“The rich may well construct domes of gold and silver on their graves! For the poor folks like me, the sky is enough” reads a couplet on the epitaph of Aurangzeb’s grave in Maharashtra’s Kuldabad. Calls for the demolition of the seventeenth-century Mughal ruler’s tomb by Hindu extremist groups Bajrang Dal and Vishwa Hindu Parishad, backed by the BJP-led state government, instigated communal violence in Maharashtra’s Nagpur, roughly 490 kilometres from Kuldabad, causing massive destruction and alleged arbitrary police action against Muslims. These groups had earlier given an ultimatum to the state government threatening that the tomb would meet a “Babri Masjid-like” fate and “karsevaks” would take charge. However, in actuality, no tomb exists at Kuldabad for “karsevaks” to demolish. The controversial king’s grave lies within the courtyard of the shrine of a Sufi saint, faintly raising eyebrows against claims of him being an “orthodox Muslim.”Aurangzeb, the longest reigning Mughal emperor who ruled over one of the largest empires in Indian history has been a controversial figure and can be easily tagged as the “most hated” of Indian rulers. Much has been written about him: some facts and a whole lot of fiction including the recently released Bollywood film Chhaava, which has once again brought a long-dead ruler to the centre of Indian politics. According to many reviews, the film conveniently evades several historical facts in its commitment to push the ‘Hindu vs Muslim’ rhetoric, including the fact that Sambhaji allied with Aurangzeb to fight against his father. According to historian John F Richards, Sambhaji was made a Mughal noble and conferred with the title of ‘Raja’ by Aurangzeb. Such complex dynamics of power, which according to historians shaped pre-modern India, find no reference in the Hindu right wing’s obsession with Hindu-Muslim binaries and blatant hatred towards Aurangzeb. Swaying away from usual demonic representations of Aurangzeb, eminent historian and professor at Rutgers University, Audrey Truschke, in her book titled Aurangzeb: The Life and Legacy of India’s Most Controversial King, explored the life, politics and legacy of the much-loathed Indian ruler. The book opened new doors into understanding Aurangzeb, but was not received well In India with the Hindu right wing unleashing a series of hate campaigns and targeted attacks against the author. In the context of the recent events, TNIE spoke to Truschke to reflect on the relevance of debates surrounding Aurangzeb. In one of your speeches six years ago, you said “India’s most hated ruler is undeniably alive in popular imagination.” Why do you think he is being brought alive time and again? Why has he been chosen among other Mughal rulers?Aurangzeb was the most powerful of the Mughal kings, and he presided over the largest land-based empire in South Asian history. The historical Aurangzeb and the Hindutva-created Aurangzeb are two different things. For starters, Emperor Aurangzeb was a real person and the most powerful king in Indian history, whereas the Hindutva-created Aurangzeb is a cartoonish fiction. India’s Hindu nationalists partly inherited their ahistorical ideas about Aurangzeb from British colonialists. They have also added to this imaginary king, over the years, in furtherance of their far-right agenda, especially their loathing of Indian Muslims. They use him as a stand-in for all Indian Muslims, alleging that Aurangzeb’s actions hundreds of years ago–real or imagined–somehow justify modern Hindutva’s anti-Muslim bigotry and violence.In other words, ignorance about the historical Aurangzeb and anti-Muslim hate undergird the Hindu nationalist iconoclastic calls to destroy his tomb.The recent violence in the name of Aurangzeb was fuelled by a Bollywood film named Chhavva, which portrayed the Mughal emperor as a power-hungry tyrant. The movie, which was a massive success in the country, also places Maratha ruler Chatrapati Sambhaji as an icon of Hinduism. Have you seen the movie? What is your take on it? I have been too busy in recent months doing my job as a historian to see a fictional film like Chhaava. I think many Indians would probably be surprised to learn about some of Sambha’s actions, especially against women, which earned him strong criticism in his own time. Regarding Aurangzeb, he is best understood through a political lens as an Indian political leader.
Source link
