Aurangzeb Alamgir is a Mughal emperor who conquered the Indian subcontinent and might act as a role model for young people.

A quick introduction to Aurangzeb Alamgir, along with a discussion of various myths and realities from his historical life.

Aurangzeb, Shah Jahan's third son, was born on October 21, 1618, in Dohad, on the border of Gujarat and Rajputana. He was younger than Dara Shikoh and Shuja, yet he easily outperformed them in terms of skill and character. He was hardworking, visionary, and meticulous. He would be made a name for himself as a capable administrator. During the many years, he spent in the Deccan and other Empire regions. He was a fierce soldier and a skilled commander, yet he was calm and careful when dealing with others. Aurangzeb was recognized as a prince for his commitment to the Muslim faith and following Islamic injunctions. In several of his letters to Shah Jahan during the succession conflict, Aurangzeb said that he was acting for the sake of true religion and the peace of the realm.  Read More From Wikipedia>>

Aurangzeb Alamgir was India's sixth and last great Mughal ruler. From 1658 until 1707 AD, he governed India. Emperor Aurangzeb is regarded as the greatest of all Mughal rulers. In the economic realm, he was adamantly opposed to any unlawful exactions and levies that were not allowed by Islamic law. Immediately after his coronation, he repealed the inland transit tax (rahdari) of 10% of the value of products and the octori (Pandari) on all items of food and drink carried into cities for sale. These actions provided respite to the people and were well received. Under his rule, the Mughal state achieved its pinnacle. The state held 29.2 percent of the global population (175 million out of 600 million in 1700 AD) under its flag and was one of the wealthiest nations the world had ever seen, with a world GDP of 24.5 percent ($ 90.8 billion out of $371 billion in 1700).

Aurangzeb launched an era of strong rule by tightening up the administration early on. Provincial viceroys began to impose imperial prestige everywhere. Energetic Subedars expanded the empire's borders to Assam. Local notables discovered that disobeying instructions would no longer be tolerated. It was taught to the border tribes that no transgression of the imperial boundaries would go unpunished.

The Jat Revolt

The Jats were the first organized Hindu insurrection against the policy of religious persecution. Abdul Nabi, a local Muslim officer in Mathura, was demolishing Hindu temples and demeaning their women. He razed a Hindu temple and built a mosque on its remains in 1661 A.D. The Jats, commanded by Gokal, rose against this and murdered Abdul Nabi in 1669 A.D. He vanquished some minor Muslim soldiers deployed against him. At the battle of Tilpat, he was defeated and died. The Jats were brutally punished.

Policy for the North-West

Aurangzeb, although a defender of Muslim orthodoxy, had to fight conflicts with similarly fanatical Muslim tribes in the North Western Frontier area. These individuals have long been a big challenge and a major nuisance for India's rulers. This region's fanatical and turbulent tribes never attempted to become a country. They were separated into tribes and were never united under a single head. They have always made a living by robbing others. The Mughal Emperor found it impossible to capture and tame the tribesmen by force, so they paid them to keep the roads along the border open to peaceful commerce. Aurangzeb paid the border chiefs six lakh rupees every year, but the tactic of buying the frontier chiefs did not always work, since new leaders emerged among the tribesmen, and they often returned to looting Mughal territory. In sum, the Mughal government was sick of these tribesmen's operations in this area.

Read more on Historypak.com

Islamic law enforcement

Until the reign of Aurangzeb, Indian Islam was influenced by mystical Sufi doctrines. Despite having Sunni ancestors, the emperors of Humayun tolerated or actively supported the activities of the Chisti Sufis. He advocated a more orthodox view of Sharia-based Islamic beliefs and conduct, which he sought to codify via edicts and legislation. His Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, a 33-volume collection of these edicts, set the pattern for Sharia-based civil legislation, which continues to influence Islamic states today. This is an example of a common conflict between the areas of fiqh (jurisprudence) typically overseen by religious academics and siyasin (politics). Aurangzeb asserted his power in both realms by drafting his own legal code. In reality, he was doing the same thing as Akbar, but while Akbar's intention was to promote an inclusive, tolerant form of Islam, his was to promote an exclusive, bigoted one.

Mughal court life altered considerably under Aurangzeb. His understanding of Islam forbade music, therefore he expelled court musicians, dancers, and singers. Furthermore, based on Muslim rules prohibiting the use of pictures, he halted the creation of representational artwork, including the miniature painting that had reached its pinnacle prior to his reign. Soldiers and residents were also allowed carte blanche to deface architectural motifs, including faces, flowers, and vines, even on the walls of Mughal palaces. Thousands of photos were deleted in this manner. Aurangzeb abandoned the Hindu-inspired rituals of previous Mughal emperors, particularly the practice of "darshan," or public visits to confer blessings, which had been customary since Akbar's reign.

Aurangzeb started to create and implement a series of edicts that were harsher on non-Muslims and had less tolerance for them. Most notably, Aurangzeb enacted regulations that expressly prohibited non-Muslim worship. Non-Muslim worship places were destroyed, non-Muslim religious meetings were prohibited, non-Muslim religious schools were closed, and certain Hindu customs such as sati (self-immolation by widows) and temple dancing were prohibited. The penalty for breaching such laws was often death.

In such a harsh enforcement atmosphere, the Mughal infrastructure became arbitrary and corrupt. As a result, instead of feeling accepted and tolerated, non-Muslims started to feel harassed and afraid. Throughout many cases, these impulses would culminate to open political and military insurrection.

Read more on aeon>>

Let's discuss the various myths and realities of his historical life.

Britishers spread false history

As per British historian Sir Henry Elliot, Hindus "had not left any record that may allow us to evaluate the traumatic effect of Muslim invasion and governance on them?" Elliot went on to write his own eight-volume history of India, with inputs from British historians, since there were none (1867). His history claimed that Hindus were killed for disagreeing with 'Mohammedans,' that they were generally forbidden from worshiping and participating in religious processions, that their idols were mutilated, that their temples were destroyed, that they were forced into conversion and marriage, and that they were killed and massacred by drunk Muslim tyrants. As a result, Sir Henry and a slew of other imperial professors went on to write a synthesis Hindu-Muslim history of India, and their falsehoods became history. The secretary of state for India, George Francis Hamilton, instructed Lord Curzon (Governor General of India 1895-99 and Viceroy 1899-1904(d.1925) that they should "so organize the educational texts that the disparities between community & community are further accentuated." The secretary of state in London wrote another Viceroy, Lord Dufferin (1884-88), that the "division of religious emotions is immense to our benefit", and that he anticipated "some good because of your commission of investigation on Indian education & on teaching material ". "We have preserved our influence in India by playing off one section against the other," recalled another viceroy, Lord Elgin (1862-63), "and we must continue to do so." Do all you can to prevent everyone from feeling the same way?"

Myth about temple demolition

Aurangzeb was accused by certain Hindu historians of damaging Hindu temples. How credible is this charge against a guy who has been considered to be a holy man and a devout Muslim? The Qur'an forbids Muslims from imposing their will on non-Muslims, declaring, "There is no coercion in religion." 2.256 (Surah al-Baqarah). The Surah al-Kafirun declares unequivocally, "To you is your faith, and to me is mine." It would be very unbecoming of a knowledgeable Muslim scholar of his quality, as Aurangzeb was considered to be, to conduct things that contradict the Qur'an's teachings. Surprisingly, the 1946 version of the history textbook Etihash Parichaya (introduction to history) used in Bengal for 5th and 6th graders states: "If Aurangzeb had intended to destroy temples to create space for mosques, India would not have had a single temple standing tall." Aurangzeb, on the other hand, provided vast estates for use as temple grounds and support in Benaras, Kashmir, and elsewhere. Official paperwork for these land transfers is still available. The old Balaji or Vishnu temple, situated north of Chitrakut Balaghat, still has a stone inscription indicating that it was commissioned by the monarch himself. His government donated a substantial tribute to the temple of Pandharpur, the seat of the god Vitthal. According to the historian the late D.G Godse, trustees of Vitthal temple were more concerned about roving Maratha forces than Mughal armies. The deed documents at the prominent Hindu sacred sites in Varanasi are readily confirmed as documentation of Aurangzeb's property donation. According to the same textbook (Etihash Parichaya), "not a single Hindu was compelled to accept Islam throughout Aurangzeb's fifty-year rule." He made no interference with Hindu religious activity." A British historian named Alexander Hamilton visited India at the conclusion of Aurangzeb's fifty-year rule and noticed that everyone was free to serve and worship God in his own manner. Aurangzeb, the Mughal emperor, is the most despised Muslim king in India. He was said to be a huge destroyer of temples and oppressor of Hindus, as well as a 'fundamentalist.' Dr. Bishambhar Nath Pande, the chairman of the Allahabad municipality from 1948 to 1953, had to deal with a property dispute between two temple priests. One of them had presented firmans (royal instructions) as proof that Aurangzeb had granted the property in issue for the upkeep of his shrine in addition to cash. Given Aurangzeb's fanatically anti-Hindu persona, Dr. Pande wondered whether they were not forgeries. He exhibited them to Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru, a prominent barrister and scholar of Arabic and Persian. He, too, was a Brahmin. Sapru analyzed the papers and determined that they were authentic Aurangzeb firmans. Dr. Pande saw this as a "new picture of Aurangzeb," so he wrote to the head priests of the country's most significant temples, asking for photocopies of any firman issued by Aurangzeb that they may have in their hands. He got copies of Aurangzeb's firmans from the renowned temples of Mahakaleshwara, Ujjain, Balaji temple, Chitrakut, Umanand temple Gauhati, and the Jain temple of Shatrunjai, as well as smaller temples and gurudwaras spread across northern India. These firmans were issued between 1659 and 1685 AD. Though these are just a few examples of Aurangzeb's kind attitude toward Hindus and temples, they are sufficient to demonstrate that what historians have written about him is prejudiced and only one side of the story. India is a large country with hundreds of temples strewn throughout. If an adequate investigation is conducted, I am convinced that many more examples of Aurangzeb's compassionate treatment of non-Muslims will be discovered. Aurangzeb did not indiscriminately demolish Hindu temples, as is often assumed. And that he only ordered temple demolition when confronted with the insurgency. This was almost likely the case with the Keshava Rai temple in the Mathura area when the Jats revolted, but even this policy of retaliation may have been adjusted since Hindu temples in the Deccan were seldom destroyed. The image of Aurangzeb as an idol-breaker may not stand up to scrutiny, because evidence suggests that, like his predecessors, he continued to bestow land grants or jagirs (large parcels of agricultural land) upon Hindu temples such as the Someshwar Nath Mahadev temple in Allahabad, Jangum Badi Shiva temple in Varanasi, Umanand temple in Gauhati, and numerous others. During his invasion of Deccan, he spared the famed Alura temples (a vast complex of ancient temples). Read more from ummid.com>>

Kashi Vishwanath Temple's demolition

Dr. Pande's study revealed that Aurangzeb was just as concerned about the rights and welfare of his non-Muslim people as he was about the rights and welfare of his Muslim subjects. Hindu plaintiffs obtained complete justice against their Muslim defendants, and if found guilty, Muslims were sentenced accordingly. One of the most serious allegations leveled against Aurangzeb was the destruction of the Vishwanath temple in Varanasi. That was true, but Dr. Pande discovered the cause behind it. "While Aurangzeb was traveling through Varanasi on his route to Bengal, the Hindu Rajas in his entourage begged that the pause be made for a day so that their Ranis might go to Varanasi, take a plunge in the Ganges, and pay their respects to Lord Vishwanath." Aurangzeb accepted without hesitation. "Army pickets were stationed along the five-mile road to Varanasi." The Ranis traveled to the Palkis. They bathed in the Ganges and paid their respects at the Vishwanath shrine. Except for the Maharani of Kutch, all the Ranis returned after doing puja (prayer). The temple premises were thoroughly searched, but the Rani was nowhere to be seen. Aurangzeb was furious when he learned about this. He sent his top officers to find the Rani. They eventually discovered that the statue of Ganesh (the elephant-headed deity) that was attached to the wall was movable. When the statue was relocated, they discovered a set of steps leading to the basement. They were horrified to see the vanished Rani dishonored and wailing, stripped of all her jewelry. Lord Vishwanath's throne was right under the basement." "The Raja sought retributive action, and Aurangzeb ordered that, since the holy precincts had been despoiled, Lord Vishwanath be relocated, the temple be burned to the ground, and the Mahant (chief priest) be imprisoned and punished."

Employment for Non-Muslims

Aurangzeb has frequently been accused of shutting the doors of official employment on the Hindus, but a check of the list of his officials reveals this is not true. Actually, there were more Hindu officials under him than under any previous Mughal emperor. Though this was mostly due to a general rise in the number of officers, it illustrates that there was no prohibition on the hiring of Hindus. In his government, the state policy was formed by Hindus. Two Hindus held the top position in the state treasury. Some prejudiced Muslims even questioned the validity of his choice to appoint non-Muslims to such prominent places. The emperor contradicted them by declaring that he had been following the dictates of the Shariah (Islamic law) which necessitates selecting appropriate men in proper places. During Aurangzeb’s lengthy rule of fifty years, numerous Hindus, notably Jaswant Singh, Jay Singh, Raja Rajrup, Kabir Singh, Arghanath Singh, Prem Dev Singh, Dilip Roy, and Rasik Lal Crory, occupied extremely important administrative posts. Two of the highest-rated generals in Aurangzeb’s government, Jaswant Singh and Jay Singh, were Hindus. Other noteworthy Hindu generals who commanded a garrison of two to five thousand warriors were Raja Vim Singh of Udaypur, Indra Singh, Achalaji, and Arjuji. One asks if Aurangzeb was hostile to Hindus, why would he elevate all these Hindus to high positions of power, particularly in the military, who might have mutinied against him and deposed him from his throne? Most Hindus respect Akbar over Aurangzeb for his multi-ethnic court where Hindus were valued. Historian Shri Sharma argues that whereas Emperor Akbar had 14 Hindu Mansabdars (high officials) in his court, Aurangzeb really had 148 Hindu high officials in his court (Ref: Mughal Govn). (Ref: Mughal Govn.). But this truth is relatively lesser recognized. If Aurangzeb was so fierce a communalist, why is it, some historians have argued, that the percentage of Hindu employees in positions of prominence throughout Aurangzeb’s reign climbed from 24.5 percent in the time of his father Shah Jahan to 33 percent in the fourth decade of his own rule?

Jizya and other Taxes

Let's all just consider Aurangzeb's imposition of the Jizya tax, which has been heavily criticized by numerous Hindu historians. Jizya was removed under the reigns of Akbar and Jahangir, and it was subsequently reintroduced by Aurangzeb. Before delving into Aurangzeb's Jizya tax, or taxing non-Muslims, it is important to note that Jizya is nothing more than a "War Tax" collected solely from able-bodied young non-Muslim male residents residing in a Muslim nation who did not wish to enlist for the country's defense. That is, no such levy was levied on non-Muslims who volunteered to fight in the country's defense. This tax was not collected from women, immature males, crippled or elderly male residents. In exchange for the payment of such taxes, the Muslim government became obligated to defend the lives, property, and riches of its non-Muslim inhabitants. If the government failed to defend its population for whatever reason, particularly during a war, the taxable sum was refunded. It should be noted that Zakat (2.5 percent of savings) and Ushr (10 percent of agricultural goods) were levied on all Muslims who had some money (beyond a certain minimum, called nisab). Sadaqah, Fitrah, and Khums were also paid by Muslims. None of these were gathered from non-Muslims. In reality, per capita collection from Muslims was three times that of non-Muslims. Aurangzeb is also credited with abolishing several taxes, however, this fact is seldom emphasized. Sir Jadunath Sarkar, the leading historian of the Mughal dynasty, mentions in his book Mughal administration that during Aurangzeb's time in power, roughly 65 kinds of taxes were repealed, resulting in a monthly income loss of 50 million rupees from the imperial treasury. According to some historians, when Aurangzeb eliminated 80 different sorts of taxes, no one praised him for his kindness. People started to express their discontent when he imposed merely one (jizya), which was not at all heavy. While some Hindu historians are rejecting the falsehoods, textbooks and historical records in Western nations have yet to accept their mistake and correct the record.

[The above percentages and reviews are collected from the research result.]

He waged near-constant warfare, justifying the resulting death and destruction on moral and religious grounds. His single-minded devotion to conquest and control based on his personal worldview is still felt today. Even today, political groups of all stripes use his rule to justify their actions. Without much effort, one can trace a direct line from Aurangzeb to many of today's political and religious conflicts. The Fatawa-e-Alamgiri has had a significant impact on future Islamic governments.

You can feel free to check out the video of Shaykh Muhammad Musa ash-Shareef about Aurangzeb Alamgir:

Unlike his predecessors, Aurangzeb regarded the royal treasury as a trust of his empire's citizens and believed it should not be used for his personal expenses. However, his constant warfare drove his empire to the brink of bankruptcy in the same way that earlier emperors' personal prolifagcy had.  Despite his success in imposing Sharia within his kingdom, he alienated many constituencies, including native Shias as well as non-Muslims. This resulted in increased militancy among the Marathas, Sikhs, and Rajputs, who broke away from the empire after his death, as well as disputes among Indian Muslims. The destruction of Hindu temples continues to elicit strong emotions. He alienated many of his children and wives, exiling some and imprisoning others. He expressed his loneliness, and perhaps regret, at the end of his life.

Apart from his predecessors, Aurangzeb left few buildings. In Aurangabad, he built a modest mausoleum for his first wife, dubbed the "mini-Taj." Besides that, he constructed in Lahore the largest mosque outside of Mecca at the time: the Badshahi Masjid ('Imperial' Mosque, sometimes called the 'Alamgiri' Mosque). He also erected a modest marble mosque known as the Moti Masjid (Pearl Mosque) in the Red Fort complex in Delhi. Aurangzeb's personal piety is undeniable. He led an extremely simple and pious life. He followed Muslim precepts with his typical determination and even memorized the Qur'an. He knitted haj caps and copied out the Qur'an throughout his life, and sold these works anonymously. He used the proceeds, and only these, to fund his modest resting place. At the age of 90, he passed away at Ahmednagar in 1707, having outlived several of his offspring. In line with his interpretation of Islamic precepts, his remains lie in an open-air burial in Kuldabad, near Aurangabad.