'AURANGZEB
KI AULADEN' (Children of Aurangzeb): INDIAN MUSLIMS OR HIGH CASTE HINDUS
June 7, 2023 violence at Kolhapur as per the
claims of the perpetrators affiliated to the Hindutva gang was a reaction to
‘provocative’ social media posts which carried photographs of Mughal ruler
Aurangzeb (1618-1707) and Tipu Sultan ruler of Mysore who was killed by the
British army with the help of Nizam’s army on
The latest in this sorry saga is that on May 11,
an FIR was registered by Navi Mumbai police against
a man, Wasi for displaying Aurangzeb's image as his Whatsapp profile picture.
He was arrested when local Hindutva organizations lodged a complaint with the
police.
‘Provocative’ social posts or no posts whole of Maharashtra has been witnessing
the running amok of the Hindutva bandwagon. One prominent English daily
described the horrible reality in the following words:
“Since November, under the banner of the
amorphous Sakal Hindu Samaj, an umbrella body with no single leader or
organisation, and many outfits linked to the Sangh Parivar, ‘Hindu jan aakrosh’
morchas or rallies have been held across the state’s districts. Their stated
agenda: To press for laws against ‘love jihad’ and ‘land jihad’.
“The attendance of BJP and (Shinde) Sena
leaders, MLAs, and office-bearers at many of these rallies and the climate of
impunity in which hate speeches are made and minority-baiting takes place,
frame an attempt by the BJP to corner its main rival for the Hindutva vote, the
Uddhav Thackeray-led Sena. In the process, it also frames a curious phenomenon
— of the BJP, indirectly and in local contexts, mobilising on the streets in
ways that threaten the rule of law, to press its demands in a state where its
own government is in power.”
[Edit,
‘Express View on Devendra Fadnavis’s communal rhetoric: Dog-whistle in Mumbai’
in The Indian Express, Delhi, June 10, 2023. https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/devendra-fadnavis-aurangzeb-ki-aulad-kolhapur-communal-tension-8655090/]
The most
shameful response to Kolhapur violence came from Maharashtra’s Deputy Chief
Minister, who also holds the home ministry portfolio. When violence by the Hindutva
goons was still on and the local law and order establishment under Fadnavis was
yet to analyze the causes of the violence he declared:
“sawal
yeh uthta hai ke Achanak Itni Aurangzeb ki auladen kahan se paida hogayi ? Iske
peeche kon hai ? Iska Asli Malik Kon hai yeh bhi hum dhoond ke nikalnege…Kon
Maharashtra me qanokn Vayvastha kharab ho, Maharashtra ka naam kharab ho yeh
karne ki koshish kar raha hai yeh bhi hum dhoondkar nikalenge. [The question
arises that suddenly from where have so many Aurangzeb’s off-springs born?
Someone is behind it. Who is the real culprit/creator we will have to unearth.
Who are trying to spoil the law and order situation and who want Maharashtra to
be defamed, this also we will find out.]”
This
shocking statement can only be described as crazy, toxic and motivated by deep communal
prejudice. This kind of language is learned in Hindutva boudhik shivirs [intellectual
training camps] and does not augur well for the stability of constitutional
set-up in Maharashtra. It is sad that failure of the home department in
controlling the excesses of the Hindutva zealots is being covered up by using
the Hindutva rhetoric, Fadnavis if fond of use of dog-whistle to browbeat the
whole of Muslim minority in Maharashtra must resign as home minister and join
the Hindutva street hoodlums.
One hopes
that Fadnavis has this much common-sense
that when he is branding those Indian Muslims who put up photo of Aurangzeb as
“Aurangzeb ki Auladen” does not mean to state that these Muslims are the direct
descendants of Aurangzeb or Mughal rulers. In fact, if Fadnavis wants to find
blood descendants of Mughals he will have to look for beyond Indian Muslims! He
is using the term as a metaphor to describe them as carriers of Aurangzeb’s
heritage. Is it true that Indian Muslims
represent or carry forward the heritage of Aurangzeb? It is a lie constructed
by the Hindu nationalists. Even ‘Hindu’ narrative of Aurangzeb’s rule would
show that his rule like the rule of other Mughal rulers of India was also the
rule of Hindu High Castes as contemporary documents will show.
Hindutva
zealots like Fadnavis must know that the ‘Islamic’ rule of Aurangzeb or Mughal
rule survived due to the Hindu high Castes joining the ‘Muslim’ rulers in
running their empires with few exceptions. How solid this unity was can be
gauged by the fact that after Akbar no Mughal emperor was born of a Muslim
mother. Moreover, Hindu high Castes provided brain and muscles to the ‘Muslim’
rulers most faithfully.
Aurobindo Ghose who played prominent
role in providing Hindu foundation to the Indian nationalism confessed that
Mughal rule continued due to the fact that Mughal rulers gave Hindus, “positions of power and responsibility, used their
brain and arm to preserve” their kingdom. [Cited in Chand, Tara, History
of the Freedom Movement in India, vol. 3, Publication Division Government of India, Delhi, 1992, p. 162.] Renowned historian Tara Chand relying on the
primary source material of the medieval period concluded that the from the end
of 16th century to the middle of 19th century, “it may
reasonably be concluded that in the whole of India, excepting the western
Punjab, superior rights in land had come to vest in the hands of Hindus” most
of whom happened to be Rajputs. [Chand, Tara, History of the Freedom
Movement in India, vol. 1, Publication Division Government of India, Delhi, 1961, p. 124.]
Maasir al-Umara [biographies of the
commanders] a biographical dictionary of the officers in the Mughal Empire
beginning from 1556 to 1780 [Akbar to Shah Alam] is regarded as the most
authentic record of the high rank officials employed by the Mughal rulers. This
work was compiled by Shahnawaz Khan and his son Abdul Hai between 1741 and
1780. According to it Mughal rulers in this period employed around 100 (out of
365) high-ranking officials most of them “Rajputs from Rajputana, the midlands,
Bundelkhand and Maharashtra”. Brahmins followed Rajputs in manning
the Mughal administration so far as the number was concerned. [Khan, Shah
Nawaz, Abdul Hai, Maasir al-Umara [translated by H Beveridge as Mathir-ul-Umra],
volumes 1& 2, Janaki Prakashan, Patna, 1979.]
Interestingly,
Kashi Nagri Pracharini Sabha [established in 1893] “committed
to the cause of Hindi as official language” published Hindi
translation of this book in 1931.
It
is nobody’s argument that Aurangzeb [1618-1707] did not commit heinous crimes
against his Indian subject. It needs to be remembered that his cruelty was not
restricted to non-Muslims, his own father, brothers, Shias, those Muslims who
did not follow his brand of Islam and Muslim ruling dynasties in the eastern,
central and western parts of India faced brutal repression and were
annihilated. The term barbarous would be an understatement to describe the
treatment he meted to Sikh Gurus, their families and followers. Same Aurangzeb
executed renowned Sufi saint, Sarmad in the precinct of Jama Masjid of Delhi
[his grave at the end of stairs on the eastern gate of Jama Masjid is revered
by many]. It is also true that there were countless cases when Hindus and their
religious places were violently targetted during Aurangzeb’s despotic rule.
However, there are contemporary records available of his patronizing Hindu and
Jain religious places. Two living examples are the grand Gauri Shankar temple,
a stone’s throw away from Lahori Gate of Red Fort, built during Shahjahan’s
reign which continued functioning during Aurangzeb’s reign and Jain Lal
Mandir just opposite Red Fort. [Trushke, Audrey, Aurangzeb: The Man and
the Myth, Penguin, Gurgaon, 2017, pp. 99-106.] Reducing all his crimes to
the repression of Hindus only will tantamount to reducing the gravity of his
crimes against humanity.
Aurangzeb never
faced Shivaji in the battle-field. It was his commander-in-chief, a Rajput
ruler of Amer (Rajasthan), Jay Singh I (1611–1667)
who was sent to subjugate Shivaji (1603-1680). Jay Singh II (1681-1743),
(nephew of Jay Singh I) was other prominent Rajput commander of the Mughal
forces who served Aurangzeb. He was conferred the title of ‘Sawai' [one and a quarter times superior to his contemporaries]
chief by Aurangzeb in 1699 and thus came to be known as Maharaja Sawai Jai
Singh. He was also given the title of Mirza Raja [a Persian title for a royal prince] by Aurangzeb. The other titles
bestowed on him by other Mughal rulers were ‘Sarmad-i-Rajaha-i-Hind’ [eternal
ruler of India], ‘Raj Rajeshvar’ [lord of kings] and ‘Shri Shantanu ji’
[wholesome king]. These titles are displayed by his descendants even today.
According to
the Hindutva narrative Pratap Singh 1 known as Maharana Pratap (1540-1597)
fought for Hindus and Hindu nation against the Mughal ruler of India, Akbar who
wanted to subjugate Hindus of India under Islamic rule. Interestingly, Akbar
never faced Maharana in a battle; it was former’s most trusted Rajput military
commander, Man Singh I (1550-1614) who fought against Maharana on behalf of the
Mughal empire. The most crucial battle of Haldighati (June 18, 1576) was fought
between Maharana led forces and Man Singh I who led the Mughal forces. He was
one of the Navratn (9 gems in Akbar’s Mughal court), Akbar called him as
his farzand (son) and ruled many subas (regions) of Akbar’s
empire. It is also to be noted that Hakim Khan Sur, an Afghan was the artillery
chief of Maharana Pratap’s forces which fought at Haldighati. He was martyred
in the same battle.
We
have first-hand account of Raja Raghunath Bahadur, a Kayasth who functioned as Deewan
Ala (prime minister) of both Shahjahan, and Aurangzeb. According to a
biographical work penned by one of his direct descendants,
“Raja
Raghunath Bahadur having attained to the most exalted rank of Diwan Ala (prime
minister) was not unmindful of the interests of his caste-fellows [Kayasths].
Raja appointed every one of them to posts of honor and emoluments, according to
their individual merits; while many of them were granted titles of honor and
valuable jagirs for their services. Not a single Kayasth remained unemployed or
in needy circumstances.”
[Lal, Maharaja Lala, Short Account of the Life and Family of Rai
Jeewan Lal Bahadur Late Honrary Magistrate Delhi, With Extracts from His Diary
Relating to the Times of Mutiny 1857, 1902.]
This account
shows that despite the rule of Aurangzeb, a ‘bigoted Muslim’ a Kayasth prime
minister of his was able to patronize his Caste fellows; all Hindus. Aurangzeb
was so fond of this Hindu prime minister that after latter’s death in a letter
directed vizier (minister) Asad Khan to follow ‘sage guidance’ of Raja
Raghunath. [Trushke, Audrey, pp. 74-75.]
The
linking of Aurangzeb or other ‘Muslim’ rulers’ crimes committed in the
pre-modern India to his/her religion is going to create serious consequences
even for ‘Hindu’ history as narrated by the RSS. Take for example, Ravana, the
king of Lanka who according to again ‘Hindu’ narrative committed unspeakable
crimes against Sita, her husband Lord Rama and his companions during 14 years
long vanvaas or exile. This Ravana, according to the same narrative, was
a learned Brahman who also happened to be one of the greatest worshippers of
Lord Shiva.
The epic
Mahabharata is a story of a great war between two families known as Pandavas
and Kauravas (both Kashtriyas) not between Hindus and Muslims but between two
‘Hindu’ armies in which, if you go by the ‘Hindu’ version 1.2 billion (120
crore) people, all Hindus are stated to have been slaughtered. Draupadi joint
wife of Pandavas was disrobed by Kauravas, all Hindus. If like Aurangzeb and
other ‘Muslim’ rulers the crimes of Ravana, Kauravas, Jai
Singh I and II etc. are linked to their religion then country will turn into a
butchery. And if revenge is to be taken from the present descendants of the
past perpetrators then beginning must be made from the beginning of the Indian
civilization; turn of the Indian Muslims will come far later!
Another crucial
fact which is consciously kept under wrap is that despite more than 500 hundred
years of ‘Muslim’/Mughal rule which according to Hindutva historians was
nothing but a project of annihilating Hindus or forcibly converting the latter
to Islam, India remained a nation with an almost 2/3 majority of Hindus at the
historical juncture when even ceremonial ‘Muslim’ rule was over. The British
rulers held first census in 1871-72. According to the Census report:
“The
population of British India is, in round numbers, divided into 140½ millions [sic]
of Hindoos (including Sikhs), or 73½ per cent., 40¾ millions of Mahomedans, or
21½ per cent. And 9¼ millions of others, or barely 5 per cent., including under
this title Buddhists and Jains, Christians, Jews, Parsees, Brahmoes…”
[Memorandum
on the Census Of British India of 1871-72: Presented to both Houses of
Parliament by Command of Her Majesty London, George Edward Eyre and William
Spottiswoode, Her Majesty's Stationary Office 1875, 16.]
These figures
make it clear that persecution and cleansing of Hindus was not even a secondary
project of the ‘Muslim’ rule. If it had been so Hindus would have disappeared
from India. At the end of ‘Muslim’ rule Hindus were 73.5% who now according to
the 2011 Census have increased to 79.80%. On the contrary Muslims who were
21.5% have been reduced to 14.23%. India seems to be the only country where
despite ‘Muslim’ rule of more than half of a millennium the populace did not
convert to the religion of the rulers. Muslims of India did not remain numerically
a minority only but also devoid of wealth, resources, and other benefits which
Hindu High Castes enjoyed under the Mughal rule.
The Indian Express (June
10, 2023) correctly stated that “The new politics of polarisation in
Maharashtra is attempting to make inroads into areas and regions of the state
even with little or no significant minority presence, and where, as in
Kolhapur, there has been a legacy of progressive politics upholding values of
tolerance and inclusion”. The moral of the story of violence perpetrated by
the Hindutva zealots is that Kolhapur violence may look like to be an attempt
to terrorise Muslims but the real aim is to establish Hindutva hegemony in an
area which though ruled by Maratha Hindu Kings remained a princely state where
rulers did not lose sight of principles of justice and egalitarianism. Shahuji
Maharaj (1874-1922) who ruled Kolhapur State for 28 years took powerful
measures to improve status of Sudras and lower Castes.
He patronized Satya Shodhak Samaj
established by Jyotiba Phule. He abolished Untouchability. Shahu ji Maharaj was
the first ruler in the Indian history to provide 50% reservation in jobs and
educational institutions to weaker sections. He withdrew all special privileges
enjoyed by Brahmins. He went to the extent of removing Brahmin priests from
palace and court duties and appointed a Maratha young man as priest of
non-Brahmins. Despite strong opposition from High Castes he supported education
of girls in his State.
So the RSS-BJP rulers of Maharashtra are
primarily trying to cleanse all that was egalitarian, pro-women and Dalit in
the history of Maharashtra. If we do not rise up to resist this Hindutva
onslaught not only Maharashtra but whole of India is going to pay a very high
price.
Shamsul Islam
June 12, 2023
Link
for some of S. Islam's writings in English, Hindi, Urdu, Marathi, Malayalam,
Kannada, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujarati and video interviews/debates:
http://du-in.academia.edu/ShamsulIslam
Facebook:
https://facebook.com/shamsul.islam.332
Twitter:
@shamsforjustice
http://shamsforpeace.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment