Popular Hindu and Sikh tradition ascribes mass conversions by force to Aurangzeb’s reign. Of course it has heightened the colours in the picture. But the examples quoted above prove that the emperor made it a part of his imperial duty to encourage conversions, personally admit converts to Islam and grant favours to the initiated. Of the converts it must be said that very few, if any, seem to have changed their faith for religious reasons. Desire to escape civic disabilities or worse, and to acquire material benefits formed the motive force in most cases. It may be argued that the religion which these converts shook off so easily must have been sitting very lightly on them. But the history of the world contains a few martyrs and a host of trimmers. Hindu India of Aurangzeb’s reign was no exception. The wonder is not that so many were converted but that the vast majority of the Hindus kept their faith amidst so many temptations and such persecution.
historian,writer
Sri Ram Sharma (1900-1976) was a professor, historian and author. He taught history, politics and public administration at the Punjab, Bombay and Poona Universities for many years. He was a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society and a member of the Indian Historical Records Commission. He was also the Director of the Institute of Public Administration, Chandigarh and Principal of the D.A.V.College. At the time of his death, he was editing a volume on the 'Mughal Culture and Institutions' for the Comprehensive History of India being Published by Indian History Congress, and had almost finished his portion of the work. Historian Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi called his work The Religious Policy of the Mughal Emperors an useful and objective study.
From: Wikiquote (CC BY-SA 4.0)
From Wikidata (CC0)
A letter written by the President and the Council of Surat on 22 January, 1668, suggests a rather ingenious method of making converts. The factors state that trade had been largely obstructed by the fierce bigotry of Aurangzeb and his persecution of the Hindus. If a Muhammadan had no desire to discharge his debt to the bania and if the bania demanded the payment of the same, the Muhammadan would lodge a complaint to the Kazi that he had called the prophet names or spoken contumaciously of their religion, produce a false witness or two, and the poor man was forced to circumcision and made to embrace Islam. Several persons had been thus served to the great terror of all. This king not at all minding anything of his kingdom gives himself wholly upon the converting or rather perverting the banias.’ Forcible conversion of the Hindus at Surat, at last drove them to plans of migrating from Surat to Bombay. The English, however, turned down their request. The Hindus then closed their shops at Surat and eight thousand of them marched on to Broach to the emperor who was supposed to be there. What became of their appeal we do not know.
Advanced Search Filters
Filter search results by source, date, and more with our premium search tools.
By 1679 Aurangzeb had advanced so far on the path of Puritanism that it was possible for him to order the levy of the Jizya on non-Muslims on the representation of Anayat Khan, Diwan-i- Khalsa. It was to be paid by all and sundry in Muslim India and Rajput States, by officials, and non-officials, Brahmans and non-Brahmans, clerks and lighters. Aurangzeb’s imposition differed ’ from all earlier impositions in that it was laid on the persons living in feudatory states as well. The imposition was followed by a public protest by the Hindus at the capital and in the suburbs. They waited till Friday and when the emperor rode out on an elephant to say his Friday prayers in the Friday Mosque, they : made a demonstration and blocked the path of the royal elephant. For some time Aurangzeb was non-plussed. As all efforts at securing a path for him failed, after a delay of an hour or so, he ordered the march to be resumed trampling underfoot many of the protestants, Abu’l Fazl Mamurl, who himself witnessed the incident, tells us that this continued for several days and many lost their lives fighting against the imposition.
Fireworks of all kinds were prohibited. It was laid down in the Faiawa-i-Alamgiri that the Hindus should not be allowed to look like Muslims. In furtherance of this it was ordered in 1694 that, except Rajputs and Marathas, no Hindus were to be allowed to ride an ‘Iraqi or Turani horse, an elephant, nor to use a palanquin. A Hindu disobeying this order in 1 694 in Multan had his horse and saddle confiscated. The deshmukh of Ahmadnagar was discovered in 1703 riding a palanquin and at once the imperial orders were enforced against him. It seems, thus, that the exception in favour of the Marathas was not always respected. In 1702 orders were given that the Muslim engravers be not allowed to engrave the names of Hindu gods and goddesses on the seals of the Hindus’ rings. The Maasir-i-Alamgiri assigns to the year 1693-94 the order prohibiting the carrying of arms in public by the Hindus.
Besides the measures Aurangzeb took for the purpose of reducing the number of the Hindus in the public services, many other restrictions were imposed on them. The pilgrimage tax was reimposed. Bernier tells us that at the time of an eclipse of the Sun three lakhs of rupees were paid to the state. Rupa Brahman offered to pay to the state Rs. 1 ,000 in a lump sum on behalf of the pilgrims visiting Pushkar (near Ajmer) in order to save them the indignity inflicted on them during the collection. This was accepted. The celebration of some religious festivals was stopped. The Holi ceased to be celebrated by imperial orders issued on 20 November, 1665. It was not a police order alone, promulgated for the purpose of keeping peace and order during the Holi days as Sir Jadu Nath Sarkar has suggested. Raja Bhim of Banera and Kishen Singh while serving in South India in 1692, made arrangements for the celebration of Holi. The censor tried to stop the celebration, but as Bhim and Kishen Singh were officers of high status, the censor’s attempts were of no use. He reported the matter to the emperor by whose order the celebrations were stopped. In 1704, 200 soldiers were placed at the disposal of the censor for the purpose of preventing the celebration of the Holi. Of course the emperor was not always able to stop the celebrations. In 1693 there was a riot in Agra during the celebrations and many persons were wounded. The celebration of Dipavali also was prohibited in 1665. In 1703 Hindus were not allowed to burn their dead on the banks of the river Sabarmati in Ahmedabad. An earlier order issued in 1696 had imposed similar restrictions with regard to the Jamuna in Delhi.
The Mughals, however, had captured a prize in the two sons of the Guru [Guru Goving Singh] who had got separated from him when he had escaped from the Mughals at Kot Nahang on the Sirsa. They were asked to embrace Islam and at their natural refusal were executed at Sirhind. Their martyrdom was very much utilized by Banda in his campaign against the Muslims in the Punjab.
Works in ChatGPT, Claude, or Any AI
Add semantic quote search to your AI assistant via MCP. One command setup.
Aurangzeb urged the appointment of an officer on special duty in order to destroy the Hindu temples in Maharashtra. He discovered that it was not possible for the labourers accompanying the royal army on the march to destroy all the temples during the short time at their disposal with the limited number of men available to them..
The Jum’a Masjid at Irach (in Bundelkhand) is assigned to Aurangzeb’s reign. It is said to be built of materials taken from a Hindu temple. While passing through Udaipur in Bundelkhand (about 1681) Aurangzeb is said to have ordered the Saiva temple there to be demolished. The orders were however modified and the temple was converted into a mosque. The temples at Gayaspur near Bhilsa and the temple of Khaundai Rao in Gujarat were also destroyed.