How Lebanon became a Muslim majority country overnight ?

 

How Lebanon became a Muslim majority country overnight ?

(Lessons Hindus can learn from the Lebanese Civil War

Unfinished Agendas of Political Islam – Lebanon)

Pankaj Saxena

It is not allowed for a Muslim to live in a country ruled by a non-Muslim. That is because non-Muslims are necessarily inferior to Muslims in the Islamic scheme of things. If they actually do they should strive to convert that country into a Muslim majority country.

Lebanon is a small country in West Asia on the Mediterranean coast. In 1970s, except Israel, it was the only non-Muslim majority country in the region. And it was also the only other democracy. And it was its democracy which ultimately led to its takeover by Muslims.

Lebanon is an ancient country mentioned in the Bible. Its Bekaa valley is famous as the quintessential mountainous terrain near the sea. Until 1975 Lebanon was what they meant by Levantine culture. Benign in weather and culture also. Good food, hospitality and diverse culture.

Beirut, its capital was called the Paris of the East. Despite being resource rich, it was always a great city because Lebanon is a part of the Levant, which connects Africa, Asia and Europe and so always on the trade crossroads of three continents making it rich and diverse.

Its cultural diversity was legendary. It was the only home to the Maronite Christians, an ancient branch of eastern Syrian Christianity which had been wiped out from its original home in Antioch (which is now a completely Muslim city in Turkey).

Lebanon was also home to the last of the Greek Catholics left in Asia. There are very few of them and the only culture they identify with is Orthodox. So it is a special group. It was also home to the last Greek Orthodox left in Asia after Turkey had cleansed them all.

After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Lebanon and Syria came became French colonies optimistically called as ‘Protectorates’. They were one country with a unified command. But by 1944 the decolonization era had begun and the French were preparing to leave the country.

At their independence the former French Mandate of Syria was divided into two independent countries with Lebanon as the Christian majority country and Syria as the Muslim majority country. Lebanon was a democracy while Syria was a dictatorship.

And as soon as Lebanon became independent, the neighboring Islamic countries set about for invading and turning it into an Islamic country by changing its demography. This is where we need to understand the refugee strategy of Islam.

Islam uses Muslim refugees as foot soldiers of Islamic expansion in non-Muslim countries. In a brilliant tactical maneuver, Islam has managed to turn even a great humanitarian crisis, like a civil war, or a plunging economy, into an instrument of Islamic expansion.

Even a civil war in a completely Islamic country is something that Islam turns into a vehicle of Islamic colonization of neighboring non-Muslim countries. The civil war displaces people in massive numbers with unspeakable atrocities and great human tragedy.

The tragedy is genuine but it is used for an ulterior motive. These refugees then flee outside the borders of the Islamic countries from where they come from: and they appeal to non-Muslim countries for asylum.

Many goals are achieved with this: first the refugees do get a better life in a democracy run by non-Muslim ethics and law. They enjoy all the fruits of a free country. And they get to further the cause of Islam, by increasing Muslim population in a non-Muslim country.

This is exactly what happened with an unsuspecting Christian majority in Lebanon in 1970-71. Jordan and Syria pushed the runt of their Muslim populations towards Lebanon, the only non-Muslim majority country in the region except Israel, changing its delicate demography.

Terrorist organizations (Shia & Sunni) encouraged Muslims to infiltrate key government institutions & start agitation to take control, but under the label of ‘Left’. Foot soldiers of Islamic terrorists in Lebanon became ‘leftist’, without having to do anything with the left.

Automatically the hapless majority Christians became ‘rightist’, for no reason. The terrorists knew that in a world which had just recovered from a World War started by a Nazi-fascist alliance would lap up anything and anyone going by the tag ‘leftist’.

This is exactly what happened. Global media demonized Christian ‘majority’ of Lebanon in rabid leftist swearology, calling them as fascists who were usurping the rights of the Muslim leftist minority. Muslims were depicted in terms designed to generate global sympathy.

The truth was that Christians were barely 52-54% by 1971 in Lebanon & they were being constantly invaded by Muslim refugees. The truth was that Lebanon had just a few lakh Christians while it was surrounded an ocean of 50 Islamic countries containing crores of Muslims.

So a ‘rightist’ Christian ‘majority’ of few lakh isolated Lebanese Christians was portrayed as the ‘oppressor’ against a rapidly increasing population of ‘leftist’ ‘oppressed’ Muslims who took benefit of trans-national networks of global Islam of a billion strong population.

The Muslims started taking city after city. First western Beirut, then Sidon, then Tyre. These ancient Christian cities were completely Islamized. The Muslims had now grown to around 44%. It is then that they started the Civil War.

Leftist historians still whitewash the Lebanese Civil War saying that it is the Christians who started it. (Just like in #NupurSharma case). But the Muslim attacks on Christians had become so frequent that the Christians had no option but to defend what was left.

As city after city was cleansed of Christians they started armed defense of their territories. Soon a full blown Civil War was upon them. The Christians were isolated militarily, geographically and ideologically with the world media still portraying them as aggressors.

And the Muslims were globally networked with all Islamic countries and had a geographical contiguity with a Muslim country Syria which was too willing to provide them with arms, terrorists and more Muslim refugees to further tilt the balance in Islam’s favor.

The Civil War lasted ten years till 1991 and by the time it ended the situation had reversed and Muslims had become majority and Christians had become minority. The situation is getting worse every year with Christians migrating to Americas every year.

Lebanon has now a 63% Muslim majority with current Islamic refugee crisis adding more trouble. Every year the Christians are fleeing to South America, seen as safe haven for them and the Hezbollah, as well as Sunni terrorist organizations are becoming stronger.

The outcome of the War was decided even before it officially started. A loose coalition of local Christian militias, beleaguered by the West, were no match against the well coordinated Muslims, backed by global Islamic community with a mission of conquering the world.

Post-war, Muslims forced Christian militias to give up arms while Islamic terrorist organizations like Hezbollah came to virtually rule the country and used it as a springing board of Iran to attack Israel. So did the Sunni terrorist organizations use Lebanon against Israel.

The lesson to learn here is this: no war with Islam is local. Islam always thinks globally. Local majority of non-Muslims means nothing, especially if you are in a geographical region surrounded by Muslim countries. Non-Muslims in such case are always minorities.

The Lebanon story has much to teach India. Our situations are frighteningly similar. India is a lone Hindu majority country surrounded by fundamentalist Islamic countries. Indian Muslims play victimhood as minority while coordinating with global Islam.

Indian Muslims align with the Left, while portray the Hindus as rightists. Global media, quite literally paid by Islamic countries and terrorist organizations demonize Hindus globally and spreads the myth of persecuted Muslim minority of India.

Hindus see the Hindu-Muslim problem as the local thing. While the Muslims are clear that they are fighting a global war of world conquest and domination by Islam and Muslims. Hindus are infighting while Muslims are united, just like Christians in Lebanon.

In Lebanon, Syria provided arms and terrorists and Jordan provided Muslim refugees. In India too, Pakistan provides arms and terrorists while Bangladesh provides us Muslim refugees. Pockets in India are now completely Islamic just like Lebanon.

If Hindus hope to survive as Hindus and preserve Hindu culture, civilization and the way of living, the case of Lebanon is a grim reminder and a potent warning about what lies ahead in the path.

Tomorrow we will listen to another such story.

Pioneer of Shuddhi reformation in Modern India: Swami Dayanand Saraswati

 

 

Pioneer of Shuddhi reformation in Modern India: Swami Dayanand Saraswati

Swami Dayanand, the founder of the Arya Samaj pioneered the Shuddhi reformation movement in Modern India. For centuries we had completely forgotten the concept of Shuddhi. With the decline of Buddhism, the country came under Muslim rule. Muslim rulers used force, persuasion, and all other means to convert non-Muslims to the Islamic folds. The main reason for the conversion to Islam was forcible conversion, war, natural calamities, massive destruction of the seats of learning, rapid decline in the Gurukula system of education, the lure of high posts, or feudatory gains, polygamy, patronage by the Muslim rulers and never to forget the proselytizing mentality of Islamic preachers, etc.

Along with them the European powers such as the French and the British also ran in for the race to acquire a political base in India in order to secure their trade. This period of political instability was one of the most crucial phases in the social history of India. Confronted with rampant immorality, tyranny, and corruption, the Indian society degenerated to such an extent that religious bigotry, superstition, irrational and inhuman beliefs and practices such as sati, infanticide, superstitions, animal sacrifice, and the caste system became cardinal principles of the Indian value system. Such politically divided, socially degenerated, and economically exploited Hindu Society steeped into ignorance. In such a dreaded situation it was a major uphill task to reform the downtrodden condition of Hindu society to its previous glory and status of being the world.

Swami Dayanand decided to liberate Hindu society from this ignorance. He advocated molding and recreating a new dynamic and liberated society by demolishing the walls of separatism, allowing social mobility vertically, and dissolving social rigidity. Under such circumstances, it was natural for Dayanand to reform and consolidate Hindu society by establishing Shuddhi, a process of ritual purification to destroy the walls of hierarchical separatism and imparting man active and cosmic qualities to develop his capabilities.

Swami Dayanand was well aware that for centuries a large number of races of peoples of foreign origin had been continually coming to India before the Muslims, and were absorbed into Hinduism. Basing the assertion on a popular Vedic injunction Krinvanto Vishvamaryam i.e. ‘make the whole world Aryan', Swami Ji argued that the ancient Aryans had a tremendous zeal for Aryanizing people as they did with the Greeks, the Sakas, the Kushans, the Huns, and various others. Ancient texts like Dewala Smriti and Agni Purana refer to the existence of the institution of conversion under the name Vratyastoma, but it was with the advent of Islam the reverse process started and the conversion of the Hindus began. Gradually as the caste system became rigid, there appeared an unwillingness to take the lost brothers back into Hinduism. The rigidity was so hard that we can understand with the help of two examples.

‘The younger Sheshadari in Bombay was pronounced to have lost the status of a Hindu because he had lived for a day or two with his minor elder brother whom the missionaries had succeeded in converting to Christianity.’

    ‘Even leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Mahadev Gobind Ranade might have been lost to Hinduism in the latter half of the nineteenth century if they had not undergone purificatory ceremonies. Their sin had been that they had allowed the Christian organizer of a prize-giving function in the Mission School to offer them cups of tea; they had not touched the cup much less partaken the tea in it.’

The Arya Patrika refers to many cases with a view to establish that a large number of Hindus were driven into the fold of Christianity and Islam. Because at some occasions they inadvertently or by the force of circumstances became victims of petty pollution and were excommunicated. In view of this, it was argued that almost all religions of the world keep their doors open to 'newcomers' to their faith. Islam and Christianity were proselytizing religions in India and Hinduism were fast losing some of its members to both.

In the last quarter of the 19th century, Swami Dayanand stressed the revival of the ancient Vratyastoma under the guise of Shuddhi, a term so easily intelligible to a man in the street. It has gone a great way towards the regeneration, and re-admission into the Vedic Dharma, of thousands and thousands of such Hindus, whose ancestors under the stress of circumstances in centuries gone by, had to take shelter under the banners of Islam and Christianity. It is believed that the question of Shuddhi for the first time arose during Swami Dayanand's visit to Punjab in 1877. In Jullundur, six months after his arrival in Punjab, he reconverted a Hindu who had become a Christian. His name was Kharak Singh, and he was born a Sikh then became a Hindu and was consequently baptized by Rev. Robert Clark of Amritsar. He became an Arya after meeting the Swami. One Ramsharan, a Brahman of Ludhiana, who was teaching in a Mission School and was about to be converted to Christianity, abandoned his idea after meeting Swami Dayanand. Later on, in Dehradun, in 1879, he reconverted a born Muslim, Muhammad Umar, giving him the name of Alakhdhari. Besides these individual cases, there are a few instances that establish that any person could be admitted to the fold of Hinduism if he promised to lead a life according to the dictates of the Vedas. Moreover, he, through his speeches, impressed many probable converts to Christianity to remain within the Hindu fold and in the process stemmed the tide of Christianity. At Amritsar, about 40 Hindu students under the influence of Christian propaganda had almost become unbaptized Christians, who on listening to Swami Dayanand's preaching did not convert to Christianity. There are instances showing that a few European Christians also adopted Hinduism under the influence of Swami Dayanand. For instance, John Montgomery Hamilton, a Police Inspector changed his name to Sukh Lal. Martin Luther, a teacher working in Christian Orphanage was also converted to Hinduism. A Christian lady with her two children was converted at Ajmer on August 26, 1883. The evidence of conversion during the lifetime of Swami Dayanand is few in number. It can be viewed as a humble beginning, a preparatory stage that lessened the sense of impotence, and signified a new world in which Hindus could fight to maintain themselves and their religion.

J.T.F. Jorden acknowledges the credit to Swami Dayanand, for proclaiming the principle that reconversion was the right procedure, a principle the Arya Samaj would later fully put into practice. From a principle, it developed into ever enlarging its scope and proliferating its dimensions. The Shuddhi, a process of purifying an individual and making him again acceptable to his caste fellows, was first realized to retain Hindus who had been converted to either Christianity or Islam. In due course of time, it was extended to those whose ancestors had been converted, and finally, to those who had never been Hindus at all and whose ancestors had not been Hindus thus giving Hinduism an institution of conversion that it had not traditionally possessed. Once it had become possible to purify a foreigner or a Hindu whose family had been converted centuries before, the Arya Samajist thought it prudent to purify the members of the outcastes and raise their status to the level of the caste Hindus. Surely, if one can purify an Englishman or an American, then one can purify a low caste. This concept of caste reform through Shuddhi came later and perhaps the full implications of it were never realized.

The Shuddhi was adopted seriously by his successors like Swami Shraddhanand, Lala Lajpat Rai, Bhai Parmanand, Veer Savarkar, etc. through platforms of Arya Samaj, Hindu Mahasabha leading to the movement of Hindu Sangthan. Swami Shraddhanand leads to Shuddhi of Malkans Neo Muslims living near Agra in thousands of numbers. His Shuddhi movement was opposed by Muslims and ultimately he had to sacrifice his life for his courage and mission. Veer Savarkar along with Bhai Parmanand started Shuddhi of Hindu prisoners in Andaman jail who were converted by Muslim officials of the jail. After his term in Jail, he continued his mission with full zeal.

It was welcomed by other eminent personalities like Swami Vivekananda. In his letter to Kahan Chand Verma (an Aryan Missionary from Lahore working in Kolkata) he congratulated him for Shuddhi of a Bengali Brahmin bringing him back to the folds of Hinduism from Christianity.

The Shuddhi movement will ever remain as an eternal monument of Swami Dayananda's foresight and his invaluable services to Hindus as a great social reformer.

Vivek Arya

Guru Arjan Singh and his martyrdom

  

Guru Arjan Singh and his martyrdom

 

Dr. Vivek Arya

 

Guru Arjan Singh was fifth Guru and he was credited for building Hari Mandir, Amritar Sarovar and compilation of Adi Granth. After the death of Akbar Jahangir and Prince Khusrau were having contest for throne. Prince Khusrau while visiting Lahore visited Guru Arjan Singh. Guru helped him when he was in bad condition. This became thorn in the flesh for Jahangir.

 

 Shaikh Ahmad Sarhindi advisor to Jahangir incited him against Guru Arjan when he halted at Sarhind in pursuit of Khusrau. Shaikh Farid Bukhari was leading the vanguard of the army which was pursuing the Prince. He was the first leader to know about Khusrau's visit to the Guru. He declared that the Guru should have captured him and ought to have handed him over to the Emperor. He therefore considered the Guru a rebel. Jahangir also took the same view. He wrote in his autobiography:

 

"A Hindu named Arjan lived at Goindwal on the bank of river Beas in the garb of a Pir and Shaikh. As a result many of the simpleminded Hindus as well as ignorant and foolish Muslims had been persuaded to adopt his ways and manners, and he had raised aloft the standard of sainthood and holiness. He was called Guru. From all sides cowboys and idiots became his fast followers. This business had been flourishing for three or four generations. For a long time it had been in my mind to put a stop to this vain affair (dukan e-bâtil) or to bring him into the fold of Islam. In these days when Khusrau passed along this road, this foolishly insignificant fellow (mardak-emajhul) proposed to wait on him. Khusrau happened to halt at the place where he lived. He came and met him. He discussed several matters with him and made on his forehead a finger-mark in saffron. In the terms of Hindus it is called Qashqa and is considered propitious."

 

In pursuit of Khusrau Jahangir halted at Goindwal while his army had gone ahead

to capture Khusrau. Jahangir writes:

 

"I call God to witness that while at Goindwal, at this perilous crisis, I

experienced some strong forebodings that Khusrau was coming to my presence."

Just then the news came that royal forces were victorious and Khusrau had been

taken prisoner.Khusrau was arrested on the eastern bank of river Chenab on April 26, 1606. He was produced before Jahangir on May 1 and was partially blinded. The Emperor then summoned Guru Arjan to Lahore. The Guru had realized that being surrounded by enemies on all sides his end was near.

 

Jahangir asked him why he had helped Khusrau. The Guru replied that he gave him

some money for his journey and not to help him in rebellion against him. He was

in a wretched condition. He had to show him some consideration out of regard for

Emperor Akbar who had been very kind to him. Heartlessness and ingratitude were

opposed to the principles of Guru Nanak's house. Jahangir did not feel satisfied. He wanted to punish him with death. He was given two options either to pay fine of two lakh or face death.

 

The Sikhs of Lahore showed willingness to raise subscriptions to pay the fine.

The Guru issued strict injunctions not to do so.

 

 Jahangir writes:

 

 "I ordered  that he should be summoned. His houses, camps and sons were given over to Murtza Khan. His property and cash were confiscated. I issued instructions that he should be put to death by torture."

 

The Guru was imprisoned in the Lahore Fort. May-June are the hottest months

there. He was chained to a post in an open place exposed to the sun from morning

to evening. Below his feet a heap of sand was put which burnt like a furnace.

Boiling water was poured on his naked body at intervals. His body was covered

with blisters all over. In this agony the Guru used to utter Terä kiya mitha läge

Nam padarath Nanak mänge

 

[Whatever you ordain appears sweet. I supplicate for the gift of Name.]

 

The Guru suffered from 'heat apoplexy.' Sewing up political prisoners in fresh

hides of animals seems to be a general practice in those days. A month earlier

two main supporters of Khusrau had been treated similarly. Husain Beg was sewn

in a fresh ox hide and Abdur Rahim in the green skin of an ass. The same

punishment was now proposed for the Guru. When the raw hide of a cow was brought before him, he shuddered at its sight. The Guru asked permission to bathe in the Ravi as he did not want to die unclean. He was sent there with a strong escort, but the swift current owing to the melting of snow carried away his weak and emaciated body. This took place on 30 May, 1606. The Guru was only 43 years old. His smadhi was later on erected at the site on the bank of river Ravi opposite to the Fort of Lahore.

 

Shaikh Ahmad of Sarhind, who was for-most in advising cruel punishment for Guru expressed utmost delight at Guru Arjan's murder. In a letter written to Shaikh Farid Bukhari entitled Murtza Khan, the Governor of Panjab, he said:

 

“The execution at this time of the accursed Kafir of Goindwal with whatever

motive . . . is an act of the highest grace for the followers  of Islam. He

added that the Hindus should be treated as dogs. Jazia should be imposed upon

them and cow slaughter should be allowed in the open.”

 

Readers are wiser enough to decide the lesson from the great sacrifice of the Guru Arjan Dev.

 

[This article is based on book Hitsory of the Sikhs by Hari Ram Gupta Vol 1 p. 148-153]

Aurangzeb and his religious policies: Take home lesson

Aurangzeb and his religious policies: Take home lesson

Dr Vivek Arya

Akbaruddin Owaisi's visit to Aurangzeb’s tomb at Khuldabad in Maharashtra's Aurangabad district has brought the historical figure into the news again.

Owaisi once issued a controversial statement “remove police for fifteen minutes, we will teach Hindus.” Owaisi Brothers have been seen as competing with other Muslim leaders in spreading hatred against Hindus, and wanting to project themselves as 20th century Jinnah.

Why they want to align themselves with the image of Aurangzeb is a natural question? The answer lies in the religious policies of Aurangzeb.

Aurangzeb was a true believer in the Islamic theory of Jihad. According to Islamic theology, a true believer’s highest duty is to follow in the path of God, by waging war against infidel lands (Dar-ul-harb) until they become a part of the realm of Islam (Dar-ul-Islam) and the people are converted into ‘true believers’.

Aurangzeb’s reputation suffered greatly in the Muslim world after he executed all his brothers and their sons and for imprisoned his father. To combat this image he became a ruthless puritan who took on the aim of restoring Islam to its original glory.

In the beginning of his reign Aurangzeb ordered “the local officers in every town and village of Orissa from Katak to Medinipur”, to pull down all temples, including even clay huts, built during the last 10 or 12 years, and to allow no old temple to be repaired. He then proceeded to demolish many other Hindu temples in the province.

Aurangzeb decided to use all the resources of a vast empire in suppressing Hinduism and converting people to Islam. During his viceroyalty of Gujarat in 1644, he desecrated the recently built Hindu Temple of Chintaman in Ahmadabad by killing a cow in it and then turned the building into a Mosque.

In 1661-62 a big temple was demolished at Mathura and a Jama Masjid was erected in its place in the heart of Hindu population. From April, 1665, Hindus were charged double the customs duty of that paid by Muslims on all articles brought for sale. In May 1667, Muslims were exempted from payment of customs duty altogether, while Hindus had to pay the old rate of five per cent.

In 1668 Hindu fairs and festivals were stopped. On April 9, 1669, a general order applicable to all parts of the Mughal Empire was issued “to demolish all the schools and temples of the infidels and to put down their religious teaching”.

In January, 1670, the biggest temple of Keshav Rae at Mathura was destroyed and the city was named Islamabad.

The destruction of Hindu places of worship was one of the chief duties of the Muhtasibs (Censors of Morals) who were appointed in all parts of the empire. Hindus employed in public services, including clerks and accountants, were dismissed in 1671. The post of Qanungo (insert meaning here) could be retained by a Hindu only if they embraced Islam. Hindus who became Muslims received stipends, rewards, government jobs, release from jails, right to ancestral property and may other privileges.

The new converts were paraded through the streets and bazars, made to ride on elephants followed by bands and flags as a show of Islamic superiority. Jizya was charged from all Hindus from April 2, 1679. Many Hindus, unable to pay the heavy taxes, converted to Islam to obtain relief from the insults of the debt collectors.

In June 1680, the temples of Amber, the capital of Jaipur State, the most loyal Hindu State, were demolished. In March 1695, all the Hindus except Rajputs, were banned from riding on elephants, horses and in palanquins. They were also prohibited from carrying arms.

Syad Muhammad Latifs writes:

“He discouraged the teaching of the Hindus, burnt to the ground the great Pagoda near Delhi, and destroyed the temple of Bishnath at Benares, and the great temple of Dera Kesu Rai at Mathura, said to have been built by Raja Narsingh Deo, at a cost of thirty-three lakhs of rupees. The gilded domes of this temple were so high that they could be seen from Agra 54 kms distant. On the site of the ruined temple, he built a vast mosque at a great cost. The richly decorated idols of the temples were removed to Agra and placed beneath the steps leading to the mosque of Nawab Begum. The name Mathura was changed into Islamabad, and was so written in all correspondence and spoken by the people. Aurangzeb had resolved that the belief in one God and the Prophet should be, not the prevailing, but the only religion of the empire of Hindustan. He issued mandates to the viceroys and governors of provinces to destroy pagodas and idols throughout his dominions. About three hundred temples in various parts of Rajputana were destroyed and their idols broken. The emperor appointed mullahs, with a party of horse attached to each, to check all ostentatious display of idol worship, and, sometime afterwards, he forbade fairs on Hindu festivals, and issued a circular to all governors and men in authority prohibiting the employment of Hindus in the offices of state immediately under them, and commanding them to confer all such offices on Mahomedans only. About the year 1690, the emperor issued an edict prohibiting Hindus from being carried in palanquins or riding on Arab horses. All servants of the state were ordered to embrace the Mahomedan religion, under pain of dismissal, those who refused were deprived of their posts. A large number of jogis, sanyasis and other religious men were driven out of the king's dominions. The emperor reduced the duty on merchandise belonging to Mahomedans to one half the amount paid by Hindus, and remitted a number of other obnoxious taxes. Following the tradition of his house, he, in 1661, married his son, Moazzam, to the daughter of Raja Rup Singh. In the 22nd year of his reign, he renewed the Jazia, or poll-tax, on Hindus, throughout his dominions. The Hindus of Delhi gathered in large numbers beneath the jharoka window, on the banks of the river, and implored his majesty to remit the obnoxious tax; but the emperor was inexorable. The Hindus adopted the expedient of closing the shops in the city, and all business came to a standstill. They thronged the bazars from the palace to the grand mosque, one Friday, with the object of seeking relief. The crowd increased every moment, and the king's equipage was interrupted at every step. He stopped for a while to hear them, but the multitude held their ground. At length under orders from the emperor, war elephants were directed against the mob, and, the retinue forcing its way through, numbers were trodden to death by horses and elephants. After this the Hindus submitted without further demur”.

Conversion of Hindus to Islam was in full swing. Bakhtawar Khan states that Aurangzeb himself administered Kalima to prominent persons and adorned them with Khilats with his own hands.

The persecution of Hindus led to revolts by The Jats, Sainamis, Sikhs, Rajputs and Maratha.

Gokal, a Jat of Tilpat, revolted against the bigoted governor of Mathura, Abdu Nabi and shot him dead in May, 1669. Aurangzeb sent a strong force against him. After fierce resistance Gokal was defeated and hacked to pieces. Women from his family were given away to Muslims. Five thousand Jats were killed and 7,000 were taken prisoners.

Satnamis lived in and around Narnaul. Though they dress like faqirs, most of followed agriculture or small capital trade. One day in 1672 a Mughal soldier picked up a quarrel with a Satnami and broke his head with his baton. Other Satnamis beat the soldier in return. The local officer sent a party of footmen to punish the Satnamis, who came together in retaliation, seized their arms and drove them away. About 5,000 Satnamis continued to repulse troops sent by local officers. The rebels plundered Narnaul and demolished mosques. Aurangzeb sent a artillery of 10,000 strong and after an obstinate battle, two thousand of the Satnamis fell on the battlefield. The rest were slain in the pursuit that followed and the Satnamis were wiped out, without a trace.

Aurangzeb dealt with the Sikhs in a similar manner. In November, 1675, Guru Tegh Bahadur was called upon to embrace Islam, and on his refusal he was beheaded. His companions were cruelly murdered. The resistance against the Mughals gave an opportunity to Son of Guru Tegh Bahadur, Guru Govind Rai to transform the Sikhs into Khalsa Army. The establishment of Khalsa army and their struggle against Islam wiped out the Islamic rule form Punjab forever.

In December, 1678, Maharaja Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur passed away. Aurangzeb immediately proceeded to annex his kingdom to the Mughal Empire and went to Ajmer in January, 1679. Jaswant Singh's two widows gave birth to sons on their way back at Lahore. One of them died soon afterwards. The other child, Ajit Singh, was detained at Delhi to be brought up in the imperial harem. “The throne of Jodhpur was offered to Ajit on condition of his turning Muslim. On the Rani's refusal, Aurangzeb ordered them to be taken under a strong escort to the prison fortress of Nurgarh.”

Before the Mughal troops could arrive, their residence in Delhi was besieged by Raghu Nath, a noble of Jodhpur, with one hundred devoted soldiers. There were a few Mughal troopers guarding the mansion. In the melee, Durga Das slipped out with Ajit and the Ranis and rode away direct for Marwar. Jodhpur and all the great towns in the plain were pillaged, the temples were torn down and mosques erected on their sites.

The annexation of Marwar was followed by the conquest of Mewar. Aurangzeb's artillery defeated Maharana Raj Singh of Udaipur. Chitor was seized and 63 temples in the town were razed to the ground. At Udaipur 173 temples were demolished.

Aurangzeb then turned his attention towards the Marathas. He reached Aurangabad on March 22 1682, never to return to the north, and died at the same place 25 years later.

The great Shivaji had passed away at the age of 53 on April 4, 1680. His eldest son, Shambhuji, succeeded him. On February 1, 1689, he was captured by Aurangazeb and dragged out by his long hair.

Twenty-five of his leading chiefs along with their wives and daughters were also captured. Shambhuji and his Prime Minister Kavikalash were dressed as buffoons with long fool's caps and bells placed on their heads, mounted on camels, and brought to Bahadurgarh with drums beating and trumpets pealing. Hundreds of thousands of spectators lined the roads to gaze at Shambhuji. Thus degraded, the captives were slowly paraded through the entire camp and finally brought to Aurangzeb who was sitting in full durbar for the occasion.

Shambhuji did not bow before the Emperor though pressed hard by the courtiers to do so. He was immediately blinded and the tongue of Kavikalash was cut off. They were tortured for a fortnight. On March 11, 1689, their limbs were hacked to pieces, and dogs fed on their flesh. Their heads were fixed on spears and exhibited in all the major towns and cities of the Deccan with the beat of drums and blowing of trumpets. Aurangzeb then seized the surviving widows of Shivaji, wives of Shambhuji and of his younger brother Raja Ram and their sons and daughters including seven-year-old Shahu.

With no proper leader, hundreds of Maratha chiefs at the head of their own small bands began to harass the Mughals anywhere and everywhere. It became a people's war. Aurangzeb and his generals could not be present at all places. The emperor had to face an enemy all pervasive from Bombay to Madras across the Indian Peninsula, elusive as the wind, without any headman or stronghold whose capture would naturally result in the extinction of their power.

The Empire's leading chiefs and men suffered terribly. Porters disappeared, elephants and horses died of hunger and overwork, scarcity of grain was ever present in his camps. The endless war in the Deccan exhausted his treasury, the Government was bankrupt, and the soldiers starving from arrears of pay mutinied.

The Marathas were supreme. They plundered Mughal territory. Their power increased under the regime of Rajaram, and after his demise, his widow Tarabai became their leader. The detritus of the Deccan war which raged intensely for nearly twenty-years, was one hundred thousand soldiers and three times that number of horses, elephants, camels and oxen on the Mughals side, every single year.

Aurangzeb, a man who once ruled as an unchallenged Emperor from Jamrud to Cuttack was watched the destruction of his kingdom through his old eyes. He became so devastated that he confessed to his son Azam, in February 1707

“I came alone and I go as a stranger. I do not know who I am, nor what I have been doing.”

Aurangzeb’s Jihad ended, not in a glorified Islamic nation but a long-drawn-out war with no winners or losers. Peace eluded him till the very end, with records indicating that came to regret the endless destruction.

Perhaps then, one wonders, the true lesson that we are to learn from Aurangzeb’s bloody conquests, is that violence against and the desecration of a people will never end in the way we expect. So, is Aurangzeb’s policy truly the answer?

[This article is based on book History of the Sikhs, The Sikh gurus 1469-1708, Volume 3 by Hari Ram Gupta published from Munshi Ram Manoharlal]