Why Aurangzeb's Reputation As A Tyrant And Bigot Doesn't Stand The Test Of History

[Optimus_Prime]

You haven't read the OP. In one of the letter he acknowledges destroying Somnath temple to punish people for their idol worship.

Dunno what "document" and where it came from. Still... I assume all Hindu leaders are evil after Babri destruction?.

 

[Paragkhadse259]

Stop crying dude. Wars happen. People die. Thats life. Those victims you mentioned were fighting against mughals and lost. They paid the price. That happend during a time when leaders generally were ruthless. You know how many muslims died beacuse of our infighting? Supposedly 500 000 arab supporters of Umayaads were murdered during the Abbasid revolt. See what happen in Syria and Yemen today? mans greed and lust for power transcends religious identity.

Am i crying for something here ?
I whole heartedly agree with each word you wrote here.

My reply was idiotic comparison of Modi with Aurangazeb.

Modi is no doubt pro-hindu leader but he is painted as anti-muslim or communal leader by his enemies. Since he took PM office not a single law was passed against Muslims or any other minority. He is concerned about development rather than cheap communal politics.

I have no doubt in 2019 elections Modi will win more share of Indian muslim vote bank for what he doing right now.

 

[my2cents]

Dunno what "document" and where it came from. Still... I assume all Hindu leaders are evil after Babri destruction?.

Now you are acting dumb and not open to criticism. I can show you hundreds of ancient temples that were defaced and looted by these marauding invaders. Don't condone any act of intolerance just because they are your heroes. What happened to Babri is also not right because it is an act of intolerance, however you slice it.

 

[Hamza913]

That question needs to be asked to Sikhs too. See if they can testify if he was not a tyrant at all!!



How was Gen Zia? Compared to Aurangzeb?

Comparing Zia to Aurangzeb is laughable, Zeb was much worse.

 

[Dash]

Comparing Zia to Aurangzeb is laughable, Zeb was much worse.

But your country men choose to differ.

 

[Hamza913]

But your country men choose to differ.

Anyone who thinks Zia was worse is stupid and anyone who calls them comparable is also incredibly naive.

Zeb was much worse, but I agree that he's unnecessarily demonised. He was harsh, but that's it.

 

[Dash]

Anyone who thinks Zia was worse is stupid and anyone who calls them comparable is also incredibly naive.

Zeb was much worse, but I agree that he's unnecessarily demonised. He was harsh, but that's it.

I just asked a question. I didn't start a comparison. Just clarifying.

Now who is better or worse in Pakistan I don't know. But Zeb was good or bad then only Sikhs can answer better if one doesn't believe Hindus.

 

[Optimus_Prime]

Modi is no doubt pro-hindu leader but he is painted as anti-muslim or communal leader by his enemies. Since he took PM office not a single law was passed against Muslims or any other minority. He is concerned about development rather than cheap communal politics.

Now you are acting dumb and not open to criticism. I can show you hundreds of ancient temples that were defaced and looted by these marauding invaders. Don't condone any act of intolerance just because they are your heroes. What happened to Babri is also not right because it is an act of intolerance, however you slice it.

Listen man, I do not defend what Aurangzeb did. They did many good thing and many bad Things. Building an empire demand sacrifices, and sadly many lives were lost. Generally mughals were not religious zealous. They looted some temples for funding their war machinery. That is not ethically right i would say. But its unfair to compare morale of medieval Warriors with present day ethics. Were mughals worse than leaders of contemporary empires? i dont think so. Were they better? Yes..arguably in many ways more ethical than many other dynasties. Surely, they were less marauding than indo-aryan invaders that virtually eradicated native population of the sub-continent.

Summary: Alamgir was not as bad as nationalistic hindus today like to potray. After all the mughals had many hindu allies.

 

[Mamluk]

I just asked a question. I didn't start a comparison. Just clarifying.

Now who is better or worse in Pakistan I don't know. But Zeb was good or bad then only Sikhs can answer better if one doesn't believe Hindus.

Suppression of Sikh revolt was cruel (but mostly only rebels were killed, unlike anti-Sikh riot in India which killed indiscriminately).

But at the same time as Sikh revolt, there were a couple of other revolts led by Muslim groups, including Pashtuns. They were suppressed far more brutally. Do your hindu schools teach this part of history? Your entire education system works with an agenda.

At least the Sikh guru (unlike Muslim rebels) was given a choice to convert (he would be killed anyway and he knew it - the trick was to use the conversion to dampen Sikh morale).

And don't forget Guru Gobind Singh's Zafarnama - where he denounces Aurangzeb's harsh treatment of his subjects and asserts Aurangzeb betrayed teachings of Islam. The Sikh guru knew very well that Aurangzeb was motivated by personal greed (like any ambitious King/Emperor), not by Islam.

 

[Zarvan]

1) Killing several blood brothers to seize throne including rightful succeeder to throne Dara Shakoh
2) Imprisonment of Badshah Shahjaan (Father) to take reign of power and making him wish to die in life of seclusion.
3) Brutal torture & inhuman execution of Chhatrapati Sambhaji ( Son of Chhatrapati Shivaji)
4) Beheading of Sikh guru Teg bahadurs and his sons.
5) Execution of Sarmhad Kashani
6) Cutting Bhai Mati Das & Bhai Dayal Das into pieces with SAW on refusal to convert.
7) Killing of several muslims who dressed like Non Muslims.
8) Looting wealth from Somnath Temple , Kasava Deo Temple, Vishwanath Temple, etc and later demolishing them.
9) Massacre of around 700000 to 1200000 non muslims who refused to convert.
10) Banning diwali festival
11) Issuing orders of destructing non islamic schools, temple of infedals

View attachment 387507

( Order issued by Aurangazeb in 1669)


These are few points which makes Aurangazeb a genocide manaic and intolerant tyrant.

No other muslim ruler was comdemned and resisted by Indian masses as Aurangazeb was for his fanatical rules and policies.

If he hadn't killed his brothers they would have killed him so he was out of choice on that one and as for Sikh guy well sorry but most Sikh leaders were creating trouble and no Government tolerates those who create trouble. And as for killing non Muslims for not converting that was a big fat lie.

 

[Dash]

Suppression of Sikh revolt was cruel (but mostly only rebels were killed, unlike anti-Sikh riot in India which killed indiscriminately).

A misplaced comparison. Strategic killing against heat of the moment stuff.

Do your hindu schools teach this part of history? Your entire education system works with an agenda.

In not a history student so I wouldn't know. But I'm sure our schools don't restrict people to "not" read something. Our government up until 10th standard teaches which is necessary for the children and let s then persuit personal interest. There is a reason Indian teaching is respected world over and Indian talent.

As for Aurangzeb, he was consumed by greed from the very beginning right from killing his elder brother and you acknowledged that.

However greed or no greed. The future remembers us for today's actions. And no matter what a killing can't be justified and as far I know there was no such threat to Aurangzeb when he ruled.

He was a bigot and a disgrace to Islamic rulers who ruled then. I'm thankful to all his predecessors for not Arabising Islam in India.