Editing Aurangzeb (section)

===Taxation policy===
Shortly after coming to power, Aurangzeb remitted more than 80 long-standing taxes affecting all of his subjects.<ref name="Pirbhai-2009">{{Cite book|last=Pirbhai|first=M. Reza|url=https://brill.com/view/title/17049|title=Reconsidering Islam in a South Asian Context|date=2009|publisher=Brill|isbn=978-90-474-3102-2|location=|pages=67–116|chapter=Chapter Two : Indicism, Intoxication And Sobriety Among The 'Great Mughals'|doi=10.1163/ej.9789004177581.i-370.14|chapter-url=https://brill.com/view/book/9789047431022/Bej.9789004177581.i-370_004.xml}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Chandra|first=Satish|date=September 1969|title=Jizyah and the State in India during the 17th Century|journal=Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient|volume=12|issue=3|pages=322–340|doi=10.2307/3596130|jstor=3596130|issn=0022-4995}}</ref>[[File:Aurangzeb holding a flywhisk (6124544937) (cropped).jpg|thumb|right|upright|Aurangzeb holding a flywhisk]]
In 1679, Aurangzeb chose to re-impose ''[[jizya]]'', a military tax on non-Muslim subjects in lieu of military service, after an abatement for a span of hundred years, in what was critiqued by many Hindu rulers, family-members of Aurangzeb, and Mughal court-officials.<ref name="Truschke-2017">{{Cite book|last=Truschke|first=Audrey|url=https://www.degruyter.com/view/title/590382|title=Aurangzeb: The Life and Legacy of India's Most Controversial King|year=2017|publisher=[[Stanford University Press]]|isbn=978-1-5036-0259-5|location=|pages=70–71|language=en|chapter=5. Moral Man and Leader|doi=10.1515/9781503602595-009|s2cid=243691670|chapter-url=https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781503602595-009/html}}</ref><ref name="Lal">{{Cite web|last=Lal|first=Vinay|author-link=Vinay Lal|title=Aurangzeb's Fatwa on Jizya|url=http://southasia.ucla.edu/history-politics/mughals-and-medieval/aurangzeb/aurangzebs-fatwa-jizya/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170511063033/http://southasia.ucla.edu:80/history-politics/mughals-and-medieval/aurangzeb/aurangzebs-fatwa-jizya/ |archive-date=11 May 2017 |access-date=2021-02-05|website=MANAS|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Khan|first=Iqtidar Alam|date=January–February 2001|title=State in the Mughal India: Re-Examining the Myths of a Counter-Vision|journal=Social Scientist|volume=29|issue=1/2|pages=16–45|doi=10.2307/3518271|jstor=3518271|issn=0970-0293}}</ref> The specific amount varied with the socioeconomic status of a subject and tax-collection were often waived for regions hit by calamities. Rajput and Maratha state officials, Brahmins, women, children, elders, the handicapped, the unemployed, the ill, and the insane were all perpetually exempted.<ref name="Lal" /><ref>{{Cite book |last=Truschke |first=Audrey |url=https://www.degruyter.com/view/title/590382 |title=Aurangzeb: The Life and Legacy of India's Most Controversial King |publisher=[[Stanford University Press]] |year=2017 |isbn=978-1-5036-0259-5 |location= |pages=70, 94 |chapter=7. Later Years |doi=10.1515/9781503602595-011 |chapter-url=https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781503602595-011/html |s2cid=242351847}}</ref>

The collectors were mandated to be Muslims.<ref name="Truschke-2017" /> A majority of modern scholars reject that religious bigotry influenced the imposition; rather, realpolitik – economic constraints as a result of multiple ongoing battles and establishment of credence with the orthodox Ulemas – are held to be primary agents.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Aggarwal|first=Dhruv Chand|date=Spring 2017|title=The Afterlives of Aurangzeb: Jizya, Social Domination and the Meaning of Constitutional Secularism|url=https://lawandreligion.com/sites/law-religion/files/01_Aggarwal%20%281%29.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://lawandreligion.com/sites/law-religion/files/01_Aggarwal%20%281%29.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|journal=Rutgers Journal of Law & Religion|volume=18|pages=109–155}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Husain|first=S.M. Azizuddin|date=2000-07-01|title=Jizya – Its Reimposition During the Reign of Aurangzeb: An Examination|journal=Indian Historical Review|language=en|volume=27|issue=2|pages=87–121|doi=10.1177/0376983620000204|s2cid=220267774|issn=0376-9836}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author=Lal|first=Vinay|author-link=Vinay Lal|title=Aurangzeb, Akbar, and the Communalization of History|url=http://southasia.ucla.edu/history-politics/mughals-and-medieval/aurangzeb/communalization-of-history/|website=Manas}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Kulke|first=Tilmann|url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/aurangzeb-islam-india-tilmann-kulke/e/10.4324/9780429054853-14|title=Routledge Handbook of South Asian Religions|date=2020|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-0-429-05485-3|editor-last=Jacobsen|editor-first=Knut A.|editor-link=Knut A. Jacobsen|location=|page=194|language=en|chapter=Aurangzeb and Islam in India : 50 years of Mughal Realpolitik|doi=10.4324/9780429054853-14|s2cid=226338454|chapter-url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/aurangzeb-islam-india-tilmann-kulke/e/10.4324/9780429054853-14}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Husain|first=S. M. Azizuddin|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yTJuAAAAMAAJ|title=Structure of Politics Under Aurangzeb, 1658–1707|date=2002|publisher=Kanishka Publishers, Distributors|isbn=978-81-7391-489-8|language=en}}</ref>

Aurangzeb enforced a higher tax burden on Hindu merchants at the rate of 5%, as against 2.5% on Muslim merchants, which led to considerable dislike of Aurangzeb's economic policies; a sharp turn from Akbar's uniform tax code.{{citation needed|date=December 2023}} According to Marc Jason Gilbert, Aurangzeb ordered the jizya fees to be paid in person, in front of a tax collector, where the non Muslims were to recite a verse in the Quran which referred to their inferior status as non Muslims. This decision led to protests and lamentations among the masses as well as Hindu court officials. In order to meet state expenditures, Aurangzeb had ordered increases in land taxes. The burden of which fell heavily upon the Hindu Jats.<ref name="Pirbhai-2009" /><ref>{{Cite book |last=Gilbert |first=Marc Jason |title=South Asia in World History |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1dhKDgAAQBAJ&pg=PT96 |year=2017 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-066137-3 |pages=85–86 |language=en}}</ref> The reimposition of the jizya encouraged Hindus to flee to areas under East India Company jurisdiction, under which policies of religious sufferance and pretermissions of religious taxes prevailed.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Smith |first=Haig Z. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=AFNYEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA215 |title=Religion and Governance in England's Emerging Colonial Empire, 1601–1698 |date=2022 |publisher=Springer Nature |isbn=978-3-030-70131-4 |pages=215, 216 |language=en}}</ref>

Aurangzeb issued land grants and provided funds for the maintenance of shrines of worship but also often ordered their destruction.<ref name="Puniyani-2003">{{cite book|last=Puniyani|first=Ram|title=Communal politics: facts versus myths|publisher=Sage Publications|year=2003|isbn=978-0-7619-9667-5|page=60|quote=he kept changing his policies depending on the needs of the situation ... he had put a brake on the construction of new temples but the repair and maintenance of old temples was permitted. He also generously donated jagirs to many temples to win the sympathies of the people ... ''firmans'' include the ones from the temples of Mahakaleshwar (Ujjain), Balaji temple (Chitrakut), Umanand temples (Guwahati) and Jain temples of Shatrunjaya. Also there are ''firmans'' supporting other temples and gurudwaras in north India.|author-link=Ram Puniyani}}</ref><ref name="Mukhia-2004">{{Citation|last=Mukhia|first=Harbans|title=For Conquest and Governance: Legitimacy, Religion and Political Culture|year=2004|url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9780470758304.ch1|work=The Mughals of India|pages=25–26|publisher=John Wiley & Sons, Ltd|language=en|doi=10.1002/9780470758304.ch1|isbn=978-0-470-75830-4|access-date=2021-02-05}}</ref> Modern historians reject the thought-school of colonial and nationalist historians about these destruction being guided by religious zealotry. Rather, the association of temples with sovereignty, power and authority is emphasized upon.<ref name="Subodh-2001">{{Cite journal|last=Subodh|first=Sanjay|title=Temples Rulers and Historians' Dilemma: Understanding the Medieval Mind|year=2001|journal=Proceedings of the Indian History Congress|volume=62|pages=334–344|jstor=44155778|issn=2249-1937}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Pauwels|first1=Heidi|last2=Bachrach|first2=Emilia|date=July 2018|title=Aurangzeb as Iconoclast? Vaishnava Accounts of the Krishna images' Exodus from Braj|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-royal-asiatic-society/article/abs/aurangzeb-as-iconoclast-vaishnava-accounts-of-the-krishna-images-exodus-from-braj/E38DFDADE1A61737AC9D24394EF11F4C|journal=Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society|language=en|volume=28|issue=3|pages=485–508|doi=10.1017/S1356186318000019|s2cid=165273975|issn=1356-1863}}</ref>

Whilst constructing mosques were considered an act of royal duty to subjects, there are also several ''[[firman]]s'' in Aurangzeb's name, supporting temples, ''[[Matha|maths]]'', chishti shrines, and [[gurudwara]]s, including [[Mahakaleshwar Jyotirlinga|Mahakaleshwar temple]] of [[Ujjain]], a gurudwara at Dehradun, Balaji temple of [[Chitrakoot district|Chitrakoot]], [[Umananda Temple]] of [[Guwahati]] and the [[Shatrunjaya]] [[Jain]] temples, among others.<ref name="Puniyani-2003" /><ref name="Mukhia-2004" /><ref name="Subodh-2001" /><ref name="Eaton-2000" /><ref>{{Cite news |last=Truschke |first=Audrey |title=What Aurangzeb did to preserve Hindu temples (and protect non-Muslim religious leaders) |url=https://scroll.in/article/829943/what-aurangzeb-did-to-preserve-hindu-temples-and-protect-non-muslim-religious-leaders |access-date=2021-02-05 |work=Scroll.in |date=23 February 2017 |language=en-US}}</ref>

Contemporary court-chronicles mention hundreds of temple which were demolished by Aurangzab or his chieftains, upon his order.<ref name="Mukhia-2004" /> In September 1669, he ordered the destruction of [[Kashi Vishwanath Temple|Vishvanath Temple]] at Varanasi, which was established by Raja Man Singh, whose grandson Jai Singh was believed to have facilitated Shivaji's escape.<ref name="Eaton-2000" /> After the Jat rebellion in Mathura (early 1670), which killed the patron of the town-mosque, Aurangzeb suppressed the rebels and ordered for the city's [[Kesava Deo temple]] to be demolished, and replaced with an ''[[Eidgah]]''.<ref name="Eaton-2000" />

In 1672–73, Aurangzeb ordered the resumption of all grants held by Hindus throughout the empire. This was not followed absolutely in regions such as [[Gujarat]], where lands granted in in'am to [[Charan]]s were not affected.<ref>{{cite thesis |last=Shafqat |first=Arshia |year=2008 |title=Administration Of Gujarat Under The Mughals (A.D. 1572–1737) |url=http://archive.org/details/AdmistrationOfGujarat |type=PhD |publisher=Aligarh University |page=194}}</ref> In around 1679, he ordered destruction of several prominent temples, including those of Khandela, Udaipur, Chittor and Jodhpur, which were patronaged by rebels.<ref name="Eaton-2000">{{cite journal |last=Eaton |first=Richard |year=2000 |title=Temple Desecration and Indo-Muslim States |journal=Journal of Islamic Studies |volume=11 |issue=3 |pages=305, 307–309 |doi=10.1093/jis/11.3.283 |quote=In early 1670, soon after the ring-leader of these rebellions had been captured near Mathura, Aurangzeb ordered the destruction of the city's Keshava Deva temple and built an Islamic structure ('īd-gāh) on its site ... Nine years later, the emperor ordered the destruction of several prominent temples in Rajasthan that had become associated with imperial enemies. These included temples in Khandela ... Jodhpur ... Udaipur and Chitor. |doi-access=}}</ref>

In an order specific to Benaras, Aurangzeb invokes Sharia to declare that Hindus will be granted state-protection and temples won't be razed (but prohibits construction of any new temple); other orders to similar effect can be located. Eaton notes numerous new temples were built in other areas of the empire during this time.<ref name="Eaton-2000" /><ref>{{Citation|title=Precedents for Mughal architecture|year=1992|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/architecture-of-mughal-india/precedents-for-mughal-architecture/087130D88C52F03255F9228F16A1E3C6|work=Architecture of Mughal India|page=8|editor-last=Asher|editor-first=Catherine B.|series=The New Cambridge History of India|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|doi=10.1017/CHOL9780521267281.002 |isbn=978-0-521-26728-1|access-date=2021-02-05}}</ref> Richard Eaton, upon a critical evaluation of primary sources, counts 15 temples to have been destroyed during Aurangzeb's reign.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Eaton|first=Richard M.|year=2000|title=Temple Desecration and Indo-Muslim States|page=297|work=[[The Hindu]]|location=Chennai, India|url=http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl1726/17260700.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140106040012/http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl1726/17260700.pdf|archive-date=6 January 2014}}</ref><ref name="Mukhia-2004" />