View about emperor Aurangzeb as bigot has colonial roots: US historian

February 28, 2017

New Delhi, Feb 28: Historian Audrey Truschke refuses to buy the argument that Aurangzeb razed temples because he hated Hindus saying it has roots in colonial-era scholarship, where positing timeless Hindu-Muslim animosity embodied the British strategy of divide and conquer.

aurangzebIn her new book, she also says that had Aurangzeb’s reign been 20 years shorter, he would have been judged differently by modern historians. Truschke, an assistant professor of South Asian history at Rutgers University in Newark and an avid follower of Mughal history, New Jersey, has now come up with a new biography on Aurangzeb.

"Aurangzeb: The Man and The Myth", published by Penguin Random House, takes a fresh look at the controversial Mughal emperor. According to Truschke, Hindu and Jain temples dotting the landscape of Aurangzeb's kingdom were entitled to Mughal state protection, and he generally endeavoured to ensure their well-being.

"By the same token, from a Mughal perspective, that goodwill could be revoked when specific temples or their associates acted against imperial interests. Accordingly, Emperor Aurangzeb authorised targeted temple destructions and desecrations throughout his rule," she claims.

"Many modern people view Aurangzeb's orders to harm specific temples as symptomatic of a larger vendetta against Hindus. Such views have roots in colonial-era scholarship, where positing timeless Hindu-Muslim animosity embodied the British strategy of divide and conquer," she writes.

She says there are, however, numerous gaping holes in the proposition that Aurangzeb razed temples because he hated Hindus.

"Most glaringly, Aurangzeb counted thousands of Hindu temples within his domains and yet destroyed, at most, a few dozen. This incongruity makes little sense if we cling to a vision of Aurangzeb as a cartoon bigot driven by a single-minded agenda of ridding India of Hindu places of worship.

"A historically legitimate view of Aurangzeb must explain why he protected Hindu temples more often than he demolished them." Truschke argues that Aurangzeb followed Islamic law in granting protection to non-Muslim religious leaders and institutions.

"Indo-Muslim rulers had counted Hindus as dhimmis, a protected class under Islamic law, since the eighth century, and Hindus were thus entitled to certain rights and state defences.

"Yet, Aurangzeb went beyond the requirements of Islamic law in his conduct towards Hindu and Jain religious communities. Instead, for Aurangzeb, protecting and, at times, razing temples served the cause of ensuring justice for all throughout the Mughal Empire."

Truschke claims state interests constrained religious freedom in Mughal India, and Aurangzeb did not hesitate to strike hard against religious institutions and leaders that he deemed seditious or immoral.

"But in the absence of such concerns, Aurangzeb's vision of himself as an even-handed ruler of all Indians prompted him to extend state security to temples."

She says Aurangzeb had 49 years to make good on his princely promise of cultivating religious tolerance in the Mughal Empire, and he got off to a strong start.

"In one of his early acts as emperor, Aurangzeb issued an imperial order (farman) to local Mughal officials at Benares that directed them to halt any interference in the affairs of local temples."

Truschke claims that political events incited Aurangzeb to initiate assaults on certain Hindu temples. She also argues that if Aurangzeb's reign had been 20 years shorter, closer to that of Jahangir (who ruled for 22 years) or Shah Jahan (who ruled for 30 years), modern historians would judge him rather differently.

"But Aurangzeb's later decades of fettering his sons, depending on an increasingly bloated administration, and undertaking ill-advised warring are a hefty part of his tangled legacy. Thus, we are left with a mixed assessment of a complex man and monarch who was plagued by an unbridgeable gap between his lofty ambitions and the realities of Mughal India," she writes.

Comments

suresh
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Mar 2017

#4,AHMED K.C. - HINDUISM THRIVED FROM AFGANISTHAN TO BURMA,
Its the effect of Muslim rulers today Afganisthan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, have 100% muslim population. And how rest of India hinduism survived was becoz of Rulers like Pritviraj Chauhan, Maharana pratap, Chatrapati Shivaji maharaj, and so on.

Ahmed K.C.
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Mar 2017

Muslims ruled India for 700 years. If there was atrocities against Hindus and forced conversion there would not have been only 24% Muslims at the time of Independence in the year 1947. Even today Muslims are only 15% according to statistics.
If Muslims rulers were really bad, then Muslims population in India would have been 80% and all other would have been 20%

shaji
 - 
Tuesday, 28 Feb 2017

Undermine muslims is the prime and main agenda of BJP which is agreed by being followed by them including name sake indians Mukhtar Abbas and Shanawaz are following. BJP and Trump are two faces of a coin.

KhasaiKhane
 - 
Tuesday, 28 Feb 2017

Aurangzeb (Allah have mercy on him) spread justice across \Akhand \" Bharath (which was from Afghan to South of India).
A devout Muslim is always the one who rules over his people with fear of Allah & justice, and he is always hated by a bigoted section.
Beats Shivaji all around Maharashtra, British couldn't establish anything during his reign, Poor enjoyed power, Farmers were given highest preference in his administration, Criminals feared the shariah law.

No rapes, or threats, or lynching, That's why Sanghis hate him!

May Allah forgive his faults, shower his mercy on him...!"

Rikaz
 - 
Tuesday, 28 Feb 2017

BJP came to power just to undermine Muslims....that is it....no development (vikas).....problem creators....

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 11,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 11: Onion price dropped to Rs 25-30 per kg on Monday, down from the dizzying Rs 200/kg in December and January. The price had spiked because of excess rain, which ruined the crop in several parts of the country.

With supply stabilising, especially from Maharashtra and northern Karnataka, and exports banned, the rate is now easing, officials said.

Consumers may be smiling but farmers are worried as they are not able to make more than Rs 17/kg as against the expected Rs 40.

"We get onions from Nasik and Sholapur in Maharashtra. Nasik onions used to be exported but since that is currently banned, they are landing in Bengaluru, leaving the market here with a surplus," said K Lokesh, president, Karnataka State Onion Merchants Association.

A farmer from Sholapur wh o was part of a onion growers' delegation which met traders in Bengaluru, said, "The cost of everything has gone up. Labour charges and fuel prices are draining us. How can we survive? How can I pay for my children's education?"

Another Sholapur farmer rued: "My daughter's wedding is in March. How am I going to meet all the expenses? I have to pay for labour, transportation, gunny bags and when everything adds up, I don't get to save more than Rs 30,000 in a month."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 18,2020

Bengaluru, Mar 18: In the backdrop of the breakdown of the COVID-19 virus across the state, the ongoing Budget session of the Karnataka Assembly, which is scheduled to end of this month, is likely to be cut short by one week.

According to official sources, the state government, which had shut down all the congregating places including Malls, Theatres, Marriage Halls and banned all the public functions, is in favor of the cutting short the ongoing Assembly session, to give focus on keeping a tab on the COVID-19 disease.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com news network
July 21,2020

Mangaluru, July 21: Putting an end to all speculations, district in charge minister Kota Srinvas Poojary on Tuesday said that the lockdown in Dakshina Kannada will not be extended beyond Wednesday.

In a video message, the minister said that all the shops in the district will remain open from July 23 morning. He said district administration will make a formal announcement soon.  

Meanwhile chief minister B S Yediyurappa said: “There’ll be no lockdown from Wednesday, people need to get back to work, economy is also very important. We have to fight COVID-19 while maintaining stable economy. Lockdown is not the solution, now restrictions will be placed only in containment zones.”

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.