But Firoz himself claims here that he built only 40 mosques in his entire reign. His language seems to emphasize that whereas his predecessors allowe… - Sri Ram Sharma

As we have discussed below,’ the Jizya was a very heavy burden to the masses. But it was not its burden alone which was irksome. It was a badge of inferiority round the necks of the unfaithful reminding them constantly that they formed a subject people under an alien rule. The payment of the Jizya guaranteed the non- Muslim subjects a second class citizenship in the state. The non- Muslims were invariably prohibited from criticising the Quran, the Prophet and Islam. They could not marry a Muslim and forfeited the protection granted to them on committing adultery with a Muslim woman. Similarly they were not allowed to make converts. Old temples were not to be repaired nor new temples built. The ruler could prescribe a special dress for the non-Muslim and forbid them from riding good horses. Their religious ceremonies had to be performed in such a way that neither Muslim eyes nor ears could be profaned thereby. They could be prohibited from building houses higher than those of their Muslim neighbours.

He valiantly tried to replace Hindu public servants by Muslims wherever he could. [Newsletter dated July 27, 1703 records] “Twenty Hindu musketeers of the royal guards were dismissed to give place to Muslims on…“

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.