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

The same textbook reads: During the fifty year reign of Aurangzeb, not a single Hindu was forced to embrace Islam. He did not interfere with any Hindu religious activities. (p. 138) Alexander Hamilton, a British historian, toured India towards the end of Aurangzebs fifty year reign and observed that every one was free to serve and worship God in his own way.

Tags: india, god, education
Asked by Indian Patriot, 08 May '10 08:27 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 (4)

1.

You know who is the bone of contention of all, it is westerners. They misguided us a lot. Its fact that he was one among the tyrant rulers of all the time but never raped India as MF hussain did. I agree that he was a strict follower of Muslim but had specific guidelines and principles. We learnt how to condemn others faults but not to praise virtues. Some of his deeds truly deserve great admiration .He is the person who donated the entire land for Vaisno Devi pilgrimage. He is the person who introduced some tax against war protection but the same was misinterpreted by the historians as penalty on Hindus. It was not a ransom, it was a fund raised for contingency. He clearly conveyed those who were capable of earning would have to pay the tax. War protection tax was very much common in foreign countries then.

A comparative study of all the Mughal emperors shows that He was the best ruler despite of his dictatorship. There were no muslim staff in his administration, in fact his ...more
Answered by joyesh chakraborty, 08 May '10 09:06 pm

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

This is all a false propaganda. What are the credentials of this Nagendra Nath Banerjee? who is he. when you come out with such material it should be backed by ample evidence, which I am afraid you will not find. All a propogandist can do is take some names whom no one has ever heard as 'authorities' on Aurangzeb. To begin Aurangzeb, it is well known rthat he arrested his own father and put him in prison till his death. He killed his brothers. All this only to gain access to the throne (which he could not legally as he was third in line) all this he did to establish orthodox Islam as he was not happy with the Secularism followed by his ancestors from Babar till Shahjehan. Aurangzeb's ancestors were Shias, but Aurungzeb converted to Sunni for the same reason. The era of Aurangzeb was full of torture and atrocities on the Sikhs. He burried two adolescent boys of Guru Govind Singh ji.This is history. In his tenure Sikhs were asked to cut off their hair and accept Islam or face death. The ...more
Answered by QueSera Sera, 08 May '10 08:54 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (0)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
3.

Dear Mr.Patriot,..... what exactly u want to convey.
Answered by Damodar Biswal, 08 May '10 08:33 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (0)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
4.

Aurangzeb was a despot. A religious fanatic.
Answered by Chandra sekhar Krishnan, 08 May '10 08:31 pm

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

Ask a Question

Get answers from the community

600 characters remaining

Related Answer

Q.
A

Yes ,well said.PAKKISTHAN is following this strategy for a long time,with out realizing that it has been playing in to the hands of terrorists slowly..more