Why Aurangzeb Would Be Called Terrorist Today?

Aurangzeb: A Modern-Day Perspective on Religious Extremism and Terrorism

Aurangzeb, the last significant Mughal emperor, ruled over India from 1658 to 1707. His reign is marked by intense religious orthodoxy, political turbulence, and a brutal approach to non-Muslims, especially Hindus and Sikhs. A significant portion of his policies involved enforcing a strict version of Islam, and many of his actions, such as the destruction of temples, forced conversions, and suppression of religious minorities, closely resemble the ideological extremism seen in some modern terrorist groups. If Aurangzeb were to rule in today’s world, his actions would likely be labeled as terrorist in the modern context. This article explores why his reign could be considered an example of religious extremism and why he might be classified as a terrorist by contemporary standards.

The Nature of Aurangzeb’s Religious Extremism

Aurangzeb was deeply religious, but his adherence to a rigid interpretation of Sunni Islam influenced his policies significantly. Unlike his predecessors, particularly Akbar, who promoted a policy of religious tolerance and inclusivity, Aurangzeb took a hardline stance on religion. He believed in the supremacy of Islam and saw it as his divine duty to enforce it throughout the empire. His policies were aimed at suppressing non-Muslim beliefs and practices, with the primary focus being the Hindu majority, which constituted the largest portion of his subjects.

Aurangzeb’s reign saw the systematic persecution of non-Muslims in multiple ways, ranging from the destruction of temples to the imposition of discriminatory taxes. His policies of forced conversion and temple destruction were not just limited to military campaigns but were part of a broader strategy to eliminate what he considered the “infidels” and establish a purer form of Islam in India. This rigid stance on religious conformity was not just a product of his personal beliefs but also a way for him to consolidate power in a religiously diverse empire, using religion as a tool to unify the masses under his rule.

Violence and Persecution: The Terroristic Nature of Aurangzeb’s Actions

One of the most significant factors that would lead to labeling Aurangzeb as a terrorist by modern standards is his frequent use of violence against civilians to achieve his religious and political goals. Modern terrorism is often defined by the use of violence and intimidation to achieve ideological, religious, or political objectives, and Aurangzeb’s rule mirrored many of these characteristics.

The destruction of Hindu temples, which was widespread during his reign, serves as one of the clearest examples of state-sponsored violence. Aurangzeb ordered the destruction of major temples such as the Kashi Vishwanath Temple in Varanasi and the Somnath Temple in Gujarat, viewing them as symbols of religious opposition to Islam. By attacking these temples, Aurangzeb sought not only to undermine Hinduism but also to project his authority and dominance over the Hindu population.

In addition to temple destruction, Aurangzeb was notorious for enforcing the jizya tax, a tax levied on non-Muslims. This discriminatory tax burdened the Hindu population and made life difficult for non-Muslims, essentially enforcing a system of inequality and second-class citizenship for them. In modern times, such actions would likely be considered a form of state-sponsored persecution, aligning with the kind of tactics seen in authoritarian regimes or extremist movements that use state machinery to enforce their religious ideology.

Furthermore, his policies of forced conversion and brutal punishment for those who resisted his vision of Islamic dominance also reflect the terroristic nature of his rule. By demanding that non-Muslims convert to Islam under threat of violence or social ostracism, Aurangzeb used coercion to achieve his religious goals. This use of violence and intimidation mirrors the tactics employed by many extremist groups today, who justify their actions as part of a religious or ideological mission.

Targeting Non-Combatants and Civilian Populations

A crucial characteristic of modern terrorism is the targeting of civilians or non-combatants in order to create fear and compliance. Aurangzeb’s policies, which involved persecuting the civilian population—particularly religious minorities—are consistent with this approach. The destruction of religious sites and the persecution of those who refused to convert were aimed at instilling fear among the population and suppressing resistance to his rule.

For example, when Guru Tegh Bahadur, the ninth Sikh Guru, refused to convert to Islam, Aurangzeb had him publicly executed. This act was intended to send a message not just to the Sikh community but to all non-Muslims who resisted his authority. In modern terms, this would be seen as an act of terror, designed to break the spirit of resistance and intimidate the wider population.

The brutal suppression of Sikh and Hindu communities, particularly during the later years of his reign, also exemplifies how religiously motivated violence against civilians can destabilize societies and create long-lasting fear and division. This kind of state-sanctioned violence, when directed at non-combatants, is frequently condemned as terrorism in today’s world.

The Political Dimension of Aurangzeb’s Extremism

Although much of his violence was religiously motivated, it also served a political purpose. Aurangzeb’s actions were not just about enforcing religious conformity but also about consolidating power. His authoritarianism and strict control over the empire often relied on religion as a tool to maintain dominance and suppress regional revolts. By aligning himself with the most conservative religious factions, he sought to strengthen his hold on power and eliminate political opposition, which was often led by those who resisted his religious policies.

His policies caused significant social and political upheaval, particularly among the Marathas, Rajputs, and Sikhs, all of whom resisted his oppressive regime. Modern-day terrorist groups often thrive in environments where power vacuums exist or where resistance movements challenge the authority of the state. Similarly, Aurangzeb’s actions contributed to the instability of the Mughal Empire and sowed divisions that would ultimately lead to its decline.

State-Sponsored Terrorism and the Legacy of Aurangzeb

If Aurangzeb were alive today and enacting similar policies, his actions would likely be classified as state-sponsored terrorism. His use of the Mughal Empire’s military and administrative resources to enforce religious orthodoxy, persecute non-Muslims, and suppress dissent would fit the definition of terrorism as defined by international law.

The long-term impact of his reign left a legacy of division, resistance, and fear, which is a hallmark of any terroristic regime. The resistance against his policies from groups like the Marathas, Sikhs, and Rajputs helped create a fragmented political landscape, ultimately weakening the Mughal Empire. This fragmentation of authority, combined with his repressive measures, contributed to the downfall of the once-powerful Mughal dynasty.

Conclusion

In today’s context, where the term “terrorism” is used to describe violent acts motivated by religious, political, or ideological extremism, Aurangzeb’s reign would likely be viewed through a similar lens. His use of state power to enforce religious uniformity through violence, persecution, and intimidation aligns with the tactics employed by modern extremist groups, making him a figure who would likely be labeled as a terrorist in the modern world. While historical context is essential in understanding his reign, the parallels between his actions and the behaviors of contemporary extremist movements are striking, highlighting the dangerous consequences of religious intolerance and authoritarianism.