should we judge Aurangjeb as good or bad as a man?

Answer 1

The struggle between the four sons of Shah Jahan continued for more than two years and ended

Aurangazeb,the intolerant Moslem King ruled not so much from a position of strength but by relying on intrigue and cruelty.
During his long reign(1658-1707)Aurangazebwas continually at war,sending troopsto the north,east and constantly engaged in suppressingthe uprisings in various parts of his empire.
More and more often Aurangazeb was securing victories by means of bribery and not thanks to his skill as a commander.
While under Akbar the standard land revenue had been a third of the produce, in Aurangazeb's reign it had been risen to a half, and in practice the exactions from the raiyats were even greater.
Famine was severe in Deccan in 1702-1704 when more than two million people died.
In order to bring the life of the country in accordance with the precepts of islam,Aurangazebbanned Shiah festivals,the drinkingof wine,the playing of music,painting,dancing,the sowing of the drug bhang ,etc.
Between 1665 and 1669, he gave orders for Hindu temples to be destroyed and for mosques to be ercted from their debris.Hindus were not allowed to wear any marks of honour,to ride elephants,etc.
As per history, Aurangazeb is judged as a bad ruler.

Answer 2

Aurangzeb being a king earned his living by making caps. He never used his wealth for his personal needs.

He was definitely high tempered but he never troubled his subjects.

All the kings be it a Hindu or a Muslim used to fight each other to capture each others territory.

Some say he captured his father Shahjahan and put him in prison.

He (Shahjahan) deserved that because he cut the hands of the Masons who built the Taj Mahal (one of the seven wonders).

Thus Aurangzeb was a good man.

Answer 3

From an objective view, Aurangzeb was clearly a very despotic ruler and a horrible unconscionable human. He instituted draconian laws and called for the forced conversion and genocide of all non-muslims. In the eyes of muslims he is viewed as a pious king- a ghazi(killer of kafir/non-believers)- but to everyone else he was a madman. Also, he over-extended the mughal empire, and in doing so lost control over his subjects and his kingdom eventually disintergrated and fell apart.

Answer 4

That depends on which religion you belong to. For the Muslims, he is the perfect Mughal king. For the Hindus, he is the villain of the piece, when they view Sivaji as the hero.

Answer 5

He do many bad thing like locking his own father in prison but he never drink alchol which is a custom that time he never watch dance or heard music he lead a simple life but in my opinion he do many bad thing he is not a good person we cannot say him even too much bad.

Answer 6

yes