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
July 12,2020

Bengaluru, Jul 12: KCTET 2020: Attention candidates, the Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister has confirmed the exam dates for Karnataka Common Entrance Test, KCET 2020.

As per information, KCET 2020 will be held between July 30 and July 31.

Karnataka Common Entrance Test or KCET is an examination which is held for admission to BTech courses in the state’s institutes.

The Higher Education Minister C N Ashwathnarayan, took to twitter to confirm the KCET dates. The Minister tweeted:

“The K-CET 2020 examinations will be held on the decided dates of July 30 & July 31. All the best to all the students!”

Details regarding KCET exam centers, time, and schedule will be mentioned in the admit card. Candidates can download their admit card fro the official website of KEA i.e. cetonline.karnataka.gov.in.

KCET 2020 was earlier scheduled to be held from April 22 to April 24, 2020, however, due to the ongoing coronavirus outbreak, KEA postponed KCET 2020 exams.

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 7,2020

New Delhi, Mar 7: The Supreme Court on Friday stayed the bail granted by Karnataka High Court to 21 Popular Front of India (PFI) members accused in connection with violence that erupted during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Karnataka's Mangaluru in December 2019.

On February 17, the High Court had granted bail to the accused on the bail petition filed by Mohammed Ashik.

A bench consisting Chief Justice S A Bobde issued notice to the accused on Friday after taking cognisance of the plea filed by Karnataka government against the bail granted by the High Court.

Appearing for the state government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta criticised the High Court's order stating that at least 56 policemen sustained injuries during the violent protests.

Two persons identified as Jaleel (43) of Kudroli and Nousheen (49) of Bengre had died at a private hospital following the bullet injuries they sustained in an alleged police firing during a protest against CAA 2019.

Comments

Abdul Gaffar Bolar
 - 
Saturday, 7 Mar 2020

RSSupreme court!

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
June 9,2020

New Delhi, Jun 9: Elections to seven seats of the Karnataka Legislative Council will be held on June 29, the poll panel announced on Tuesday.

The seven seats are falling vacant on June 30, according to an Election Commission statement.

Members of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly will vote on June 29 to elect the seven new MLCs.

The Commission has directed the Karnataka chief secretary to depute a senior officer to ensure that the  instructions regarding COVID-19 containment measures are complied with during the elections.

The counting of votes will be held on the evening of June 29 after completion of polls, as per practice.

The notification for the elections will be issued on June 11, the statement said.

MLCs are usually elected by four types of electors -- MLAs, Graduates, Teachers and members of local authorities.

On Monday, the Commission had deferred elections to four seats of the Karnataka Legislative Council -- two each from Teachers and Graduate constituencies -- falling vacant on June 30 due to the outbreak of the novel coronavirus.

"If MLAs are electors, the size of the electorate is small and the assembly building is the only polling station. When the electorate is teachers or graduates, the number of those who can vote is higher.

Due to the virus, Commission only allowed polls to seats where MLAs are the electors to prevent large gatherings," explained a senior EC functionary.

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.