Most people on this board are writing without a knowledge of history.
After Ashoka the person who was ruler of such a large territory was Aurangzeb. - If Aurangzeb was a cruel leader than so was Ashoka - Ashoka killed hundreds and thousands of people in his battles. - There was justice during Auranzeb's time. If he was anti-Hindu How come many of his advisors were Hindus - Aurangzeb had the practice of widows being burned banned. - Aurangzeb did not use public money for his personal needs. - Some Hindus complain about him implementing Jizya (a tax on non-Muslims). But this is used instead of the draft and forcing him to join the army. Moreover Aurangzeb removed over 50 taxes that were previously taken from people. Muslims had to pay Zakat and Ushar tax which non-Muslims did not have to. - If he was anti-Hindu how come except a few all Hindu temples were untouched and their worshippers allowed to pray in peace. - The few temples that were attcked were 1) due to rebellion and 2)in one case priests from a temple kidnapped and killed some princesses who had come to pray. Aurangzeb at the request of the Raja sent Hindu troops to punish the kidnappers.
Overall Aurangzeb was one of the greatest rulers India has seen.
RE:Ashoka & Aurangzeb
by mandook on Mar 07, 2008 08:24 PM Permalink
hey, on, you stupid guy, you dont know what is truth and what is false. You have no brains, you have to be the right hand person for people like the cruel Aurangazeb, Bin Laden, etc.
