Giridhar Reward Points : 200 Member Since : Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Aurangzeb was the last great emperor of the Moghul dynasty what does this mean. He killed his 3 bothers and he even imprisoned his father. How can he be called great. He even converted many Hindus into Muslims by force and tortured them. How can someone call him great. The correct term for Aurangzeb is loser.
Dipen Guha Reward Points : 51700 Member Since : Friday, December 25, 2009
Lexically, the word great means considerably above average in amount,extent, or strength. It does not always and essentially mean- grand or brilliant. To call Aurangzeb the last great emperor of the Mughal dynasty, one may mean his phased regime from 1658 to 1707, that is more than fifty years. Aurangzeb ascended the throne of Delhi in 1658 following the Dharmat Battle against his brother Murad. In the same year, he had to fight the Samugadh Battle against his brother Dara. In 1659 there was yet another battle at Deorai against Suja. Needless to say, Aurangzeb was fratricide, and imprisoned his old father, which is synonymous to the abject act of patricide. India woefully experienced calamities of all kinds. The worst femine took place in his time. The Jath Movement came to pass because of this despot. Religious tolerance as propunded by Akbar was translated into intolerance by him. Teg Bahadur, the Sikh Guru, took to martyrdom. Khalsa founded by Guru Govind Singh, was virtually a pathfinder to emancipation from atrocity. But, this religious bigot ruled for a wide span, and with his death in 1707, the majestic edifice of the Mighty Mughal collapsed like a house of cards. Let us review what his successors could do as rulers. Bahadur Shah I=1707-1712, Jahandar Shah=1712-1713, Farookhshire=1713-1719, Md. Shah=1719-1748,, Ahmed Shah=1748-1754, AlamgirII=1754-1759, Shah Alam II=1759-1806, Akbar II= 1806-1837, and Bahadur Shah II=1837-1858. Besides, they were not strong enough in their administrative convictions. To be notorious is also GREAT. Those who are neither good nor bad do scarcely have any remarkable entity.
Posted On : 03/17/10 9:52:50 AM
Saif Reward Points : 200 Member Since : Saturday, June 23, 2012
Whatever you have written gives a wrong idea about Aurangzeb he did nothing out of which you have mentioned about him.He was a great and efficient ruler he new all the in s & out s of fighting besides he didn t use a penny of the Indian treasure and lived his life on what he earned on selling the HOLY QURAN which he would write himself & the holy caps which he and her wife manufactured by their own hands.He also lived his life as a common man.He only tried to spread Islam.
He was mis-guided by few people with vested interest to enforce conversion. Rule is the stronger should be ruler and all those who can disturb state have to be killed. Learn from history Kans was the greatest scientist of that time. Krishn him self had to come to librate kans. and kans also imprisoned his father. He was the most powerfull king at that time. and krishn grand father was the richest person on earth at that time. He was termed as Nagar seth.
Posted On : 08/09/12 8:09:18 AM
HM M Zaman Reward Points : Member Since : Thursday, October 11, 2012
Aurangzeb was a great Mughal ruler.In fact he was one of the greatest rulers India had ever produced. True Aurangzeb was engaged in a fratricidal war.It is nothing new in history.You will find plenty of such examples in ancient Indian history.Are you really interested in history Have you read Mahabharata Do you know about the reign of Sasanka One who holds the gun writes the history or one who rules the present rules the past.What is going on in Kashmir Have you ever tried to know what ordeal your fellow citizens in the 7 Eastern provinces are going through Don t read history unless you can afford to understand history.History is not the story of bad king John and good king William.The role of a historian is not to give the verdict but to explain.analyse interpret.