What is your view on Aurangzeb. The most polarizing Mughal icon of Hindustan

[Bhaijaan]

Hindus and Sikhs remember him as the most cruel of the Mughals who was desperate to eradicate minorities of Hindustan.

Some Muslim scholars say that although he was an ultra conservative, but he was actually the most devoted Muslim of all Mughals.

Whatever is said, the man was the most powerful ruler of this land once upon a time.

Do you think he was good or bad for Mughals and for Hindustan

What is his legacy.

 

[RexRex]

Nobody cares.

Live in the present.

 

[Kriketer]

If he was the way you describe then you wouldn't have more than a billion Hindus. Stop polluting your minds with hatred to marganalize minorities and live in the present. Perhaps also make a thread on Hindu Rajas who kept slitting each others throats in countless brutal wars. Your Hindu Raja history is filled with blood shed and this Bharat that you delusional guys love speaking of so highly was never a United region because they were too busy slitting each other's throat, was the case all along until Muslims arrived who finally made it a prosperous region by building massive infrastructure, trade, living conditions and pretty much united the region under one governance.

No point in crying and obsessing over history now.

 

[PakLFC]

He was another power hungry Mughal. He killed innocent people and saved many as well. Enhanced a culture as well as destroying some monuments. Overall the Mughal's were not subhuman as the RSS fascists would like us to believe. Many took Hindu wives and even celebrated Hindu festivals to keep the majority community happy. With them it was about power not faith. It is like in 1000 years people may say America did this and that holding Christianity responsible when again it is just about power and influence, nothing else.

 

[Bhaijaan]

He was another power hungry Mughal. He killed innocent people and saved many as well. Enhanced a culture as well as destroying some monuments. Overall the Mughal's were not subhuman as the RSS fascists would like us to believe. Many took Hindu wives and even celebrated Hindu festivals to keep the majority community happy. With them it was about power not faith. It is like in 1000 years people may say America did this and that holding Christianity responsible when again it is just about power and influence, nothing else.

If he was the way you describe then you wouldn't have more than a billion Hindus. Stop polluting your minds with hatred to marganalize minorities and live in the present. Perhaps also make a thread on Hindu Rajas who kept slitting each others throats in countless brutal wars. Your Hindu Raja history is filled with blood shed and this Bharat that you delusional guys love speaking of so highly was never a United region because they were too busy slitting each other's throat, was the case all along until Muslims arrived who finally made it a prosperous region by building massive infrastructure, trade, living conditions and pretty much united the region under one governance.

No point in crying and obsessing over history now.

As former Bharatiyas however, whose ancestors were ruled by Aurangzeb as much as ours. And also as a Muslim of this land, what is your personal view of Aurangzeb and his policies.

Do you celebrate him or do you hold him accountable for wrong doings

As per you, is Aurangzeb a legit icon of Mughal Hindustan.

 

[PakLFC]

As former Bharatiyas however, whose ancestors were ruled by Aurangzeb as much as ours. And also as a Muslim of this land, what is your personal view of Aurangzeb and his policies.

Do you celebrate him or do you hold him accountable for wrong doings

As per you, is Aurangzeb a legit icon of Mughal Hindustan.

He did what was needed to remain in power. This was both righteous and violence but overall he is no hero on mines.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I don't really know much about Mughal history although there are names which seem to have resonated down the centuries, Aurangzeb is one, Akbar is another. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but was Bharat relatively prosperous region during the Mughal rule, or did the fortunes improve under the British Raj?

 

[Bhaijaan]

I don't really know much about Mughal history although there are names which seem to have resonated down the centuries, Aurangzeb is one, Akbar is another. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but was Bharat relatively prosperous region during the Mughal rule, or did the fortunes improve under the British Raj?

Bharat peaked as an economy under Mughal rule.

British just looted Bharat and turned us from among the richest countries to among the poorest by the 19th century.

 

[gani999]

Aurangzeb's legacy:
-Captured the throne by butchering his brothers and imprisoning his father.
-Destroyed the Mughal empire by waging countless wars in the Deccan and emptying the treasury. All the kingdoms he conquered simply declared independence once the Mughal army turned their backs. This eventually allowed European powers to make their presence felt in India.

Not one to be very proud of, I'm afraid.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Bharat peaked as an economy under Mughal rule.

British just looted Bharat and turned us from among the richest countries to among the poorest by the 19th century.

Thanks, that confirms pretty much what I thought. We Brits used to refer to Bharat as the Jewel in the Crown, there was even a television series named just that, as Bharat was the source of Britain's most wealthy transformation from a cold relatively miserable country into the world colossus it became during Empire.

 

[SM1989]

Was a product of his time but a powerful ruler. We need another one like him.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Was a product of his time but a powerful ruler. We need another one like him.

How would you imagine Aurangzeb in 21st century as a political leader.

Why are not many Muslims names after him. Do they feel embarrassed of his tainted legacy.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Was a good looking chap.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

How would you imagine Aurangzeb in 21st century as a political leader.

Why are not many Muslims names after him. Do they feel embarrassed of his tainted legacy.

Good question. Aurangzeb is not a widely known Muslim name, perhaps because it's roots are neither Arabic nor Persian. Not much is known about any Mughal ruler outside of Bharat, not even sure they teach much about this in Pakistani curriculum. Outside of the subcontinent Mughal rule is not really a topic of much interest in the Muslim world.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Good question. Aurangzeb is not a widely known Muslim name, perhaps because it's roots are neither Arabic nor Persian. Not much is known about any Mughal ruler outside of Bharat, not even sure they teach much about this in Pakistani curriculum. Outside of the subcontinent Mughal rule is not really a topic of much interest in the Muslim world.

It sounds like a very royal and strong name actually.

Pakistani residents can shed light on whether they’re taught of Mughal era in their text books and how is he seen within Pakistan as the much reverted Badshah of Hindustan.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Aurangzeb like all Mughals was a self serving foreign invader. Singling him out is just pointless.

 

[Suleiman]

India peaked under the Mughal Empire.

 

[Poseidon]

well surprisingly , the history of mughals is not in the primary or secondry level. atleast when i was in school i didnt find any chapter regarding mughal rules .
it was in just some random chapters with some names come and go , like babar, humayou and bahadur shah zafar with no proper back story.
but if someone is doing masters in Islamic history or Pakistan studies thn maybe they can find some chapter only about how it starts and end .
i never read any glorification of any mughal ruler.
i only read Tipu but in the context with british rulers .
someone in my family have done masters in Islamic history , but you wont find many chapters or books regarding mughal rulers .
there were pre Islam and post Islam Arab, turks, mangols, abbasised , ummayah , spanish rule, with lit bit of Pakistan history .
here i find 4 yr Masters Program of KU . i dont know if its old or new syllabus .

Spoiler: syllabus

First Year​
1st Semester​	2nd Semester​
Course #​	Title of Course​	Cr. Hr.​	Course #​	Title of Course​	Cr. Hr.​
IH-311​	Socio-Political History of Islam (Life & Times of Holy Prophet)​	3+0​	312​	Socio-Political History of Islam (The Rightly Guided Caliphs)​	3+0​
IH-301​	Socio-Political History of Islam (Life & Times of Holy Prophet)​	3+0​	302​	Socio-Political History of Islam (The Rightly Guided Caliphs)​	3+0​
Second Year​
1st Semester​	2nd Semester​
IH-411​	Elementary Arabic​	3+0​	412​	Elementary Arabic​	3+0​
IH-413​	Elementary Persian​	3+0​	414​	Elementary Persian​	3+0​
IH-415​	Elementary Turkish​	3+0​	416​	Elementary Turkish​	3+0​
IH-401​	History of the Middle East (Iran, Iraq)​	3+0​	402​	History of the Middle East (Saudi Arabia & Syria)​	3+0​
IH-421​	History of the Middle East (Iran, Iraq)​	3+0​	422​	History of the Middle East (Saudi Arabia & Syria)​	3+0​
Third Year​
1st Semester​	2nd Semester​
IH-511​	History of Muslim Historiography​	3+0​	IH-512​	History of Muslim Historiography​	3+0​
IH-521​	History of Umayyads of Damascus​	3+0​	IH-522​	History of Umayyads of Spain​	3+0​
IH-531​	History of Early Abbasids (749-861 AD )​	3+0​	IH-532​	History of Later Abbasids (861-1258 AD)​	3+0​
IH-541​	History of Osmanli Turks (1299-1606 AD)​	3+0​	IH-542​	History of Osmanli Turks (1606 - 1924 AD)​	3+0​
IH-551​	Evolution of Muslim Community in Sub-continent Indo-Pak (610-1707 AD)​	3+0​	IH-552​	Evolution of Muslim Community in Sub-continent Indo-Pak (1707 - 1947 AD)​	3+0​
Fourth Year​
1st Semester​	2nd Semester​
IH-611​	Muslim Political Thought​	3+0​	IH-612​	Muslim Political Thought​	3+0​
IH-621​	History of Muslim Jurisprudence​	3+0​	IH-622​	History of Muslim Jurisprudence​	3+0​
IH-631​	Modern Muslim World (Turkey & Egypt)​	3+0​	IH-632​	Modern Muslim World (Afghanistan & Indonesia)​	3+0​
IH-641​	History of The Muslims of Central Asia (uptill 17th Century)​	3+0​	IH-642​	History of The Muslims of Central Asia (18th to 20th Century)​	3+0​
IH-643​	History of Sindh (712-1843 AD)​	3+0​	IH-644​	History of Sindh (1843-1947)​	3+0​
IH-651​	History of Muslim Mysticism​	3+0​	IH- 652​	History of Muslim Mysticism​	3+0​
IH-653​	Special Study of Shah Waliullah​	3+0​	IH- 654​	Special Study of Shah Waliullah​	3+0​
IH-655​	Special Study of Ibn-i-Khaldun​	3+0​	IH- 656​	Special Study of Ibn-i-Khaldun​	3+0​
IH-661​	History of Fatimids (812 – 1171 AD)​	3+0​	IH-662​	History of Ayyubids & Mamluks (1171 - 1517 AD)​	3+0​
IH-671​	History of Muslim Culture & Civilization​	3+0​	IH-672​	History of Muslim Culture & Civilization​	3+0​
IH-681​	Modern Trends in South Asia (1857-1947)​	3+0​	IH-682​	Modern Trends in South Asia​	3+0​
IH-683​	Revivalist Movement in Islam​	3+0​	IH-684​	Revivalist Movements in Islam​	3+0​
IH-691​	Aspects of Muslim Art & Architecture​	3+0​	IH-692​	Aspects of Muslim Art & Architecture​	3+0​

​

 

[Sherazkhalid]

As former Bharatiyas however, whose ancestors were ruled by Aurangzeb as much as ours. And also as a Muslim of this land, what is your personal view of Aurangzeb and his policies.

Do you celebrate him or do you hold him accountable for wrong doings

As per you, is Aurangzeb a legit icon of Mughal Hindustan.

I guess I am partially out of this list, not a former Bharatiya and my ancestors were not ruled by Mughals, though as a muslim, Aurangzeb who? Never cared about him before and not now either.

 

[Champ_Pal]

India peaked under the Mughal Empire.

Mughals peaked under Mughal empire.

 

[bala977]

Hindus and Sikhs remember him as the most cruel of the Mughals who was desperate to eradicate minorities of Hindustan.

Some Muslim scholars say that although he was an ultra conservative, but he was actually the most devoted Muslim of all Mughals.

Whatever is said, the man was the most powerful ruler of this land once upon a time.

Do you think he was good or bad for Mughals and for Hindustan

What is his legacy.

Not ALL Hindus and ALL Sikhs remember him as the most cruel.

His vile image was created by historians post facto as a convenient villain against Hindu hero Shivaji. He had many good administrative (Financial control, eliminating wastages in govt spending, increasing tax collection etc.) and personal qualities (disciplined, hard worker etc.) that his contemporaries could only dream of. Even the much riled Jiziya tax was not a blanket tax on all Hindus - it was imposed on able bodied Hindus in-lieu of military service and (i) it was not a fixed amount and was adjusted as per the socio economic status of the tax payer and (ii) there were many exceptions - he often waived it for regions hit by famine, flooding etc. and also excluded women, children, elders, handicapped, unemployed etc. from paying Jizya.

The concept of "India" in its current form, i.e. including Deccan and the South, can be attributed to him. But we are taught at a young age to hate Aurangazeb and love Shivaji, although the latter also has a history of waging war & destroying non maratha hindus - https://historyofmysuru.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-kannadiga-victims-of-maratha-empire.html.

I have read a lot about Aurangazeb, the king, and personally believe that he not only ruled within the acceptable framework of that time, but he should be treated at the same level as someone like Akbar. History has been very unfair to him.

 

[Justcrazy]

He was a Muslim King , and ruled with strong dominance, I think if I am not wrong that during his rule Mughal was at its peak. To rule such a huge land mass is not easy , you need to give him credit for that.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

How would you imagine Aurangzeb in 21st century as a political leader.

Why are not many Muslims names after him. Do they feel embarrassed of his tainted legacy.

Aurungzeb is more of an honorific than a name. His name was Muhiyudin.

In simple terms ( or for our Bhaijaan) it would be like asking if the lack of kids being named little master is because Indians are embarrassed of Sachin.

 

[ExpressPacer]

I am generally a big fan and admirer of the Mughal Empire. It was by far the best thing to ever happen to India.

However, not a big fan of Aurangzeb because of his religious intolerance against Hindus, Sikhs and even Shiites.

 

[Champ_Pal]

I am generally a big fan and admirer of the Mughal Empire. It was by far the best thing to ever happen to India.

However, not a big fan of Aurangzeb because of his religious intolerance against Hindus, Sikhs and even Shiites.

Mughals did nothing for India. They explored the riches of India and became filthy rich. India was a fractured nation with internal squabbles. They exposed that weakness and easily took over vast territories without much fight.

It’s the barbaric mountainous people vs sendantary peasants. Not a good match.

 

[ExpressPacer]

Mughals did nothing for India. They explored the riches of India and became filthy rich. India was a fractured nation with internal squabbles. They exposed that weakness and easily took over vast territories without much fight.

It’s the barbaric mountainous people vs sendantary peasants. Not a good match.

If they were barbaric mountainous people, how do you explain the finest examples of art, music and architecture from their time of rule? In fact, mostly all of India has to show for to the world comes from the time of the Mughal empire.

And I'm not even talking about their scientific and military achievements yet such as gunpowder weapons.

You should be able to have an objective look at the past mate.

 

[Champ_Pal]

If they were barbaric mountainous people, how do you explain the finest examples of art, music and architecture from their time of rule? In fact, mostly all of India has to show for to the world comes from the time of the Mughal empire.

And I'm not even talking about their scientific and military achievements yet such as gunpowder weapons.

You should be able to have an objective look at the past mate.

Their art is a mix of Persian and local Indian fusion. Nothing they brought from their homeland.

 

[Varun]

Aurangzeb was the Mughal emperor who left a relatively bad legacy because he was neither big on architecture or culture like his father Shah Jahan, nor was he able to lead a peaceful empire (uprisings like the Marathas were unheard of during Akbar, Jehangir or Shah Jahan's times). He stretched the empire to an unreasonable extent that later represented the beginning of the end for the Mughals.

Despite ruling for over half a century all the way until 1707, he also couldn't drag the Indian sub-continent out of the middle ages which left it ripe for the British to pluck in the 1700s and beyond.

 

[ExpressPacer]

Their art is a mix of Persian and local Indian fusion. Nothing they brought from their homeland.

Every piece of art or architecture will be a fusion of some form of art from the neighbouring cultures. That is what art is mate. Anyway, you don't have to appreciate the Mughal Empire. It is done and dusted. Those who live in the history remain history.

 

[Saanji]

If he was the way you describe then you wouldn't have more than a billion Hindus. Stop polluting your minds with hatred to marganalize minorities and live in the present. Perhaps also make a thread on Hindu Rajas who kept slitting each others throats in countless brutal wars. Your Hindu Raja history is filled with blood shed and this Bharat that you delusional guys love speaking of so highly was never a United region because they were too busy slitting each other's throat, was the case all along until Muslims arrived who finally made it a prosperous region by building massive infrastructure, trade, living conditions and pretty much united the region under one governance.

No point in crying and obsessing over history now.

Omg I guess history really started from 8th century AD

 

[Saanji]

Not ALL Hindus and ALL Sikhs remember him as the most cruel.

His vile image was created by historians post facto as a convenient villain against Hindu hero Shivaji. He had many good administrative (Financial control, eliminating wastages in govt spending, increasing tax collection etc.) and personal qualities (disciplined, hard worker etc.) that his contemporaries could only dream of. Even the much riled Jiziya tax was not a blanket tax on all Hindus - it was imposed on able bodied Hindus in-lieu of military service and (i) it was not a fixed amount and was adjusted as per the socio economic status of the tax payer and (ii) there were many exceptions - he often waived it for regions hit by famine, flooding etc. and also excluded women, children, elders, handicapped, unemployed etc. from paying Jizya.

The concept of "India" in its current form, i.e. including Deccan and the South, can be attributed to him. But we are taught at a young age to hate Aurangazeb and love Shivaji, although the latter also has a history of waging war & destroying non maratha hindus - https://historyofmysuru.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-kannadiga-victims-of-maratha-empire.html.

I have read a lot about Aurangazeb, the king, and personally believe that he not only ruled within the acceptable framework of that time, but he should be treated at the same level as someone like Akbar. History has been very unfair to him.

Concept of india started with aurangzeb? You learn new past everyday

 

[SM1989]

How would you imagine Aurangzeb in 21st century as a political leader.

Why are not many Muslims names after him. Do they feel embarrassed of his tainted legacy.

He would be politically astute yet committed as much as possible to the ideals of his faith. He has been vilified by the Hindutva narrative.

The name is persian I think, and many muslims prefer arab names. Although we did have a chef by the name of Aurangzeb.

 

[Stewie]

How would you imagine Aurangzeb in 21st century as a political leader.

Why are not many Muslims names after him. Do they feel embarrassed of his tainted legacy.

I have a cousin named aurengzeb. It is a fairly common muslim name but perhaps from previous generations.

 

[Varun]

I have a cousin named aurengzeb. It is a fairly common muslim name but perhaps from previous generations.

There's also Maryam Aurangzeb.

 

[bala977]

Concept of india started with aurangzeb? You learn new past everyday

Yes. He brought several kingdoms / fiefdoms in what is modern India under one umbrella. See the pic and link for more details

Aurangzeb - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Kriketer]

He would be politically astute yet committed as much as possible to the ideals of his faith. He has been vilified by the Hindutva narrative.

The name is persian I think, and many muslims prefer arab names. Although we did have a chef by the name of Aurangzeb.

Aurangzeb is such a beautiful name

 

[Kriketer]

Omg I guess history really started from 8th century AD

Your history involves bloodshed and disunity through and through before Moghuls and Brits so nothing much to talk about

 

[Bhaijaan]

If they were barbaric mountainous people, how do you explain the finest examples of art, music and architecture from their time of rule? In fact, mostly all of India has to show for to the world comes from the time of the Mughal empire.

And I'm not even talking about their scientific and military achievements yet such as gunpowder weapons.

You should be able to have an objective look at the past mate.

That’s not true mate.
Hindu heritage and architecture is quite surreal. Much of it was actually plundered but there are still examples of it all across Bharat. Especially in Southern part.

 

[nish_mate]

He was well revered in India till 2014, revered enough to have the poshest road in Delhi named after him, 100cr+ bungalows, housing the mightiest and richest families of India- make what you will of it.

As with anything IMHO theres no black and white answer with Aurangzeb, loads of grey though. If he was born in Italy, would be considerd as top Don & Godfather for imprisoning his own father for power- proper gangster!

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

That’s not true mate.
Hindu heritage and architecture is quite surreal. Much of it was actually plundered but there are still examples of it all across Bharat. Especially in Southern part.

Agree, there are some stunning examples of Hindu architecture, along with the Mughal contribution they form an amazing tapestry of the continent's richness and splendour...before we Brits built railways to help us transport the goodies to all parts of the world to transform Britain into a rich and prosperous superpower.

 

[Saanji]

Your history involves bloodshed and disunity through and through before Moghuls and Brits so nothing much to talk about

Wow, 5 years of school history books summed up in one line ..

 

[Saanji]

Your history involves bloodshed and disunity through and through before Moghuls and Brits so nothing much to talk about

Your history starts at 1940 I think, history of delhi sultanate, mughals, brits, the Guptas the mauryas the Indus Valley belongs to us. .. so take a chill pill .

Some of us don't cherry pick history for our tinted lens to just feel good about our identity.
Accept the good with the bad, else you live a deluded life.

 

[Stewie]

There's also Maryam Aurangzeb.

Yeah her last name is Aurengzeb as well. She is a very hated politician in pakistan right now.

 

[Saanji]

He was well revered in India till 2014, revered enough to have the poshest road in Delhi named after him, 100cr+ bungalows, housing the mightiest and richest families of India- make what you will of it.

As with anything IMHO theres no black and white answer with Aurangzeb, loads of grey though. If he was born in Italy, would be considerd as top Don & Godfather for imprisoning his own father for power- proper gangster!

Aurnagzeb is never revered in Punjab and North india bro.. just because some buildings were named after him.
It's so funny at some apologists trying to portray a filtered version of Aurangazeb. An entire warrior religion emerged to challenge his discrimination and persecution and no one bothered to talk about it so far

 

[nish_mate]

Aurnagzeb is never revered in Punjab and North india bro.. just because some buildings were named after him.
It's so funny at some apologists trying to portray a filtered version of Aurangazeb. An entire warrior religion emerged to challenge his discrimination and persecution and no one bothered to talk about it so far

Mate was a tongue in cheek replymate!
Funny though when you consider it Aurangzeb Road, bang in the middle of Luytens Delhi for 60 odd years, one of the most powerful addresses in Delhi

 

[Bhaijaan]

Aurnagzeb is never revered in Punjab and North india bro.. just because some buildings were named after him.
It's so funny at some apologists trying to portray a filtered version of Aurangazeb. An entire warrior religion emerged to challenge his discrimination and persecution and no one bothered to talk about it so far

Yes, Aurangzeb has a lot to do with the emergence of the sikhism.

 

[Stewie]

He could not have been as bad as the British invasion and takeover and their looting and plundering of the subcontinent.

 

[VForVendetta]

He was basically Michael Corleone of his era. So now it's upto individual choice & belief to determine his legacy. For many MC is a hero, a legend, a savior for many others he is a monster, a murderer, a disgrace. There's going to be never any middle ground regarding Aurangzeb, at least in subcontinent.

 

[sweep_shot]

@JaDed

Just to continue our Mughal discussion here from the other thread (since this is the Mughal thread).

I know you are butthurt about Mughals because you were ruled by them. I just find it funny you are not equally butthurt about British Empire who also did many bad things in subcontinent.

You accused me of supporting alleged Mughal atrocities. I say your accusation is slanderous because I never supported any atrocity. I simply said I was happy many people in SC converted to Islam. As a Muslim, I should be happy when someone converts to my religion. That's natural.

Since my country (Bangladesh) is a Muslim country (90% Muslim population), we are very happy about Mughal legacy and influence. We cherish it. We do not see them as invaders like you Indians do. You need to stop projecting your view onto others. You shouldn't expect non-Indians to think like Indians.

 

[PakEngFan]

@JaDed

Just to continue our Mughal discussion here from the other thread (since this is the Mughal thread).

I know you are butthurt about Mughals because you were ruled by them. I just find it funny you are not equally butthurt about British Empire who also did many bad things in subcontinent.

You accused me of supporting alleged Mughal atrocities. I say your accusation is slanderous because I never supported any atrocity. I simply said I was happy many people in SC converted to Islam. As a Muslim, I should be happy when someone converts to my religion. That's natural.

Since my country (Bangladesh) is a Muslim country (90% Muslim population), we are very happy about Mughal legacy and influence. We cherish it. We do not see them as invaders like you Indians do. You need to stop projecting your view onto others. You shouldn't expect non-Indians to think like Indians.

Indians just can't tolerate the fact that Muslims ruled their country for centuries. Just look at some here with the tone they have when it comes to Muslims.

They won't say much about their current masters.

 

[JaDed]

@JaDed

Just to continue our Mughal discussion here from the other thread (since this is the Mughal thread).

I know you are butthurt about Mughals because you were ruled by them. I just find it funny you are not equally butthurt about British Empire who also did many bad things in subcontinent.

You accused me of supporting alleged Mughal atrocities. I say your accusation is slanderous because I never supported any atrocity. I simply said I was happy many people in SC converted to Islam. As a Muslim, I should be happy when someone converts to my religion. That's natural.

Since my country (Bangladesh) is a Muslim country (90% Muslim population), we are very happy about Mughal legacy and influence. We cherish it. We do not see them as invaders like you Indians do. You need to stop projecting your view onto others. You shouldn't expect non-Indians to think like Indians.

Is butthurt an insult?
Why do you think I like British empire? I have consistently showed my dislike for British culture on this forum, if anything I don’t have issue with Mughals who atleast adopted to SC unlike the invaders.
I absolutely despise the British so much so that most of my friends know how much I hate the brits, I have called even British Indians as obnoxious here.

I think you also need to go and read up on Mughal king names coz Ghazni Ghauri are none they were brutal Muslim invaders along with Bin Qasim.

 

[JaDed]

@JaDed

I know you are butthurt about Mughals because you were ruled by them.

I must be 400 years old now.

 

[ghalib kichlu]

Yes, Aurangzeb has a lot to do with the emergence of the sikhism.

Did guru nanak not invite babar to India
You reap what you sow

 

[Justcrazy]

Aurangzeb was a man of his times. He ruled the empire through shariah law , I would rather say he tried . In his personal life he was upright and honest.

If I am not mistaken Hindu people also hold important positions in his court. Aurangzeb , has been made infamous by spreading lot of false things by RSS propaganda. RSS has throughout used false propagation to defame Islam and Muslims.
For example they spread the rumors that Shah Jahan cut the hands of the workers who made Taj Mahal or Aurangzeb killed thousands of hindus everyday.

These people claim to be greatest nationalists today , but did nothing during struggle for Independence . They only want to achieve one object make India free of Muslims and Christians , just like what they did with Buddhists. And then teach lower caste hindus a good lesson. After that they will try and force Sikhs to call themselves Hindus. They cannot do all this in one go , so they are doing it slowly.

 

[Justcrazy]

Indians just can't tolerate the fact that Muslims ruled their country for centuries. Just look at some here with the tone they have when it comes to Muslims.

They won't say much about their current masters.

The point is whether you love or hate Mughal rulers , you cannot ignore them. The fact that they ruled over Indian subcontinent will always remain part of Indian history , just by changing in In India , will not erase that. That shows the stupidity of current regime in India.

 

[Hitman]

Aurangzeb was a man of his times. He ruled the empire through shariah law , I would rather say he tried . In his personal life he was upright and honest.

If I am not mistaken Hindu people also hold important positions in his court. Aurangzeb , has been made infamous by spreading lot of false things by RSS propaganda. RSS has throughout used false propagation to defame Islam and Muslims.
For example they spread the rumors that Shah Jahan cut the hands of the workers who made Taj Mahal or Aurangzeb killed thousands of hindus everyday.

These people claim to be greatest nationalists today , but did nothing during struggle for Independence . They only want to achieve one object make India free of Muslims and Christians , just like what they did with Buddhists. And then teach lower caste hindus a good lesson. After that they will try and force Sikhs to call themselves Hindus. They cannot do all this in one go , so they are doing it slowly.

1. Imprisoned his own father for the last several years of his life.

2. Chopped off his brother Dara's head who was the heir apparent to the throne, sliced it into 3 or 4 parts, put it inside a box, and sent the box to his father in prison.

3. Executed Guru Tegh Bahadur.


The above 3 things are enough to figure out what type of a person he was.

 

[rpant_gabba]

Did guru nanak not invite babar to India
You reap what you sow

again any credible sources?

@MenInG bit of a trend here.

Earlier it was about Balochi's being blamed for WTC attacks. now this

 

[MenInG]

again any credible sources?

@MenInG bit of a trend here.

Earlier it was about Balochi's being blamed for WTC attacks. now this

Valid question.

Source to be provided.

 

[ghalib kichlu]

again any credible sources?

@MenInG bit of a trend here.

Earlier it was about Balochi's being blamed for WTC attacks. now this

Daulat lodi is the missing link here

 

[CricketCartoons]

Whatever flaws he had, he did push the interests of his community forward. And this is an admirable quality. Instead of whining about the pasts, Hindus should learn from him and push their interests forward, whatever it takes, like Aurangzeb.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Whatever flaws he had, he did push the interests of his community forward. And this is an admirable quality. Instead of whining about the pasts, Hindus should learn from him and push their interests forward, whatever it takes, like Aurangzeb.

I don't think Hindus are capable, Aurangzeb's vision would not have been a shrinking Bharat (which is what we are seeing) but would have been Akhand Bharat were he a Hindu. Modi can't even march on Pakistan, their avowed enemy as depicted by dishum dishum Bollycrap fiction. How would they face Afghanistan, their former nemesis before the British Raj?

 

[CricketCartoons]

I don't think Hindus are capable, Aurangzeb's vision would not have been a shrinking Bharat (which is what we are seeing) but would have been Akhand Bharat were he a Hindu. Modi can't even march on Pakistan, their avowed enemy as depicted by dishum dishum Bollycrap fiction. How would they face Afghanistan, their former nemesis before the British Raj?

True, Hindus are not capable to match the success of Aurangzeb, but they can still get inspired by him and do whatever they can.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Hindus and Sikhs remember him as the most cruel of the Mughals who was desperate to eradicate minorities of Hindustan.

Some Muslim scholars say that although he was an ultra conservative, but he was actually the most devoted Muslim of all Mughals.

Whatever is said, the man was the most powerful ruler of this land once upon a time.

Do you think he was good or bad for Mughals and for Hindustan

What is his legacy.

sikhs didn't exist prior mughal rule fyi

 

[Justcrazy]

1. Imprisoned his own father for the last several years of his life.

2. Chopped off his brother Dara's head who was the heir apparent to the throne, sliced it into 3 or 4 parts, put it inside a box, and sent the box to his father in prison.

3. Executed Guru Tegh Bahadur.


The above 3 things are enough to figure out what type of a person he was.

What were the reasons behind that.

Did Mr Aurangzeb suddenly wake up one morning and did these things?

 

[Hitman]

What were the reasons behind that.

Did Mr Aurangzeb suddenly wake up one morning and did these things?

You want to know the reasons, do your research. What history tells us is that he did those things. And that makes him a pathetic excuse of a human being.

 

[Hitman]

The only desent human being among those invading looters and plunderers is Akbar. Akbar is fit enough to be called a human being.

 

[BouncerGuy]

The only desent human being among those invading looters and plunderers is Akbar. Akbar is fit enough to be called a human being.

why? because he was more inclined towards hindus and local indians? or we have some credible source about his humanity?

 

[Hitman]

why? because he was more inclined towards hindus and local indians? or we have some credible source about his humanity?

Do your own research. There's plenty of materials online. It's an insult to him that he is related to the Mughals.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Do your own research. There's plenty of materials online. It's an insult to him that he is related to the Mughals.

it is your job to brings some proof with your statement if you are making a claim about some individual. First, you said stuff about Aurangzeb, and now Akbar. People need some proof of these kinds of statements.

 

[Hitman]

it is your job to brings some proof with your statement if you are making a claim about some individual. First, you said stuff about Aurangzeb, and now Akbar. People need some proof of these kinds of statements.

So you want me to bring proof about those 3 things I said Aurangzeb did that history tells us?

 

[BouncerGuy]

So you want me to bring proof about those 3 things I said Aurangzeb did that history tells us?

History has both positive and negative words for an individual. Everybody has own way to judge a guy. Akbar was a humanitarian to you but airangzeb was an intuder and a worst guy. But it can be opposite for other people. That was my whole point.

 

[Hitman]

History has both positive and negative words for an individual. Everybody has own way to judge a guy. Akbar was a humanitarian to you but airangzeb was an intuder and a worst guy. But it can be opposite for other people. That was my whole point.

Have you ever wondered why Aurangzeb is hated while Akbar is not by people of India? The only reason why every single one of those Muslim invaders are loved by most of the Muslims of the subcontinent irrespective of their deeds is only, and only because of their religion.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Everybody has own way to judge a guy

Again

Have you ever wondered why Aurangzeb is hated while Akbar is not by people of India? The only reason why every single one of those Muslim invaders are loved by most of the Muslims of the subcontinent irrespective of their deeds is only, and only because of their religion.

It is fine that you do not like Aurangzeb, that is your call, but don't make it Hindu-Muslim stuff. History has many hidden words that prove otherwise.

 

[sweep_shot]

Have you ever wondered why Aurangzeb is hated while Akbar is not by people of India? The only reason why every single one of those Muslim invaders are loved by most of the Muslims of the subcontinent irrespective of their deeds is only, and only because of their religion.

Do you think other non-Muslim empires in Indian subcontinent were sweet angels? LOL. Were they free from faults?

It seems like BJP Indians like to highlight Mughals only and give free passes to other empires (including British Empire).

 

[Statpadder Inc]

Do you think other non-Muslim empires in Indian subcontinent were sweet angels? LOL. Were they free from faults?

It seems like BJP Indians like to highlight Mughals only and give free passes to other empires (including British Empire).

The BJP and their fans attack the British rule too. Churchill is hated in India.
But you seem to give a free pass to a tyrant who happened to share the same religion as you.
And there is no need to gloat, you never ruled over anyone, Bangladeshis were also subjects.

 

[sweep_shot]

The BJP and their fans attack the British rule too. Churchill is hated in India.
But you seem to give a free pass to a tyrant who happened to share the same religion as you.
And there is no need to gloat, you never ruled over anyone, Bangladeshis were also subjects.

There were no Bangladesh, India, or Pakistan then. Subcontinent was divided into various empires.

BJP Indians often claim credits for things which happened under different empires (nothing to do with present-day India) yet complain when desi Muslims find common grounds with Mughals. It is funny.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

There were no Bangladesh, India, or Pakistan then. Subcontinent was divided into various empires.

BJP Indians often claim credits for things which happened under different empires (nothing to do with present-day India) yet complain when desi Muslims find common grounds with Mughals. It is funny.

The BJP lot take pride in historical rival Hindu kingdoms who raped their great grandmothers.

They are a confused lot.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

He was a great general but couldn't handle the south indian states well.