Akbar and other Mughals

[Al-zakir]

In this forum the name of Aurangzeb is sometimes mentioned but not of the other Mughal Rulers. Is there ant specific reason or just that Aungzeb is more popular in pakistan.

I agree in India Auranzeb is not liked much and Akbar is considered better.


Links of articles will be appreciated.

Akbar tried to mix match the divinity of Islam with shirk of Hinduism with the concept of Dīn-i Ilāhī (Din-i-Ilahi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). He lived a haram life and perhaps was a non believer because he made some controversial decisions that goes against the fundamental teaching of Islam. He was a good king however not popular amongst Muslim in general from Islamic prospective.

On the flip side, Aurangzeb was a conservative Muslim and lived a simple Islamic life. He enforced sharia laws like he supposed to do as a Muslim ruler. He was the most honest Mughal king with respect to lavishing life style of rests. He encouraged non believers to be part of Deen-e-Islam while discouraged shirkism. Perhaps his conservative approached made him villain within Hindu community however hero among Muslims from Islamic prospective.

So it obvious that Aurangzeb would be more popular amongst Muslims in general just like Akbar is popular among Hindu for obvious reasons.

 

[PakSher]

Akbar was a womanizer and every good looking hindu girl was his kaneez or wife, that is why he came up with Deen-e-Akbari. He set the foundation for the fall of the of the last muslim empire. So, he is sentenced to death by beheading.

 

[nitesh28]

great so you are neutral and when it comes to other muslim MOGHULS don't you think you should be neutral about them as well


and no matter what you say about moghuls today the whole "CONCEPT" of INDIA is defined by the moghuls....as in culture cuisine music hell even your biggest monument the TAJ MAHAL so overall the moghuls left a legacy that as a sub continent man you should be proud off!!!


Asoka or none of the rajputs left INDIA with a very fond memory or a just rule did they??? they all killed and plundered equally bad....atleast under the MUSLIM MOGHULS something good came out of their rule....the CULTURE!! moghuls were lesser of all the evils.....

i dont disagree with the contribution of the mughals. evry indian knows what they gave us. u mention taj mahal every one knows shah jahan built it and we acknowledge it. they have contrbuted a lot to our culture agreed.

now do u want me it say we are forever indebted to mughal oh sorry muslims for ruling us. then u are wrong. because we consider them indians and they were one of us. now u have pakistan and u want us to admit is whatever india is it is due to muslims and muslims only then that is not acceptible.

does culture is only what the rulers give and nt what the general public practices. therefore excluding the practices of hindus and saying only mughal culture is indian culture is wrong. it is all part of indian cuture.

and single out ashoka or other hindu kings they were as good and as bad as the mughals. under the rule india was as big as at any time under mughal rule.

 

[PostColonial]

lol@Taj Mahal. Taj Mahal was built for the pleasure of Shah Jahan. It had no benefit for the people of India whatsoever.

Look at the contrast. Ashoka built hospitals while Mughals built tombs and palaces.

 

[PostColonial]

Ashoka even built animal hospitals. He built great universities and institutions of learning. Don't insult Ashoka by comparing him with the decadent Mughals.

 

[Spring Onion]

lol@Taj Mahal. Taj Mahal was built for the pleasure of Shah Jahan. It had no benefit for the people of India whatsoever.

Look at the contrast. Ashoka built hospitals while Mughals built tombs and palaces.

India is earning huge revenue in terms of tourism from these places.

On another note India was developed by invaders mostly.


And yes we also agree that Mughals have only spent a luxurious life nothing else.

And on another note Ashoka wasnt a Hindu

 

[PostColonial]

^Well Thank You Shah Jahan, for your amazing planning and vision to built a potential tourist trap that would earn profits after 400 years.

If by invaders you mean British, then yes I agree. But under Mughals this country (and that includes Pakistan and Bangladesh mind you) fell behind both Europe and China in development.

Yes Ashoka was buddhist. Your point?

 

[Spring Onion]

^Well Thank You Shah Jahan, for your amazing planning and vision to built a potential tourist trap that would earn profits after 400 years.

If by invaders you mean British, then yes I agree. But under Mughals this country (and that includes Pakistan and Bangladesh mind you) fell behind both Europe and China in development.

Yes Ashoka was buddhist. Your point?

The Brits or the Mughals or for that mattter central asian invaders, my point is and many sane Indians also agree the India was mainly developed by outsiders.


as far as the last line is conerned you got my point dint you ?


Anyway after 400 years or whatever but its a reality Taj mahal is a tourist spot which is earning you.

 

[toxic_pus]

India is earning huge revenue in terms of tourism from these places.

...and the point is?

On another note India was developed by invaders mostly.

...including that portion which is now Pakistan.

And yes we also agree that Mughals have only spent a luxurious life nothing else.

That is not true, but I realise you are having a Jana moment.

And on another note Ashoka wasnt a Hindu

You mean after he converted from Hinduism?

 

[toxic_pus]

The Brits or the Mughals or for that mattter central asian invaders, my point is and many sane Indians also agree the India was mainly developed by outsiders.

Yes of course. Nothing happened before the great Mughals. It was a land of savages and our autochthonous population used to roam this land in lion cloth, perhaps not even that.

as far as the last line is conerned you got my point dint you ?

AWWWW....another Jana moment.

Anyway after 400 years or whatever but its a reality Taj mahal is a tourist spot which is earning you.

Neighbours envy, owners pride

 

[PostColonial]

The Brits or the Mughals or for that mattter central asian invaders, my point is and many sane Indians also agree the India was mainly developed by outsiders.

"Many Sane Indians" Gosh I wonder how you manage to get by with such nonsense.

No, as I said, the Mughals contributed to making India one of the most backward places on earth. They didn't develop anything.

as far as the last line is conerned you got my point dint you ?

No I'm sorry I don't. Do elaborate your "point".

Anyway after 400 years or whatever but its a reality Taj mahal is a tourist spot which is earning you.

Absolutely. As I said, all Indians are deeply thankful to Shah Jahan for his ultra-mega-long term planning.

 

[TopCat]

Yes India was in its peak under Buddhist rule, first Gupta Dynasty and gained its reputation under Pala dynasty who spread the kingdom from Indonesia to Afganistan and people as far as from Japan could know Pala dyanasty and come to India for knowledge and education.
But as the buddhist declined the Hindus took over and only the surviving buddhist throughout the hindu rules later only converted to Islam specially in eastern india where most of the converts were buddhist.
So in a sense most of good rulers of India were the same group of people, first as a Buddhist then as a Muslim.

 

[Spring Onion]

Yes of course. Nothing happened before the great Mughals. It was a land of savages and our autochthonous population used to roam this land in lion cloth, perhaps not even that.



AWWWW....another Jana moment.



Neighbours envy, owners pride

no dear we dont envoy for us its enough it was built by a Muslim ruler who ruled over India.

My comment was in response to your Indian countryman who was making fun of Taj Mahal whereas the entire India takes pride it in it.

Another matter that fundamentalist Hindus tried to term it once Hindu temple lolzz

and hey please do take some time to study the history most of the development took place during outsiders' rule in India and indeed it inculdes present day Pakistan too so dont loose heart

 

[Spring Onion]

"Many Sane Indians" Gosh I wonder how you manage to get by with such nonsense.

.

hey what ? you think calling Indians sane is "nonesense"???

 

[Spring Onion]

Yes India was in its peak under Buddhist rule, first Gupta Dynasty and gained its reputation under Pala dynasty who spread the kingdom from Indonesia to Afganistan and people as far as from Japan could know Pala dyanasty and come to India for knowledge and education.
But as the buddhist declined the Hindus took over and only the surviving buddhist throughout the hindu rules later only converted to Islam specially in eastern india where most of the converts were buddhist.
So in a sense most of good rulers of India were the same group of people, first as a Buddhist then as a Muslim.

well Indians will still not accept it. They will link it with hinduism