, specifically the Hindu majority. But first
we have to clear up some misconceptions. Which is that Hindus of the day did not
even label themselves as such and referred to themselves to sectarian labels like Brahmin,
Rajput, Maratha, etc. In fact, scholars have pointed out that the word ‘Hindu’ is Persian,
not Sanskrit. This became common use self referentially under British colonialism.
First, ‘Unjustly killing the ninth Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur’. This historical account is often
exaggerated through conflicting reports that are from a later period and vary considerably.
Modern day textbooks say that Bahadur peacefully protested against the forced conversion of
Kashmiri Brahmins. This isn’t even elaborated on in the earliest sources on the execution. In fact,
Persian and Sikh sources state that Aurangzeb saw Tegh Bahadur militarily opposing Mughal
state interests which caused civil unrest and so in Aurangzeb’s eyes, he was a legitimate
target. Aurangzeb did not look at the Gurus' religious stature as a motivation for punishment.
The reality is, Aurangzeb didn’t show mercy to anyone who would dare rebel against the state.
Second, ‘The persecution of Hindus’. In reality, Aurangzeb in his entire reign,
never oversaw any such forced conversion campaigns. In fact, Aurangzeb pursued a practical
strategy by incorporating Hindus into the Mughal bureaucracy just to win over the hearts, minds and
territory in the Deccan. So if anything, Aurangzeb selected his officials based on administrative
skills and not religious identity. Even before becoming Sultan during the war of succession,
Hindu members of Mughal court pretty much split evenly between him and his brother Darashukoh.
After becoming sultan, little has changed about Hindu share in Mughal administration. In fact,
in the later half of his reign, the number of Hindu participation increased by
50%. This was a strategy used by Aurangzeb to expand sovereignty across the Deccan.
To top it all off, Hindu and Jain temples were entitled to Mughal state protection and Aurangzeb
generally ensured their well-being. However, that goodwill could be revoked when specific temples or
their associates acted against imperial interests. So if that's the case, then where did the idea
that Aurangzeb had a vendetta against Hindus come from? Well… that came from British Colonialism.
British colonial scholars created a narrative of Hindu-Muslim animosity as apart of their good
old divide and conquer strategy. In actuality, Aurangzeb included thousands of Hindu temples
within his kingdom and atmost destroyed a few dozen. So historically speaking, he protected more
temples than he did destroyed. This was due to his following of Islamic law in granting protections
to non-Muslim religious leaders and often times went beyond religious law in his conduct toward
Hindu and Jain communities. In his princely order to a Rajput Hindu ruler of Mewar in 1654, he said:
‘Kings represent God on Earth and are thus obliged to ensure peace among religious communities.‘
he continued to condemn any king ‘who resorted to bigotry (taasub)’ as guilty of ‘razing God’s
prosperous creations and destroying divine foundations.’ So If he destroyed temples,
it was because he believed it to be an act of justice for the entire Mughal empire.
Today we see modern interpretations that suggest that Hindus like the Marathas, resist Mughal rule,
thought themselves as ‘Hindus’ defying ‘Muslim’ tyranny are just that: modern. Whereas in reality
both parties fought each other for political power.
But with all this said, why is it that Aurangzeb is heavily criticised and demonised?
Out of all the Muslim Mughal rulers that had come and gone, why Aurangzeb?
Well, for one Aurangzeb was much more pious than his imperial predecessors. He prayed all
his prayers in the Masjid and abstained from alcohol and opium which killed several members
of the Mughal royal family. He also memorised the entire Quran after becoming the Sultan. Even
sewing handmade prayer caps and writing copies of the Quran by hand. Aurangzeb drew on Islamic
ideals of justice and morality in projecting himself as a moral leader. He would ban certain
vices like alcohol, opium, prostitution, gambling and inflamatory theological wrtiings. He would
always seek approval from religious authorities but was hardly the puritanical leader, often
consulting with Hindu religious leaders throughout his life, as had earlier Mughal emperors.
So… Aurangzeb Alamgir was an enigmatic, complex and oftentimes contradictory emperor.
He wasn’t a perfect Muslim, but he wasn’t a man without morals. His reputation had suffered from
politically fueled narratives of the Mughal past. There are two sides to Aurangzeb's story in the
public: Aurangzeb the bigot and Aurangzeb the pious. The image that is oftentimes misleading
and destructive is the former image. Politicians and media use that image to stir up anti muslim
sentiment and brand Indian Muslims as dangerous traitors. They frame Islam fundamentally at odds
with Hinduism and so for India, these ideas mean that Muslims cannot be fully Indian.
So how do we move forward? Well we need to discard these images and ideas of Aurangzeb.
Only then can we move away from the notion that Islam is not compatible with being Indian
and thus fix the issues that plague todays India’s relationship with Muslims. Aurangzeb was a man of
his times, not ours. He acted according to his ideals of justice and ethical conduct
which sometimes was against Islamic law. He was fixated on dispensing his own brand of justice,
upholding Mughal traditions, and expanding his grip across the subcontinent.
In the end he died in the year 1707 and chose to be buried in an unmarked grave
and having expanded the Mughal empire to its greatest extent in history.
May Allah have mercy on Aurangzeb and help those Muslims suffering in India. Ameen.