Aurangzeb, Emperor
Shah Jahan‘s
sixth son, was born on 24th October 1618 at Dohad in Madhya Pradesh,
and wrested India’s crown from his father before the end of June 1658,
after defeating his brother Prince
Dara Shukoh‘s
armies, first at Dharmat near Ujjain (15th April 1568) and the second,
led by Dara himself, at Samugarh on 29th May 1658. The war of succession
to the richest throne in the world was practically over with this
victory, and Aurangzeb secured his position by making
Murad,
his brother and accomplice in his impetuous pursuit for power, his
prisoner, by treachery, on 25th June. He had already made his old father
Emperor Shah Jahan a prisoner in the Agra Fort (8th June 1658).
Shah Jahan survived his
confinement by nearly eight years and the disgraceful manner of his
burial will ever remain a stigma on this unscrupulous son Aurangzeb’s
advent to the throne in his father’s life time was not welcomed by the
people of India, because of the treacherous manner it was achieved; but
public opinion became all the more hostile towards him when Prince Dara
Shukoh, the favourite son of Shah Jahan, the translator of the
Upanishads,
and a truly liberal and enlightened Musalman, was taken prisoner on the
Indian border, as he was going to Persia. Dara was paraded in a most
undignified manner on the streets of Delhi on 29th August 1659. The
French doctor,
Bernier,
was an eye-witness to the scene and was deeply moved by the popular
sympathy for Dara which so much alarmed Aurangzeb that he contrived to
have a decree from his clerics announcing death-sentence for his elder
brother on the charge of apostasy.
Throughout the war of succession,
Aurangzeb had maintained that he was not interested in acquiring the
throne and that his only object was to ward off the threat to Islam,
which was inevitable in case Dara Shukoh came to power. Many, including
his brother Murad, were deceived by this posture. After his formal
accession in Delhi (5th June 1659) he posed as a defender of Islam who
would rule according to the directions of the
Shariat,
and with the advice of the clerics or Ulama for whom the doctrines,
rules, principles and directives, as laid down and interpreted in the
7th and 8th century Arabia, Persia and Iraq, were inviolable and
unchangeable in all conditions, in all countries, and for all times to
come.
One of the main objectives of
Aurangzeb’s policy was to demolish Hindu temples. When he ordered (13th
October 1666) removal of the carved railing, which Prince Dara Shukoh
had presented to the
Keshava Rai Temple at the
Krishna Janmabhumi
in Mathura, he had observed ‘In the religion of the Musalmans it is
improper even to look at a temple’, and that it was totally unbecoming
of a Muslim to act like Dara Shukoh (
Akhbarat (Aurangzeb’s Court Bulletin), 13th October 1666). This was followed by destruction of the famous
Kalka Temple in Delhi (
Akhbarat, 3rd and 12th September 1667).
In 1669, shortly after the death of
Mirza Raja Jai Singh
of Amber, a general order was issued (9th April 1669) for the
demolition of temples and established schools of the Hindus throughout
the empire and banning public worship. Soon after this the great Temple
of Keshava Rai was destroyed (Jan.-Feb. 1670) and in its place a lofty
mosque was erected. The idols, the author of
Maasir-i-Alamgiri
informs, were carried to Agra and buried under the steps of the mosque
built by Begum Sahiba in order to be continually trodden upon, and the
name of
Mathura was changed to Islamabad. The painting below is thus no fancy imagination of the artist but depicts what actually took place.
This was followed by Aurangzeb’s order to demolish the highly venerated
Temple of Vishwanath at Banaras, Keshava Rai Temple (Jan.-Feb. 1670), and of
Somanatha. To save the idol of
Shri Nathji from being desecrated, the
Gosain carried it to Rajputana, where
Maharana Raj Singh
received it formally at Sihad village, assuring the priest that
Aurangzeb would have to trample over the bodies of one lakh of his brave
Rajputs, before he could even touch the idol.
Aurangzeb’s zeal for temple
destruction became much more intense during war conditions. The
opportunity to earn religious merit by demolishing hundreds of temples
soon came to him in 1679 when, after the death of Maharaja
Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur in the Kabul Subah, he tried to eliminate the
Rathors of
Marwar
as a political power in Rajputana. But Maharana Raj Singh of Mewar, in
line with the great traditions of his House, came out in open support of
the Rathors.. This led to war with both Mewar and Marwar during which
the temples built on the bank of Rana’s lake were destroyed by his
orders (
Akhbarat, 23rd December 1679) and also about three hundred other temples in the environs of Udaipur, including the famous
Jagannath Rai Temple built at a great cost in front of the Maharana’s palace which was bravely defended by a handful of Rajputs.
Not only this, when Aurangzeb visited
Chittor
to have a view of the famous fort, he ordered the demolition of 63
temples there which included some of the finest temples of Kumbha’s
time. From Marwar (in Western Rajasthan) alone were brought several
cart-loads of idols which, as per Aurangzeb’s orders, were cast in the
yard of the court and under the steps of Jama Masjid. Such uncivilized
and arrogant conduct of the Mughal Emperor alienated Hindus for ever,
though they continued to be tolerant towards his creed.
In June 1681, orders, in a laconic two-liner, were given for the demolition of the highly venerated
Jagannath Temple in Orissa (
Akhbarat,
1st June 1681). Shortly afterwards, in September 1682, the famous
Bindu-Madhav Temple in Banaras was also demolished as per the Emperor’s
orders (
Akhbarat, Julus 26, Ramzan 20). On 1st September 1681, while proceeding to the Deccan, where his rebel son Prince Akbar, escorted by
Durga Das Rathore, had joined Chhatrapati
Shivaji‘s son,
Shambhaji,
thus creating a serious problem for him, Aurangzeb ordered that all the
temples on the way should be destroyed. It was a comprehensive order
not distinguishing between old and newly built temples (
Akhbarat, Julus 25, Ramzan 18). But in the district of
Burhanpur,
where there were a large number of temples with their doors closed, he
preferred to keep them as such, as the Muslims were too few in number in
the district (
Akhbarat, 13th October 1681). In his religious
frenzy, even temples of the loyal and friendly Amber state were not
spared, such as the famous Temple of Jagdish at Goner near
Amber (
Akhbarat,
28th March and 14th May 1680). In fact, his misguided ardour for temple
destruction did not abate almost up to the end of his life, for as late
as 1st January 1705 we find him ordering that the
Vithoba Temple of Pandharpur be demolished and the butchers of the camp be sent to slaughter cows in the temple precincts (
Akhbarat, 49-7).
The number of such ruthless acts
of Aurangzeb make a long list but here only a few have been mentioned,
supported by evidence, mostly contemporary official records of
Aurangzeb’s period and by such credible Persian sources as Maasir-i-Alamgiri.
In obedience to the Quranic injunction, he reimposed
Jizyah on the Hindus on 2nd April 1679, which had been abolished by Emperor
Akbar
in 1564, causing widespread anger and resentment among the Hindus of
the country. A massive peaceful demonstration against this tax in Delhi,
was ruthlessly crushed. This hated tax involved heavy economic burden
on the vast number of the poor Hindus and caused humiliation to each and
every Hindu. In the same vein, were his discriminatory measures against
Hindus in the form of exemption of the Muslims from the taxes (
Akhbarat, 16th April 1667), ban on
Atishbazi (fireworks) and restriction on
Diwali,
replacement of Hindu officials by Muslims so that the Emperor’s prayers
for the welfare of Muslims and glory of Islam, which were proving
ineffective, be answered. He also imposed a ban on
ziyarat (pilgrimage) and gathering of the Hindus at religious shrines, such as of
Shitla Mata and folk Gods like Pir Pabu, another ban on their travelling in
palkis (sedan
chairs), or riding elephants and Arab-Iraqi horses, as Hindus should
not carry themselves with the same dignity as the Muslims! In the same
vein came brazen attempts to convert Hindus by inducement, coercion or
by offering
qanungoship (district administrator ?) and to
honour the converts in the open Court. His personal directions were that
a Hindu male be given Rs. 4 and a Hindu female Rs. 2 on conversion (7th
April 1685). “Go on giving them”, Aurangzeb had ordered when it was
reported to him that the Faujdar of
Bithur, Shaikh Abdul Momin, had converted 150 Hindus and had given them
naqd (cash) and
saropas (dresses of honour) (
Akhbarat,
11th April 1667). Such display of Islamic orthodoxy by the state under
Aurangzeb gave strength and purpose to the resistance movements such as
of the
Marathas, the
Jats, the
Bundelas and the
Sikhs.
On the 12th May 1666, the dignity
with which Shivaji carried himself in the Mughal court and defied the
Emperor’s authority, won him spontaneous admiration of the masses.
Parkaldas, an official of Amber (Jaipur State) wrote in his letter dated
29th May 1666, to his
Diwan.
“Now that after coming to the Emperor’s presence Shivaji has shown such
audacity and returned harsh and strong replies, the public extols him
for his bravery all the more….” When Shivaji passed away on April 1680
at the age of 53 only, he had already carved a sufficiently large
kingdom, his
Swarajya, both along the western coast and some important areas in the east as well.
Aurangzeb could never pardon
himself for his lack of intelligence in letting him escape from his well
laid trap and wrote in his
Will
that it made him “to labour hard (against the Marathas) to the end of
my life (as a result of it)”. He did not realize that it was his own
doing: the extremely cruel manner even for those times – in which he put
to death Shivaji’s eldest son,
Shambhaji
made the Maratha king a martyr in the eyes of the masses and with that
commenced the people’s war in Maharashtra and the Deccan which dug the
grave of the Mughal empire.
Till the very end Aurangzeb never
understood that the main pillars of the government are the affection
and support of the people and not mere compliance of the religious
directives originating from a foreign land in the seventh-eighth
centuries.
His death after a long and
ruinous reign lasting half a century, ended an eventful epoch in the
history of India. He left behind a crumbling empire, a corrupt and
inefficient administration, a demoralized army, a discredited government
facing public bankruptcy and alienated subjects. –
Aurangzeb Info Home
Mughal Empire map based on sheet o A 16 A of Irfan Habib’s “An Atlas of Mughal Empire”, Oxford Univ. Press, Delhi. (1982)
Prince Dara Shukoh translating the Upanishads
Prince
Dara Shukoh, the eldest son of Emperor
Shah Jahan, was like his great ancestor
Akbar,
a very liberal and enlightened Musalman and a true seeker of truth.
Akbar respected all religions – Islam, Hinduism, Christianity,
Zoroastrianism, Jainism, Sikhism, etc., and gave their votaries complete
religious freedom. He was ever keen to discuss and understand their
religious beliefs, practices and philosophy and, in order to make the
Musalmans familiar with the culture, and universal values, philosophy
and traditions of India, he had the great epics of India –
Ramayana and
Mahabharat – translated into Persian. He also arranged for the translation of the
Atharvaveda.
Continuing the unfinished work of Emperor Akbar, Prince Dara Shukoh too, assisted by the Indian scholars, translated
Bhagvad Gita,
Prabodha Chandrodaya (a philosophical drama written in 1060 A.D.), and
Yoga Vashishtha
into Persian. He also translated the Upanishads, which are the
fountain-head of Indian philosophy, with the help of learned pandits
from Banaras, well versed in the Vedas and the Upanishads. The
translation of the Upanishads by him entitled
Sirr-i-Akbar (The
Grand Secret) was completed on the 28th June 1657, shortly before the
commencement of the war of succession, which he lost to his crafty and
unscrupulous brother, Aurangzeb who ruled India from 1659-1707.
In the painting, Dara is shown translating the Upanishads, assisted by Indian scholars. –
Exhibit No. 2
Prince Dara being paraded in Delhi before his execution – 29th April 1659
The painting based on Dr.
Bernier’s
eyewitness account, shows captive Dara Shukoh and his son being carried
on an elephant on the streets of Delhi, girt round by troops ready to
foil any attempt to rescue the prisoner, and led by
Bahadur Shah
on an elephant. Behind Prince Dara Shukoh is Nazar Beg, their goaler.
Dara is shown throwing his wrapper to a beggar who had cried out, “Dara!
When you were master, you always gave me alms, today I know well thou
hast naught to give”. Describing the scene Bernier writes, “The crowd
assembled was immense; and everywhere I observed the people weeping and
lamenting the fate of Dara in the most touching language … men, women
and children were wailing as if some mighty calamity had happened to
themselves”.
The outburst of popular sympathy
for Dara Shukoh and the contemptuous response which Aurangzeb had
received from the people for his outrageous treatment of his brother
made him procure in all haste a decree from the Islamic clerics in his
own pay, and had his elder brother beheaded on the charge of apostasy.
This was a sad end of a genuine
seeker of truth, translator of the Upanishads, author of many works on
Sufi philosophy, and one who could have revived and carried the
enlightened policies of his great ancestor Akbar to fulfillment. –
Exhibit No. 3
Keshava Rai Temple: “Even to
look at a temple is a sin for a Musalman”, stated Aurangzeb.
Umurat-i-Hazur Kishwar-Kashai Julus (R.Yr.) 9, Rabi II 24 / 13 October
1666
“It was reported to the Emperor (Aurangzeb) that in the
Temple of Keshava Rai
at Mathura, there is a stone railing presented by Bishukoh (one without
dignity i.e. Prince Dara, Aurangzeb’s elder brother). On hearing of it,
the Emperor observed, “In the religion of the Musalmans it is improper
even to look at a temple and this Bishukoh has installed this
kathra
(barrier railing). Such an act is totally unbecoming of a Musalman.
This railing should be removed (forthwith)”. His Majesty ordered Abdun
Nabi Khan to go and remove the
kathra, which is in the middle
of the temple. The Khan went and removed it. After doing it he had
audience. He informed that the idol of Keshava Rai is in the inner
chamber. The railing presented by Dara was in front of the chamber and
that, formerly, it was of wood. Inside the
kathra used to stand the
sevakas of the shrine (
pujaris) and outside it stood the people (
khalq)”.
Note:
Aurangzeb’s solemn observation
recorded in his own court’s bulletin that “In the religion of the
Musalmans it is improper even to look at a temple” and therefore,
presentation of a stone railing to Keshava Rai Temple by Dara was
“totally unbecoming of a Musalman” casts serious doubts about a few
instances of religious toleration and temple grants attributed to him.
Only two years before his long awaited death, he had ordered (1st
January 1705) to “demolish the Temple of Pandharpur and to take the
butchers of the camp there and slaughter cows in the temple…. It was
done” (
Akhbarat, 49-7, cited in J.N. Sarkar,
Aurangzeb,
Vol.III, 189). ‘It was reported to the Emperor (Aurangzeb) that in the
Temple of Keshava Rai at Mathura, there is a stone railing presented by
Bishukoh (one without dignity i.e. Prince Dara, Aurangzeb’s elder
brother). On hearing of it, the Emperor observed, “In the religion of
the Musalmans it is improper even to look at a temple and this Bishukoh
has installed this
kathra (barrier railing). Such an act is
totally unbecoming of a Musalman. This railing should be removed
(forthwith)”. His Majesty ordered Abdun Nabi Khan to go and remove the
kathra,
which is in the middle of the temple. The Khan went and removed it.
After doing it he had audience. He informed that the idol of Keshava Rai
is in the inner chamber. The railing presented by Dara was in front of
the chamber and that, formerly, it was of wood. Inside the kathra used
to stand the
sevakas of the shrine (
pujaris) and outside it stood the people (
khalq)’. –
Exhibit No. 6
Demolition of Keshava Rai Temple at the Krishna Janmabhumi, Mathura - 13th January – 11th February 1670
The great Temple of Keshava Rai
at Mathura was built by Bir Singh Deo Bundela during Jahangir’s time at a
cost of thirty-three lakhs of rupees. The
Dehra of Keshava Rai
was one of the most magnificent temples ever built in India and enjoyed
veneration of the Hindus throughout the land [as it stood at Sri
Krishna's birth place]. Prince Dara Shukoh, who was looked upon by the
masses as the future Emperor, had presented a carved stone railing to
the temple which was installed in front of the deity at some distance;
the devotees stood outside this railing to have
darshan of Keshava Rai. The railing was removed on Auranzeb’s orders in October 1666.
The Dehra of Keshava Rai was
demolished in the month of Ramzan, 1080 A.H. (13th January – 11th
February 1670) by Aurangzeb’s order. “In a short time, by the great
exertion of the officers, the destruction of this strong foundation of
infidelity was accomplished and on its site a lofty mosque was built at
the expenditure of a large sum”. To the author of
Maasir-i-‘Alamigiri,
the accomplishment of this “seemingly impossible work was an instance
of the strength of the Emperor’s faith”. Even more disgraceful was
transporting the idols to Agra and burying them under the steps of the
mosque of the
Begum Sahib “in order to be continually trodden upon”.
The painting shows the demolition
of the great temple, on Aurngzeb’s orders in progress and subsequent
uncivilized conduct towards the idols. –
Exhibit No. 13
Demolition of Kalka Temple – I. Siyah Waqa’i- Darbar Regnal Year 10, Rabi I, 23 / 3 September 1667
“The asylum of
Shariat (Shariat Panah) Qazi Abdul Muqaram has sent this
arzi to the sublime Court: a man known to him told him that the Hindus gather in large numbers at
Kalka’s Temple near Barahapule (near Delhi); a large crowd of the Hindus is seen here. Likewise, large crowds are seen at (the
mazars) of
Khwaja Muinuddin,
Shah Madar and
Salar Masud Ghazi. This amounts to
bid‘at (heresy) and deserves consideration. Whatever orders are required should be issued.
Saiyid Faulad Khan was thereupon ordered (by the Emperor) to send one hundred beldars
to demolish the Kalka Temple and other temples in its neighbourhood
which were in the Faujdari of the Khan himself; these men were to reach
there post haste, and finish the work without a halt”.
Note:
Kalkaji’s Temple which stands
today was rebuilt soon after Aurangzeb’s death (1707 A.D.) on the
remains of the old temple dedicated to Goddess
Kali.
The two Akhbarat dated R. Yr. 10, Rabi I, 23 and Rabi II, 3 (Sept. 3
and Sept. 12, 1667) provide details regarding the demolition of the
temple on Aurangzeb’s orders. Since 1764, the temple has been renovated
and altered several times but the main 18th century structure more or
less remains the same. The site is very old dating back to Emperor
Asoka’s time (3rd century B.C.). There is mention of Kalkaji in the
Maratha records of 1738. People flock to the temple in large numbers
especially during
Navratri. –
Exhibit No. 7
Demolition of Kalka Temple II. Siyah Akhbarat-i-Darbar-i-Mu‘alla Julus 10, Rabi II 3 / 12 September 1667
“Saiyad Faulad Khan reported that in compliance with the orders, beldars
were sent to demolish the Kalka Temple which task they have done.
During the course of the demolition, a Brahmin drew out a sword, killed a
bystander and then turned back and attacked the Saiyad also. The
Brahmin was arrested”.
Note:
There are only a few recorded
instances of armed opposition by outraged Hindus, such as at Goner (near
Jaipur), Ujjain, Udaipur and Khandela, but there must have been many
more such instances of angry outbursts and resistance against Muslim
vandalism which do not find mention in the official papers of Emperor
Aurangzeb.
Most of the Hindus took the
destruction of these temples philosophically considering these as acts
of ignorance and folly for a vain purpose. They regarded that it was
beyond the understanding or intelligence of the Musalmans to comprehend
the principle behind the idol worship or the fundamental oneness of
saguna and
nirguna worship. The Hindus believed that the Gods and Goddesses leave for their abode before the hatchet or the hammer of the vile “
mlecchas” or “
asuras” so much as even touched the idols. The idea has been well described in
Kanhadade Prabandha (written in 1456 A.D.) when giving an account of the destruction of the Somnath Temple by Sultan
Alauddin‘s troops in 1299. –
Exhibit No. 8
Demolition of the Temple of Viswanath, Varanasi – August 1669 A.D.
It was reported that, “according to the Emperor’s command, his officers had demolished the
Temple of Viswanath at
Kashi”. (
Maasiri-‘ Alamgiri, 88)
Note:
Kashi is one of the mort sacred towns in India and reference to the worship of Shiva as
Vishveshvara
goes back to very early times. Kashi itself enjoys highest sanctity
since times immemorial. According to the Puranas, every foot-step taken
in Kashi Kshetra has the sanctity of making a pilgrimage to a
tirtha. Lord Vishvanatha is regarded as the protector of Kashi and the belief is that one earns great religious merit by having
darshan
of the deity after having bathed in the Ganges. After destruction of
the temple on Aurangzeb’s orders, a mosque was built which still stands
there as a testimony of the great tolerance and spirit of forgiveness of
the Hindus even towards those who had for centuries desecrated and
destroyed their temples and other places of worship and learning, and
also as a lesson that “mutually uncongenial cultures”, when forced by
circumstances to intermingle in the same geographical area, result in
such calamities. A portion of the sculpture of the demolished temple,
probably built in the late 16th century, still survives to tell the fate
of Aurangzeb’s vandalism and barbarity. The present temple of
Vishveshvara was built by Rani
Ahilya Bai Holkar of Indore. –
Exhibit No. 11
Demolition of the Somnath Temple
About the time the general order for destruction of Hindu temples was issued (9th April 1669), the highly venerated
Temple of Somanath built
on the sea-shore in Kathaiwad was also destroyed. The famous temple was
dedicated to Lord Shiva. In the 11th century, the temple was looted and
destroyed by
Mahmud Ghaznavi. It was rebuilt by King Bhim Deva Solanki of Gujarat and again renovated by
Kumarapal in 1143-44 A.D. The temple was again destroyed by
Alauddin Khalji’s
troops in 1299. In a rare description of the scene of a temple
destruction, like of which continued to occur time and again during the
long and disastrous rule of the Musalman rulers in India, we have the
following account. “The
mlechchha stone breakers”, writes Padmanabha in his classic work “climbed up the
shikhar
of the temple and began to rain blows on the stone idols on all three
sides by their hammers, the stone pieces falling all around. They
loosened every joint of the temple building, and then began to break the
different layers (
thara) and the sculptured elephants and
horses carved on them by incessant blows of their hammers. Then, amidst
loud and vulgar clamour, they began to apply force from both the sides
to uproot the massive idol by means of wooden beams and iron crowbars” (
Kaanhadade Prabandha, Canto I, Vs. 94-96).
After the destruction of the
Somnath Temple during Alauddin’s time, it was rebuilt again. When
Aurangzeb gave orders for its destruction, the scene must have been
little different from the one described by Padmanabha. The artist in his
painting has tried to recreate the scene. –
Exhibit No. 14
Hindus forced to suffer humiliation by paying the Jizyah tax
On 2nd April 1679, Aurangzeb re-imposed
Jizyah upon the Hindus which had been abolished by Emperor
Akbar in 1564. The author of
Maasir-i-Alamgiri
writes: ‘As all the aims of the religious Emperor (Aurangzeb) were
directed to the spreading of the law of Islam and the overthrow of the
practices of the infidelity, he issued orders … that from Wednesday, the
2nd April 1679/1st Rabi I, in obedience to the Qur’anic injunction,
“till they pay Jizyah with the hand of humility”, and in agreement with
the canonical traditions, Jizyah should be collected from the infidels (
zimmis) of the capital and the provinces’.
The economic burden of Jizyah
was felt most by the poor who formed the vast majority of the Hindus;
for the middle classes and the rich, it was not so much the economic
burden which mattered but the humiliation involved in the prescribed
mode of payment, which the Jizyah collector could always insist upon, as
of right i.e. by insisting that he would accept it only when paid
personally. The Qur’anic injunction that war must be made upon all those
who do not profess Islam “till they pay Jizyah out of their
hand and they are humiliated”, was interpreted to mean that the Hindus
must be made conscious of their inferior position when paying this tax.
In the painting, a number of Hindus, both rich and poor are lining up to pay
Jizyah while the arrogant Jizyah collector is picking up the coins from the palm of a Hindu
Jizyah
payer. Some people have come from the neighbouring areas in their
bullock-carts; their bullocks are resting under the shade of the trees. –
Exhibit No. 18
Restrictions on Hindus: Forbidden to travel in palkis or ride on elephants and Arab-Iraqi horses
In March 1695, all the Hindus, with the exception of the Rajputs, were forbidden to travel in
palkis (litters), or ride on elephants or thorough-bred horses, or to carry arms. (
Muntakhab-ul-Lubab, ii, 395;
Maasir-i-Alamgiri, 370 and News Letter, 11 December 1694).
In the sketch, well to do Hindus are being made to alight from
palki
(sedan chair), elephant and good horse by Mughal officers. The need to
issue this derogatory order was the requirement also recorded in
Fatwa-i-‘Alamgiri,
that Hindus should not be allowed to look like Muslims, that is carry
themselves with the same dignity. The folly and futility, or even danger
of applying or observing the guiding principles, practices and law
prescribed, interpreted, or recommended in the seventh and eighth
centuries in Arabia, after a lapse of ten centuries in a country like
India, was never realized by the Muslim clerics or their Emperor. –
Exhibit No. 36
Shivaji leaving Aurangzeb’s court in anger
Shivaji reached Agra on the 12th May 1666 by noon, and had to be rushed to the court to attend the special
darbar on Aurangzeb’s 50th lunar birthday. Shivaji was presented to the Emperor by Asad Khan in the
Diwan-i-Khas and was then directed to stand in the line of 5
hazari mansabdars
(rank holders). “The Emperor neither talked nor addressed any word to
him”. The work of the court proceeded and Shivaji seemed to have been
forgotten.
Shivaji was not expecting this kind of reception. He was very much upset when Kumar Ram Singh (son of Mirza Raja
Jai Singh of Amber), in response to his query, informed him that the noble standing in front of him was Maharaja
Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur. He flared up “Jaswant, whose back my soldiers have seen! I to stand behind him? What it all means”?
He was made to feel neglected in
other ways also. At this he began to fret and “his eyes became wet with
anger”. The Emperor noticed the commotion and told Ram Singh, “Ask
Shivaji, what ails him”. When Kumar came, Shivaji burst forth, “You have
seen, your father has seen, and your Padishah has seen, what sort of
man I am, and you have wilfully made me stand up so long. I cast off
your mansab ….”
After saying this he then and
there turned his back to the throne and rudely walked away. Kumar Ram
Singh caught hold of his hand, but Shivaji wrenched it away….
In the painting, the above scene,
based on a contemporary letter, has been depicted. Shivaji is shown
coming out of the court in great anger, his back towards Aurangzeb, his
sword half drawn, and Kumar Ram Singh of Amber trying in vain to pacify
him. Wrote Parkaldas of Amber to the State’s Diwan in his letter of 29th
May 1666, “The people had been praising Shivaji’s high spirit and
courage before. Now that after coming to the Emperor’s presence he has
shown such audacity and returned harsh and strong replies, the public
extols him for his bravery all the more…. -
Exhibit No. 37
Aurangzeb restoring the office of ‘qanungoship’ to Hindu officials who were forced to become Musalmen
Qanungoship (district official) on becoming Musalman: There are a large number of Akhbarat
(Aurangzeb’s Court Bulletins) which mention that either Qanungoi was
restored on becoming Musalman, or that a person or persons were
appointed Qanungos on accepting Islam, or that they agreed to become
Musalman, obviously under pressure or as inducement.
A typical entry in the
Akhbarat,
such as of R. Yr. 10, Zilqada / April 22, 1667, reads “Makrand etc., in
all four persons, became Musalman. The Qanungoi of Parganah Khohri was
restored to them. Four Khil‘ats were conferred upon them”. Sir
Jadunath Sarkar is right in saying that “Qanungoship on becoming a Muslim”, had become a proverb.
As Qanungo had intimate knowledge
of the customs and tenures of the land, he could serve as the best
agent for protecting the interests of the Musalmans and in extending
influence of Islam in the rural areas. The sketch shows four Qanungos
being restored their Qanungoi on becoming Musalman.
