Latest / Aurangzeb: The Emperor Who Expanded and Broke the Mughal Empire — Fexingo History / Aurangzeb's Kashmir: The Emperor Who Destroyed a Paradise
Transcript
- Lucas: So, we've talked a lot about Aurangzeb's wars in the Deccan, his policies against the Sikhs, his jizya tax. But there's one region we haven't really touched on yet: Kashmir. And it's a fascinating case because it shows a different side of Aurangzeb's rule — how his religious orthodoxy collided with a place that had a very long tradition of syncretism and coexistence. Luna: Kashmir? I thought that was more of a peaceful region under the Mughals. Lucas: It was — for a long time. Under Akbar and Jahangir, Kashmir was like a pleasure garden. They built beautiful terraced gardens, the Shalimar Bagh, the Nishat Bagh. They loved the cool summers, the saffron fields. But Aurangzeb was not a pleasure-seeker. He visited Kashmir only once, in 1685, and he came as a conqueror, not a tourist. Luna: What happened on that visit? Lucas: Well, he arrived with a huge army — partly because he was also campaigning against the Yusufzai Afghans nearby. But once he was in Kashmir, he turned his attention inward. He was disturbed by what he saw: the Kashmiri Pandits, the Hindu Brahmin community, were not just tolerated — they actually held high positions in the Mughal administration. They had a long history of scholarship and influence. Aurangzeb decided that had to change. Lucas: One of his first acts was to order the destruction of the Martand Sun Temple, an ancient temple built in the 8th century by the Karkota dynasty. It was a massive structure — 220 feet long, with 84 columns. Aurangzeb's soldiers dismantled it stone by stone. Luna: Wait, they destroyed the Sun Temple? That's one of the most famous temples in Kashmir. Lucas: Yes, and it's still in ruins today. But the destruction wasn't just about the temple itself. It was a signal: the old ways of tolerance were over. Aurangzeb then imposed a series of restrictions on the Pandits. They were banned from riding horses, from wearing fine clothes, from carrying weapons. And then came the forced conversions. Luna: So he tried to convert them all? Lucas: Not all at once, but systematically. The local governor, a man named Saif Khan, was instructed to pressure the Pandits to convert to Islam. Those who refused faced heavy taxes, loss of jobs, and sometimes violence. Many families fled to the mountains or to the Punjab. The chronicler Muhammad Azam, in his book 'Waqiat-i-Kashmir', recorded how hundreds of families left Srinagar, their homes abandoned, their temples closed. Luna: That's awful. But were there any resistances from within Kashmir itself? Lucas: There was, and it came from an unexpected quarter — the Sufis. Kashmir had a strong Sufi tradition, and many Sufi orders had historically been very tolerant, even incorporating Hindu yogic practices. Aurangzeb's orthodoxy clashed with that. One particular Sufi saint, Sheikh Yaqub Sarfi, openly criticized Aurangzeb's policies. Lucas: Sheikh Yaqub was a respected figure — he had studied in Bukhara, he was a scholar of hadith. He believed that Aurangzeb's harsh treatment of non-Muslims was un-Islamic, that the Prophet Muhammad had said 'there is no compulsion in religion'. He wrote letters to the emperor, arguing that the forced conversions were wrong. Luna: Did Aurangzeb listen to him? Lucas: Not at all. In fact, Aurangzeb had him arrested and put in chains. Sheikh Yaqub died in prison a few years later. His tomb is still in Srinagar today — people visit it as a symbol of resistance against religious intolerance. Luna: So the Sufis, who were usually seen as allies of the Mughals, were also targeted? Lucas: Exactly. Aurangzeb didn't tolerate dissent even from within Islam. He wanted a uniform, orthodox version of the faith. And Kashmir's syncretic culture was a threat to that. So he set out to break it. Lucas: There's also a lesser-known story about the Kashmiri Pandits and their sacred texts. During this period, many Pandits tried to hide their manuscripts — copies of the Vedas, the Upanishads, the great epic 'Rajatarangini', which is the history of Kashmir written by Kalhana in the 12th century. Some buried them in clay pots, others smuggled them out. A few were burned by Aurangzeb's soldiers. Luna: So they were trying to destroy the cultural memory of Kashmir. Lucas: Yes, that's a good way to put it. And the effects were long-lasting. Many Pandits never returned. The ones who stayed were reduced to a second-class status. The pluralistic fabric that had defined Kashmir for centuries — where Hindus and Muslims worshipped at the same Sufi shrines, where the local language had words from both Sanskrit and Persian — that fabric began to tear. Lucas: Historians still debate how much of this was Aurangzeb's personal policy and how much was driven by local factors. But one thing is clear: the Kashmir campaign was part of a broader pattern. Wherever Aurangzeb went, he tried to impose a uniform Islamic order. And Kashmir, with its unique identity, was a prime target. Luna: It's interesting — we think of Kashmir as this beautiful, peaceful place, but its history is so violent. Lucas: It is. And that violence didn't end with Aurangzeb. The seeds of conflict he planted — the resentment among the Pandits, the destruction of temples, the forced conversions — those seeds would grow into larger struggles in the centuries to come. Even today, the legacy of Aurangzeb's policies in Kashmir is a deeply painful one. Luna: So this episode really shows how Aurangzeb's drive for religious purity ended up destroying one of the most diverse and tolerant regions of his empire. Lucas: Exactly. And it's a reminder that empires are not just about conquest and taxes — they're also about culture, about how people live together. Aurangzeb's failure in Kashmir was a failure of that vision. He couldn't see that the strength of the Mughal Empire had always been its ability to absorb and respect difference. By trying to erase that difference, he weakened the empire itself. Luna: And it makes you wonder — what might have been different if he had taken a different approach? Lucas: That's a question that haunts the history of South Asia. But for now, let's leave it there. Next time, we'll explore another corner of Aurangzeb's empire that we haven't touched yet — maybe the rebellions of the Jats or the Rajputs. There's always more to uncover.