Using your phone's internet browser
go to:  qna.rediff.com
Click and drag this link to
the Home icon in your browser.
Q.

Historian B N Banerjee : "In Aurangzebs administration, the state policy was formulated by Hindus. Hindus held the highest position in the State Treasury. During Aurangzeb's reign of fifty years, Jaswant Singh, Raja Rajrup, Kabir Singh, Arghanath Singh, Prem Dev Singh, Dilip Roy, and Rasik Lal Crory, held very high administrative positions. Two of the highest ranked generals, Jaswant Singh and Jaya Singh, were Hindus.Other notable Hindu generals were Raja Vim Singh of Udaypur, Indra Singh, Achalaji and Arjuji. I wonder how Aurangzeb was hostile to Hindus & position these men in POWER ?

Asked by fast tracker, 16 Feb '09 08:05 pm
  Invite a friend  |  
  Save  |  
 Earn 10 points for answering
Answer this question  Earn 10 points for answering    
4000 characters remaining  
  
    
Keep me signed inNew User? Sign up

Answers (12)

1.

He had Dara openly marched in chains back to Delhi; when Dara finally arrived, Aurangzeb had Dara executed. Legends about the cruelty of this execution abound, including stories that Aurangzeb had Dara's severed head sent to the dying Shah Jahan. With his succession secured, Aurangzeb kept Shah Jahan under house arrest at the Agra Fort.What did he do with Guru Teg-Bahadur ?? with Kashmiri Pandits ??? with Guru-Gobind sing ??? With his own father ??? From Anandpur Sahib in an attempt to dislodge the Sikhs, Aurangzeb vowed that the Guru and his Sikhs would be allowed to leave Anandpur safely. But when the Sikhs abandoned the fort, the Mughals enagaged them in battle once again, at Chamkaur. Gobind Singh's very small force -- usually described as 40 men -- fended off the larger and better-equipped forces for some time, but eventually most fell. Only Gobind Singh and a few of his aides escaped THESE FACT ARE ALSO FROM THE HISTORY, BUT CAN NOT PROVE HIM HOSTILE..!!!!
Answered by drdinesh sharma, 17 Feb '09 01:45 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (2)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
 
2.

Banerjee further stated:

No one should accuse Aurangzeb of being communal minded. In his administration, the state policy was formulated by Hindus. Two Hindus held the highest position in the State Treasury. Some prejudiced Muslims even questioned the merit of his decision to appoint non-Muslims to such high offices. The Emperor refuted that by stating that he had been following the dictates of the Shariah (Islamic Law) which demands appointing right persons in right positions.

Most Hindus like Akbar over Aurangzeb for his multi-ethnic court where Hindus were favored. Historian Shri Sharma states that while Emperor Akbar had fourteen Hindu Mansabdars (high officials) in his court, Aurangzeb actually had 148 Hindu high officials in his court.1 But this fact is somewhat less known.

Aurangzeb was the greatest king among the Mughals and ruled over the largest territory of any ruler in Indian history. His empire extended from Kabul in present Afghanistan to areas in South India b ...more
Answered by misconception, 16 Feb '09 09:32 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (5)
Not Useful
 (1)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
3.

Though the Hindu Historians condemn Aurangzeb, he was a very noble person. Hindus also accuse him of implementing the muslim shariah. He did this as it is best way of ruling a country. As far as the hindus on the high ranks, it doenot mean that he was hostile. He knew India is a multicultural society, so he didnot discremated the people on the bases of their religion rather promoted them according to their abilities on all those position which did not clash with the Islamic teachings. Administration, maintaining the army.. where it is mix of communities, has nothing to do with the governing laws and penal codes of Islam.
Answered by adeel ahmad, 16 Feb '09 08:44 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (4)
Not Useful
 (1)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
4.

Historian banerjee does not know history.
Answered by Haalayudha Dattuni, 16 Feb '09 08:27 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (4)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
5.

Some of the Hindu historians have accused Aurangzeb of demolishing Hindu temples. How factual is this accusation against a man, who has been known to be a saintly man, a strict adherent of Islam? The Quran prohibits any Muslim to impose his will on a non-Muslim by stating that

There is no compulsion in religion.

Surah al-Kafirun clearly states: To you is your religion and to me is mine. It would be totally unbecoming of a learned scholar of Islam of his caliber, as Aurangzeb was known to be, to do things that are contrary to the dictates of the Quran.

Interestingly, the 1946 edition of the history textbook Etihash Parichaya (Introduction to History) used in Bengal for the 5th and 6th graders states:

If Aurangzeb had the intention of demolishing temples to make way for mosques, there would not have been a single temple standing erect in India. On the contrary, Aurangzeb donated huge estates for use as temple sites and support thereof in Benares, Kashmir and elsewhere. The ...more
Answered by funda, 16 Feb '09 09:37 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (3)
Not Useful
 (1)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
6.

Some of the Hindu historians have accused Aurangzeb of demolishing Hindu Temples. How factual is this accusation against a man, who has been known to be a saintly man, a strict adherent of Islam? The Qur'an prohibits any Muslim to impose his will on a non-Muslim by stating that "There is no compulsion in religion." (surah al-Baqarah 2:256). The surah al-Kafirun clearly states: "To you is your religion and to me is mine." It would be totally unbecoming of a learned scholar of Islam of his caliber, as Aurangzeb was known to be, to do things that are contrary to the dictates of the Qur'an.

Interestingly, the 1946 edition of the history textbook Etihash Parichaya (Introduction to History) used in Bengal for the 5th and 6th graders states: "If Aurangzeb had the intention of demolishing temples to make way for mosques, there would not have been a single temple standing erect in India. On the contrary, Aurangzeb donated huge estates for use as Temple sites and support thereof in Benares, ...more
Answered by mohd yousuf, 17 Feb '09 11:12 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
7.

The new genegation of Hindu brothers r kept in darkness. showing them manipallated wrong history b4 them. even in Hyderabad Nizams used to tell hindu and muslim r my two eyes. But the narrow minded people the true history b4 them.
Answered by yusuf syed, 16 Feb '09 10:12 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
8.

He might have married to their daughters, as was the practice then.
Answered by rajnikant raiyarela, 16 Feb '09 08:24 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
9.

I too wondered about it.
Answered by Skywalker, 16 Feb '09 08:07 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
10.

Who is historian(?) Banergee ?? Read life of Guru Gobind Singh ji and other Gurus too and learn about Aurangzeb. A new religion came into existance to oppose the barbarianism of Aurangzeb and Islam !!
Answered by Suman Singh, 16 Feb '09 11:19 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
Previous

Ask a Question

Get answers from the community

600 characters remaining

Related Answer

Q.
A

I like Gujarati 1) Radha Shyam Rame Gokul ma Raas....Gopiyo ghumati re Paas 2) Marathi:- He Chandane Phulane...Shimpit Ratra aali...Dharti Prakash Vel..more

Answered by Raj