It was shocking to read in the newspaper that “eminent” historians like Romila Thapar have left no stone unturned to prove how saintly the actually-psychpathic ruler Aurangzeb was. No wonder we have the Aurangzeb Road at the heart of Delhi! I always used to wonder why on earth we have a road named after this sick maniac.
During his rein of terror he targeted the Sikhs most severely and in fact I think he was the main reason why Sikhism consolidated itself as the primary opponent of the Mughal rule. He not only mercilessly executed Guru Tegh Bahadur (the 9th Sikh Guru) because the Guru stood by the Kashmiri Pandits, later on he was also instrumental in the killings of the 4 sons of Guru Gobind Singh, the 10th Guru.
He was most bigot of all the rulers. He brought back the laws of Shariya in all its severity and re-instated the Jizya — it was a tax you had to pay in order to live and earn a living as a non-Muslim. Aurengzeb wanted to purge India of all infidels (non-Muslims) and convert it into a land of Islam. He was repressive and, contrary to what our historians would have us believe, had no tolerance for other religions. He demolished famous Hindu temples to build mosques in there place. Hindu idols were placed in the steps of mosques so that Muslim pilgrims could tred upon them. He forced Brahmins to wear cow meat around their necks. So if he was tolerant and saintly, we must all be gods!
Even Jawaharlal Nehru considered Aurangzeb as a “bigot and an austere puritan” whose policies were instrumental in creating unease and dissent, and consequently, the dwonfall of the Mughal empire.
So why do our historians write all this bullshit about he being tolerant and secular? Romila Thapar, for instance, is known as a Marxist historian, and most Marxists are not interested in anything but their own agendas. They are not bothered about history, or even anthropological psychology. Interestingly, Stalin tried to annihilate the Muslims because communism and Muslims are totally opposite when it comes to religion: the communists abhore religion and the Muslims see nothing beyond religion. In the 1940′s, Stalin deported nearly all the 1.5-million Chechens to Siberian concentration camps, where 25% died. Two million other Soviet Muslims, including many Dagestanis, were also sent to Stalin’s death camps where they died of the Russian winter.
Anyway, coming back to India, why this twisting of history? As a scholar who spends years in research (and get paid for that), why would you present obscurantist facts and tarnish your image as a scholar? Are they being paid huge amounts of money? Are they politically motivated? Are they foreign-funded?
Last year I read this book by Arun Shourie titled Eminent Historians:Their Techniques, Their Line, Their Fraud in which he has tried to expose the nefarious nexus between the so-called secular-leftist historians who have been having a wild time distorting the historical facts. Although I believe historical facts should not be used to raise pointed fingers at different communities, the true knowledge is very important if you want to evolve as a mature civilization. It doesn’t pay to sweep everything under the carpet. History is an ideal tutor and if we don’t learn from it we keep on comitting the same mistakes again and again.
A suggestion to the Sikh community of Delhi: I think they should take the naming of a prominent road to Aurangzeb as an insult 
. How can the ruthless murderer of Guru Tegh Bahadur be revered in this humiliating manner? For all you know, in a few years you might even have an Osama Bin Laden road or a Maulana Masood Azhar University or Dawood Ibrahimabad.
