The Rise and Fall of the Mughal Legacy: Akbar's Enlightenment vs. Aurangzeb's Orthodoxy

If history teaches us anything, it is that tolerance is paramount. A nation governed by respect inspires a patriotic people who will live and die for a noble cause. A nation ruled by instability and intolerance will respond in kind—call it cause and effect, if you will.

Akbar became "Akbar the Great" by being a benevolent autocrat. He was tolerant, yet not weak; clever, yet not blindingly arrogant—at least not early on. He excelled in both warfare and statecraft, the foremost qualities an emperor must possess.

Most of the citizens under his rule were Hindus, and the Rajputs were among his closest allies. In contrast, Aurangzeb, although he did retain some Hindu nobility in his administration, alienated more than he gained. If I may speak casually, he ruined the legacy his grandfather built.

Let us examine what each emperor did to better understand the failure of Aurangzeb’s rule.

1. Tolerance vs. Intolerance

Akbar invited scholars of multiple religions—Hinduism, Jainism, Christianity, and Islam—to his palace for disputations at the Ibadat Khana. He eliminated the jizya tax and wed a Hindu Rajput princess illustriously named Mariam-uz-Zamani (commonly called Jodha Bai).

Aurangzeb, who had an orthodox disposition, directed the destruction of a number of Hindu temples. Some of them are:

Kashi Vishwanath Temple (Varanasi, 1669)

Kesava Deo Temple (Mathura, 1670)

Somnath Temple (Gujarat, 1706)

Vishwanath Temple (Jhain, near Jaipur)

He also prohibited Hindu holidays such as Holi and Diwali in some areas and reinstituted the jizya tax.

2. The Rebirth and Death of the Jizya Tax

Akbar removed the jizya tax in 1564, acknowledging the fact that most of his subjects were Hindus. This action instilled loyalty and encouraged integration within the empire.

Aurangzeb revived the tax in 1679, more than a century of religious tolerance having passed. Most Hindus, used to a more liberal world, viewed this as a backward step, creating a discord.

3. Inclusive Rule vs. Marginalization

Akbar appointed Rajput rulers such as Raja Man Singh to positions of importance in the Mughal government and army. Man Singh was one of the nine gems (Navaratnas) of Akbar's court and commanded more than sixty-seven battles for the empire.

Aurangzeb deposed numerous important Hindu and Sikh officers. His execution of Guru Tegh Bahadur, the ninth Sikh Guru, for not converting to Islam, ignited widespread indignation and rebellion. This rebellion laid foundation to the sikh empire in early 17th century

4. Cultural Appreciation vs. Cultural Suppression

Akbar was a patron of the arts. He commissioned illustrated works like the Akbarnama by Abul Fazl and constructed architectural wonders like Fatehpur Sikri, a mix of Hindu, Persian, and Islamic styles.

Aurangzeb prohibited music in his court and commanded the destruction of numerous temples. He even prevented his daughters from playing musical instruments—showing a sharp cultural turnaround.

5. Dynamic Rule vs. Chaotic Rule

Akbar created the mansabdari system, which was a ranking system of the army and the administration that guaranteed effective government and encouraged meritocracy.

Aurangzeb, though keeping the system, stretched the empire's army and treasury to their limits. Corruption pervaded, and the Deccan region was especially plagued by administrative apathy.

6. War and Peace vs. Constant Warfare

Akbar rarely employed warfare to win over the Rajputs but employed diplomacy instead. His conquests were well planned and only minimally destructive.

Aurangzeb had almost 30 years of extended warfare against the Marathas during the reigns of Shivaji and Sambhaji. These wars depleted the treasury and drained the army. He initiated wars against the Sikhs and Deccan Sultanates as well.

7. Intellectual Open-Mindedness vs. Orthodox Conservatism

Akbar promoted the translation of religious Hindu scriptures like the Mahabharata and Ramayana into Persian to facilitate understanding.

Aurangzeb shut off such intellectual opportunities. He prohibited Sufi music, circumscribed theological disputes, and imposed Hanafi Sunni orthodoxy, which suppressed cultural and religious pluralism.

8. Unity Through Inclusion vs. Division Through Favoritism

Akbar sought unity through inclusion by having individuals of different faiths and ethnicities in his bureaucracy and army. His inclusive measures ushered in stability and harmony.

Aurangzeb's discriminatory policies resulted in uprisings of the Marathas, Sikhs, Jats, and Rajputs. His period saw the decline of the Mughal Empire, which speeded up after his demise.

Final Thoughts: Akbar's rule was one of prosperity through tolerance and enlightenment, but Aurangzeb's was one of division, suppression, and endless war. Akbar constructed an empire through intelligent maneuvering and solidarity, while Aurangzeb's conservatism bred fissures into its very foundations. Let this be a lesson for generations to come: tolerance leads to harmony, while anarchy can reduce the greatest empire to rubble.

Sources 

• Elliott, Henry M. The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians (Vol. 4).

• Fisher, Michael H “Akbar and the Jesuits.” Journal of Asian Studies.

• Fisher, Michael H. A Clash of Cultures: Mughal India and European Trading Companies.

• Rizvi, S.A.A. Mughal India: Studies in Polity, Ideas, and Society.

• Richards, John F. The Mughal Empire. Cambridge University Press, 1993.

• Kumar, Raj. Essays on Mughal India.

• Habib, Irfan. The Agrarian System of Mughal India.

• Farooqi, Naimur Rahman. The Political and Administrative History of the Mughal Empire.

• Chandra, Satish. Medieval India: From Sultanate to the Mughals.

• Qureshi, I.H. The Administration of the Mughal Empire.