Original persian edicts from Aurangzebs court are really breathtaking study… they share the truth about all his tyrannies…

thanks again…

Click

http://according-to-mughal-records.blogspot.com/

Do you have any links to any articles that mention these instances?

Thanks.

P.S. You may also find this post interesting:

http://satyameva-jayate.org/2008/04/05/lies-and-half-truths-part-2/

Let me put it another way.

“The past is not dead. Its not even the past.”

Get it if you can and happy smiling if you still find it funny. And yes do worry about Gandhi. Think about why his longest fast was against an Indian named Ambedkar and not against the British. The GoI never tells this in the textbooks. Worry about Au… too. God bless you. Keep smiling.

Thanks for replying and sorry for the delay. I just wanted to complicate this picture. Of course Aurangzeb destroyed temples. But at the same time he gave grants too. And I believe both of us agree on this. And there is sufficient evidence for both arguments. We can keep piling up this evidence as happened in the Babri-Ayodhya debates and be oblivious to the other side, or we can open our eyes and realise that Aurangzeb actually did do both the things. We can look for smarter ways of explaining his (his govt’s actually and the same applies for all kings) actions or understand him to be the representative icon of all South Asian Muslims and simply say Muslims oppressed Hindus as is easy and convenient today. You could say that his plan was to destroy all Hindu temples all over India but that he died. But that is the stuff of counterfactuals not history, because the truth is that he both destroyed and furthered Hindu temples.

Now I am just throwing in some possibilities. Maybe we need to look into the timing of the momentous occasions of breaking of the temples. If as you say Somnath was destroyed in 1706, it could have been a desperate way of rallying the Muslims of the Mughal empire (I mean officials not some small time guy named Abdul etc in some small village) together, when the empire was on the brink. I admit I do not have answers but all that I am saying is that the picture is very muddled and does not lend itself to such easy and bland interpretations as many other readers (above comments) would like them to be. But I am certain about the Dara Shikoh temples. Maybe Au… destroyed temples which had some importance for the Marathas, who at the same time were trying to put together a Hindu nation. And why should not the Rajputs not oppose them and be desirous of being captains of Hindus. After all, the Muslims were not united either, and still are not. Nobody was and is. The world is supposed to keep churning.

I hope you do not take all this personally. Sorry if I offended you.

Again, if his vendetta was against the Dara Sikoh faction, then why impose jaziya on non-Muslims?

With the object of curbing the infidels and of distinguishing the land of the faithful from an infidel land the jizya or poll tax was imposed upon the Hindus throughout all the provinces i Upon the publication of this order the Hindus all round Dehli assembled in vast numbers under the jharokha of the Emperor on the river front of the palace to represent their inability to pay and to pray for the recall of the edict But the Emperor would not listen to their complaints One day when he went to public prayer in the great mosque on the Sabbath a vast multitude of Hindus thronged the road from the palace to the mosque with the object of seeking relief Money changers and drapers all kinds of shopkeepers from the Urdu bdzar mechanics and workmen of all kinds left off work and business and pressed into the way Notwithstanding orders were given to force a way through it was impossible for the Emperor to reach the mosque Every moment the crowd increased and the Emperor’s equipage was brought to a stand still At length an order was given to bring out the elephants and direct them against the mob Many fell trodden to death under the feet of the elephants and horses For some days the Hindu continued to assemble in great numbers and complain but at length they submitted to pay thejizi a  <a href=”http://books.google.com/books?id=5MgNAAAAQAAJ&dq=aurangzeb+jizya&as_brr=1&vq=Hindu&pg=PA296&ci=131,355,830,807&source=bookclip”>The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians The Muhammadan Period By Henry Miers Elliot,  John Dowson</a>

That’s funny. So from your definition, we shouldn’t worry about Aurangzeb or even Gandhi.