Why Even Muslim Scholars Opposed Aurangzeb’s Rule
We should not glorify historical figures blindly. Instead, we must assess them critically, using wisdom and justice.
History is often told in a way that glorifies certain figures while ignoring their flaws. One such figure is Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb, who is sometimes passionately defended by sections of the Muslim community.
However, even Muslim scholars and historians have criticized him for his harsh policies, which played a significant role in the decline of the Mughal Empire.
Aurangzeb’s Path to Power: A Brutal Struggle
Aurangzeb’s rise to the throne was marked by bloodshed. He killed his own brother, Dara Shikoh, and imprisoned his father, Shah Jahan, to take power.
This kind of ruthless behavior wasn’t unique to Aurangzeb—many Mughal and Ottoman rulers followed the “Takht Ya Taboot” (Throne or Coffin) philosophy, where they eliminated even their own family members to secure their rule.
However, from an Islamic perspective, this raises serious ethical concerns, as justice and righteousness are central to Islamic teachings.
The Sharifs of Mecca Rejected Aurangzeb’s Rule
After overthrowing Shah Jahan, Aurangzeb sought religious legitimacy from the Sharifs of Mecca, who were descendants of the Prophet Muhammad and custodians of Islam’s holiest sites.
However, they refused to endorse him, citing Islamic principles that prohibit unjustly overthrowing a rightful ruler. This rejection suggests that even in his time, Aurangzeb’s rule was seen as problematic by respected Islamic authorities.
Muslim Scholars Criticized Aurangzeb’s Policies
Many well-known Muslim scholars and historians have pointed out that Aurangzeb’s rigid and intolerant approach weakened the Mughal Empire rather than strengthening Islam.
Shah Waliullah Dehlavi (1703–1762), a prominent Islamic scholar admired Aurangzeb for his piety and commitment to Islamic governance but criticized his excessive military campaigns, neglect of administration, and failure to train his successors. He also pointed out that Aurangzeb’s rigid policies, including alienation of Hindus and Rajputs, weakened the empire. Shah Waliullah believed that while Aurangzeb upheld religious values, his lack of political flexibility and strategic governance contributed to the Mughal Empire’s decline after his death.
Syed Murtaza Husain (Student of Shibli Nomani) In Tarikh-e-Aurangzeb, he argued that Aurangzeb’s oppressive policies did more harm than good. His intolerance created divisions, leading to unrest and weakening the empire.
Ghulam Husain Khan (1727–1792) In Siyar-ul-Mutakhkhirin, Ghulam Husain Khan noted that Aurangzeb’s extreme religious policies alienated both Hindus and many Muslims. He linked this intolerance to instability and rebellion.
Maulana Shibli Nomani (1857–1914) A scholar who generally supported Islamic governance, Shibli Nomani still criticized Aurangzeb’s excessive conservatism. He argued that the emperor’s strict policies backfired, speeding up the empire’s decline.
Sufi Scholars Opposed Aurangzeb’s Religious Policies
Aurangzeb considered himself a devout follower of Sufism, but many respected Sufi scholars opposed his harsh and rigid rule.
Shaykh Muhammad Masum Sirhindi (d. 1668, Naqshbandi Sufi) Initially, he supported Aurangzeb but later criticized his authoritarian approach. He advised Aurangzeb to rule with justice instead of religious extremism, but his warnings were ignored.
Hazrat Shah Kalimullah Jahanabadi (1650–1729, Chishti Sufi) A key figure in the Chishti Sufi tradition, he emphasized love and tolerance over rigid religious laws. He openly disagreed with Aurangzeb’s extreme policies and promoted coexistence instead.
Lessons for Today’s Muslims and Hindus
We should not glorify historical figures blindly. Instead, we must assess them critically, using wisdom and justice.
Aurangzeb’s legacy is not a model of Islamic strength but a reminder of how intolerance and authoritarianism can lead to the downfall of even the most powerful empires.
For Muslims, true strength lies in justice, wisdom, and coexistence—not in defending rulers whose legacy is marked by division and controversy. It is more important to uphold Islamic values of patience, knowledge, and tolerance.
For Hindus, the rich history of Indian civilization should be a source of pride. India has endured and thrived for thousands of years because of its resilience, inclusivity, and wisdom. However, it is crucial not to let history be used to divide society further.
By taking a balanced view of the past, both Muslims and Hindus can work toward unity and mutual respect. Instead of clinging to divisive narratives, we should focus on building a future of understanding and harmony.
