‘DECCAN PROVED THE ULCER FOR AURANGZEB’? DISCUSS

 

DO YOU AGREE WITH THE VIEW THAT ‘DECCAN PROVED THE ULCER FOR AURANGZEB’? DISCUSS

During the first half of Aurangzeb’s reign his attention was engrossed with affairs in the north, and the Deccan was left to the viceroys. The decadent southern Sultanates had not been able to recover fully from the blows that had been inflicted on them, and the Marathas rose at their expense. The rise of the Marathas, as a sort of challenge to the Mughal Empire, complicated the political situation in the Deccan, the full significance of which the Emperor could not realize at first. During the first 24 years of his reign his viceroys in the Deccan could achieve no definite success either against the Sultanates or against the Marathas.

The death of Shivaji in 1680 in no way improved the imperial position in the Deccan, not withstanding Aurangzeb’s determination to consolidate his supremacy. The flight of the rebellious Prince Akbar to the Maratha King Shambhuji, and the alliance between the disturber of India and the infernal father, as Aurangzeb called these two, brought a complete change in his policy towards the Deccan. Having now realized the necessity of marching there in person to check this menace to imperial interests he patched up a peace with Mewar in June 1681. Leaving Ajmer for the Deccan on 8^th September 1681, he arrived at Burhanpur on 23^rd November 1681 and at Ahmednagar on 1^st April 1682. His mind must have been full of high hopes and he could not foresee that destiny was dragging him to the south to dig the graves of himself and his empire. The first four years were spent in unsuccessful attempts to seize Prince Akbar and in rather disastrous campaigns against the Marathas.

The conquest of the decayed Sultanates next engaged the Emperor’s attention. Aurangzeb’s attitudes towards the Shiah Sultanates of the Deccan was influenced partly by imperial interests and partly by religious considerations. Bijapur, weakened by party factions and the rise of the Marathas, submitted to the invaders. The Emperor himself went on the last Mughal siege of the city.

According to writers like Elphinstone and Smith, the annihilation of the Southern Sultanates was an impolitic step of the part of Aurangzeb. They hold that it freed the Maratha chiefs from any fear of local rivalry, which the Mughal Emperor might have utilized to his advantage against he Marathas. But it is doubtful in any sincere alliance between the Sultanates and the aggressor, the Mughal Emperor was possible and also if they could check the rise of the Marathas. As Sir J. N. Sarkar observes, ‘since Akbar had crossed the Vindhyas, the Deccan Sultanates could never forget that the sleepless aim of the Mughal Emperors was the final extinction and annexation of all their territories’. He also points out that it would have been impossible for the decadent Sultanates to check the Marathas effectively as they had already organized themselves into a progressive national state.

Having achieved one of the two objects of his Deccan policy, i.e., the annexation of the decadent Sultanates of the Deccan, Aurangzeb turned towards the other, i.e., suppression of the renascent Maratha power. His attempts were at first crowned with success. Shambhuji was executed on the 11^th of March 1689, his capital Rajgarh was captured and though his brother Rajaram, escaped, the rest of his family, including his younger son Shahu were made prisoners. In the course of the next few years the Emperor extended his conquests further South and levied tribute on the Hindu states of Tanjore and Trichinopoly.

In fact by the year 1690 Aurangzeb had already reached the zenith of his power and was the lord paramount of almost the whole of India – from Kabul to Chittagong and from Kashmir to Kaveri. ‘All seemed to have been gained by Aurangzeb now; but in reality all was lost. It was the beginning of his end. The saddest and most hopeless chapter of his life was now opened. The Mughal empire had become too large to be governed by one man or from one center… His enemies rose on all sides; he could defeat but not crush them forever… Lawlessness was reigned in many places of Northern and Central India. The old emperor in the far off Deccan lost all control over his officers in Hindustan, and the administration grew slack and corrupt; chiefs and zamindars defied the local authorities and asserted themselves, filling the country with tumult. In the province of Agra in particular, there was chronic disorder. Art and learning decayed at the withdrawl of imperial patronage; not a single edifice, finely written manuscript, or exquisite picture, commemorates Aurangzeb’s reign. The endless war in the Deccan exhausted his treasury; the government turned bankrupt, the soldiers, starving from arrears of pay, mutinied; and during the closing years of his reign the revenue of Bengal, regularly sent by the able Diwan Murshid Quli Khan, was the sole support of the Emperor’s household or his army, and the arrival was eagerly looked forward to. Napoleon I used to say, ‘It was the Spanish ulcer which ruined me’. The Deccan ulcer ruined Aurangzeb. The Emperor failed to subjugate the Marathas or conquer their land. They recovered by 1691 and carried on a war of national resistance against the Mughals, first under Rajaram and some other Maratha chiefs and then after Rajaram’s death in 1700, under his brave widow Tarabai.

 

 

CONCEPT OF ASHOKAS DHAMMA

ASHOKAS DHAMMA

After the Kalinga War, the greatest ideal and objective before Ashoka was the propagation of Dhamma for the fulfillment of which he worked relentlessly. The Dhamma as explained in Ashoka’s edicts is not a religion or religious system, but a ‘Moral Law’, ‘a common code of conduct’ or an ‘Ethical Order’, which is a common meeting ground of all religions.

Ashoka explaining what is dhamma, enumerates two basic attributes or constituents of Dhamma: less evils or sins (ap ansinave) and many good deeds (bahu Kayane). He enumerates the Asinavas or sin, such as rage or fury, cruelty, anger, pride and envy, which are to be avoided and many good deeds (bahu kayane) - kindness, liberality, truthfulness, gentleness, self-control, purity of heart, attachment to morality, inner and outer purity etc., - which are to be pursued vigourously. The two attributes constitute the ‘Doctrinal’ or negative and positive aspects of Ashokas dhamma.

The Code of Duties / Practical Dhamma

1. Obedience to mother and father, elders, teachers and other respectful persons.

2. Respect towards teachers

3. Proper treatment towards ascetics, both Brahmanas and Sramanas, relations, slaves, servants and dependents, the poor and miserable, friends, acquaintances and companions.

4. Liberality towards ascetics, friends, comrades, relatives and the aged.

5. Abstention from killing of living beings.

6. Non injury to all living creatures.

7. Moderation in spending and saving.

8. Mildness in case of all living creatures.

9. Truthfulness

10. Purity of heart.

The Dhamma of Edicts is not merely a guide to action. It is distinguished by several characteristic doctrines and philosophical positions, bringing out the originality of Ashoka’s ideas of moral reform. Toleration was insisted on as an absolute duty in a multi religious country like India. Ashoka tried to instill moral law (Dhamma) as the governing principle and force in every sphere of life and to spiritualize politics and all human activities. The Dhamma thus presented in these Edicts is but another name for the moral or virtuous life and takes its stand upon the common meeting ground of all religions. It is not sectarian in any sense, but is completely cosmopolitan, capable of universal application and acceptance as essence of all religions. Thus, he laid the basis of a universal religion and was probably the first to do so in history.

After the Kalinga War, Ashoka considered the Dhamma Vijaya, the victory based on piety and morality, as the real victory. In Pillar Edict I, he sums up his intentions by saying that he wants the maintenance, governance, happiness and protection of the people to be regulated by Dhamma. He further stressed the paternal concept of monarchy ‘All men are my children, and just as I desire for my children that they obtain welfare and happiness, both in this world and the next, so do I desire the same for all men’.

Ashoka’s dhamma was intended to strengthen social solidarity or social relationships, whether between parents and children, elders and young friends or various ideological sects. It was included as an ethical concept related to the individual in the context of his society.

Measures for the propagation of Dhamma

Ashoka took a number of measures for the propagation of Dhamma throughout his Empire. He adopted the doctrines of Dhamma as a governing principle of his personal life and public policies. Some of the significant measures were:

1. Issue of Dhamma lipis and Dhamma stambhas respectively in the form of Rock and Pillar Edicts describing the attributes of Dhamma

2. Appointment of Dhamma mahamatras.

3. Dhamma – Yatras, royal tours for the propagation of Dhamma.

4. Dhamma-mangala public welfare activities in accordance with the spirit of Dhamma.

5. Preaching of Dhamma by regulations and persuasions.

6. Administrative measures suited to the principles of Dhamma.

CONTRIBUTION OF THE PALLAVAS IN THE FIELD OF ART AND ARCHITECTURE

 Discuss the contribution of the Pallavas in the field of art and architecture.

The history of architecture and sculpture in South India begins with the Pallava temples which introduce a new technique called the Dravidian style. In addition to the temples in Kanchi and other places, ‘some of the rock-cut temples known as the seven pagodas or rathas of Mamallapurama are built in this style which may justly be called the Pallava style of art’. In fact, Pallava contribution to Indian culture is unique. Undoubtedly their edifices are among the noblest monuments in South India. From an early date they created an architecture of their own which was to be the basis of all the styles of the South. The cave and structural temples and other architectural remains of the Pallavas form an important chapter in Hindu art. The Pallava architecture has two phases:

1. Rockcut architecture from 610-690; it includes mandapas or rathas (monolithic temples)

2. Structural from 690-900; it includes temples.

 

A mandapa is an open pavilion, a hall with cells in the back wall. It is excavated in a rock. A ratha is a monolithic shrine. Many of the architectural productions of the Pallavas have a figure of a lion on the prominent place. This heraldic beast was made to serve as a symbol of the Pallava Simhavishnu or lion (simha) ancestry.

The twon of Mahavallipuram or Mamallapuram, 32 miles south of Madras, founded by the great Pallava King Narasimhavarman (625-645) on the sea-beach, has many cave-temples or mandapas decorated with fine reliefs. The mandapas are 10 in number and are found on the hill. They are remarkable not for their size but for the exceptional character of their design and execution. The pillars, the façade and the sculpture combined with the architecture are the salient features of these mandapas. The pillar is made to rest on the sedent animal’s head and it has fluted and banded shaft, refined necking, the elegant curves, and lotus form with wide abacus. The relief work and architectural features are designed and executed in admirable way.

The monolithic temples called rathas, known as, ‘seven pagodas’ are another type of remarkable rock cut architecture at Mamallapuram. They are named after the five Pandava brothers and Draupadi, each carved out from a single massive granite stone upon the seashore. They are complete with all the details of an ordinary temple and stand today as undying testimony to the super quality of Pallava art. These rathas are of no great size, the largest measuring only 42 feet long, the widest 35 feet and the tallest 40 feet high. They number eight in all with the exception of Draupadi’s ratha which is the smallest, simplest and most finished, others are derived from the Buddhist structure of a Vihara or a monastery and Chaitya Hall or temple. The Dharmaraja ratha is the largest. The Bhima ratha with its three upper stories is the finest and most interesting of the group. The Ganesh ratha has architectural form known in later Dravidian architecture as Gopuram – the gateway. The significant point to note here is that ‘these rathas formed the originals from which all the vimanas in South India were copied and continued to be copied nearly unchanged to a very late period’ (Gokhale). These monolithic shrines or rathas were of Saivism as in their proximity are images carved in rock, of a lion, an elephant and a bull, symbolizing respectively Durga, Indra and Shiva. Probably each ratha was a shrine consecrated to one of the manifestations of Shiva.

These mandapas and rathas are adorned with marvellous figure sculpture. The Pallava sculpture here reveals a finer feeling for form, experience craftsmanship, a noteable sense of restraint and a refined simplicity. Among the sculptures, one large composition on rock has obtained great celebrity. It is cut down from one standing soldi rock 98 feet long and 43 feet wide. The scene represented is usually described as the penance of Arjun, but now it is held by art critics and scholars that it represents the Descent of the Ganges. Towards the end of the 7^th century the art of excavated ratha or mandapa was given up and the second phase of the Pallava art, the art of structural edifices, was taken up and it occupied the whole of the 8^th century. Splendid temples were constructed; their lofty towers were built tier upon tier, diminishing in size towards a summit, typifying all the wealth, munificence and grandeur of the Pallavas. The most wonderful example of the Pallava structural art is the famous Kailasa temple at Kanchi. There the shrine with its sikhara or pyramidal tower and flat roofed mandapam is surrounded by a series of cells, resembling rathas. The temple of Vaikuntha Perumal at Canjeevaram is another marvelous example of the art. Here the Pallava style of architecture is seen in its most mature form. It is larger and more spacious that the afore-stated Kailash temple. Here the principle parts, the cloisters, portico and sanctuary, instead of being separate buildings, are amalgamated into one architectural whole. This has produced a unity of conception and considerable architectural merit. To sum up, the Pallava art evolved splendid huge temples of stone. Sometimes the upper part was made of bricks. Above the main shrine pyramidal tower was constructed.

The style of Pallava architecture not only set the standard in the South but also largely influenced the architecture of the Indian colonies in the Far East. The Pallava art was transmitted beyond the seas to the countries of south east Asia like Indonesia ‘where its effulgence, reflected in the vast monuments of those civilizations, shone with even greater splendor than in the country of its origin’ (Percy Brown). The schools of sculpture which developed out of the Pallava art in Java and Cambodia displayed the high artistic character and the superb quality of the Pallava plastic art. The Khmer sculptures at Angkor Thom and Angkor Vat and the bas-reliefs on the stupa temple of Borobudur owe some of their characteristics to the rock cut monoliths of Mamallapuram. The characteristic Pallava or Dravidian type of shikara is met with the temples of Java, Cambodia and Annam. But there are important differences between them and the South Indian temples. The pillars that form an important adjunct to the latter are altogether absent in the former. Credit goes to the Pallavas for having kept burning brightly the torch, which kindled by the Buddhist in the early centuries of the Christian era at Amaravati, was bequeathed to these Simha Vishnu ‘lion’ kings, Pallvas. Later on its flame glowed with renewed brilliance in the hands of the Chola and subsequent rulers of Southern India.  

AMIR KHUSRAU'S CONTRIBUTION TO HINDI LITERATURE

 

Short Note on the contribution of Amir Khusrau towards Hindi Literature

Amir Khusrau (1253 - 1325) was the first great name among Indian historiographers during the sultanate period. He lived through the reign of six different Sultans. Kaiqubad, Bughra Khan, Jalaluddin Khilji, Alauddin Khilji, Qutbudin Mubarak Shah Khilji and Ghyasuddin Tughlaq. His close association with these sultans, and more so with the saint, Nizamuddin Auliya, gave him an opportunity of knowing the political events and the social conditions of the time. He is a very prolific writer who is supposed to have written about 92 works. But he is more a poet than a historian, his works lack unity of theme and chronology His strongest point is an embellished style. His works on history are 6 in number, the most important of which are Khazain - ul- Futuh, Khiran - us- Sadain, and Thugluqnamah. He is good in giving us an account of events but his philosophy of history is not rational but metaphysical in nature. For him human characteristics are created outside the world of time and events, that is by God, and events merely betray those characteristics.

In other words, man is a creature depending entirely on the Divine Will. The modern concept of History is that it is the story of developing changing human nature in action; but to Khusrau it was a spectacle o divine Ordination. If Ranke speaks in terms of God dwelling in history, Croce in terms of the spirit action, and Toynbee in terms of theodicy it is no wonder that Amir Khusrau was speaking almost in the same language. He advises Allaudin not to be harsh in government. The primary purpose of Amir Khusrau was to fulfill his aesthetic sense, to amuse his readers, to stimulate their emotions and the poetic medium suited his historical theme.