Aurangzeb’s grave is India’s latest flashpoint- What it tells about the 17th-century Mughal emperor, his life
Aurangzeb, who died over 300 years ago on February 20, 1707, was the longest-reigning Mughal emperor, yet his burial site remains an anomaly in the grand tapestry of Mughal tombs.
Follow
Three days after Nagpur witnessed violent clashes, the curfew in affected areas was partially lifted on Thursday (March 20). At the center of this storm stands the tomb of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb—a relic of a fallen empire that the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and other Hindutva groups are now demanding to be removed.
Aurangzeb, who died over 300 years ago on February 20, 1707, was the longest-reigning Mughal emperor, yet his burial site remains an anomaly in the grand tapestry of Mughal tombs. Unlike the opulent mausoleums of his predecessors that continue to draw global tourists, his modest grave lay largely unnoticed—until modern-day debates over historical grievances reignited interest in it.
Aurangzeb’s final years were marred by an empire in decline. His once-mighty dominion was crumbling under the weight of an agrarian crisis, political betrayals, and an unrelenting military challenge from the Marathas. It was during one such campaign in the Deccan that the aging emperor—then nearing 90—met his end.
Why is Aurangzeb buried in Maharashtra?
“It was Aurangzeb’s own wish to be buried in a simple tomb, in keeping with Islamic austerity. His grave lies inside the complex of the dargah (shrine) of Sheikh Zainuddin, a 14th-century Chishti saint,” historian Ali Nadeem Rezavi of Aligarh Muslim University told The Indian Express.
His resting place in Khuldabad is shared by his son, Azam Shah, the first Nizam of Hyderabad, Asaf Jah I, and the second Nizam, Nasir Jung. Unlike the grand tombs of his forebears, Aurangzeb’s grave was initially marked only by a simple stone cenotaph, in accordance with his dying wish.
American historian Catherine Asher, in her book Architecture of Mughal India, describes, “The emperor’s open-air grave, in accordance with his final wishes, was marked by a simple stone cenotaph, although in the early twentieth century it was faced with white marble. The top was filled with earth so plants might grow.”
In an ironic twist of history, it was the British Viceroy, Lord George Curzon, who later ordered the erection of a white marble screen around the grave—to honor the memory of one of India’s longest-ruling monarchs.
The many stories Aurangzeb's grave tells
Aurangzeb’s grave is more than just a burial site—it is a paradox etched in stone. A ruler widely known for his religious orthodoxy, he chose to be interred in the shrine of a Sufi saint, an act seemingly at odds with his rigid Sunni beliefs.
Asher notes, “Toward the end of his life, Aurangzeb noted that visiting graves was not acceptable in orthodox Islam. Nevertheless, the location of his own tomb indicates that he personally never lost esteem for saints.”
His final resting place also bears a striking resemblance to that of his sister, Jahan Ara, who was buried in a simple grave at the Nizamuddin Auliya dargah in Delhi. However, their lives had been anything but similar—Jahan Ara had been a staunch supporter of Prince Dara Shikoh in the bitter succession battle and remained loyal to their imprisoned father, Shah Jahan, till the end.
Historian Michael Brand, in his 1993 research paper on Mughal tomb architecture, draws attention to a fascinating contrast. “While Babur and Aurangzeb willed their own simple burials, the grand tombs of Humayun, Akbar, and Jahangir were erected by their sons and successors... It can be asked whether Mughal tombs were really built to commemorate dead emperors or as victory monuments for the survivors of internecine warfare.”
Unlike his predecessors, whose monuments signified the empire’s grandeur, Aurangzeb's austere tomb reflects a dynasty in decline. With no worthy successors to match the vision of emperors past, the Mughal throne gradually faded into insignificance.
In his final days, Aurangzeb himself seemed aware of his failures. Historian Jadunath Sarkar, in A Short History of Aurangzib, quotes a poignant letter written by the dying ruler to his son, Prince Azam:
"I know not who I am and what I have been doing… I have not at all done any (true) government of the realm or cherishing of the peasantry… Life, so valuable, has gone away for nothing."
subscribe to Asianet Newsable WhatsApp channel by clicking here.
