The Question Rising from Aurangzeb’s Tomb: Why Does the Indian Government Spend Lakhs on a Simple Grave?

Aurangzeb Tomb Controversy: Once the most powerful emperor of the Mughal Empire, today Aurangzeb’s modest tomb finds itself at the center of controversy. A towering name in Indian history, Aurangzeb remains as influential as he is divisive. While some view him as a “true follower of Islam,” a large section of India remembers him as a tyrant and oppressor of Hindus. The recent Marathi film “Chhava”, which depicted Aurangzeb’s brutal treatment of Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj, has reignited the national debate, especially in Maharashtra, about why his tomb is being preserved and why public funds are spent on it.

Why the Controversy Around Aurangzeb’s Tomb?

Aurangzeb’s tomb is located in Khuldabad, a small town about 30 km from Aurangabad in Maharashtra. Surprisingly, his final resting place is neither in Agra, where the Taj Mahal stands, nor in Delhi, from where he ruled most of his empire. This raises several questions:

• Why was such a mighty emperor buried in an obscure village?

• Does the Indian government actually spend lakhs of rupees annually on the maintenance of his grave?

To understand this, we must look into:

• The historical and spiritual significance of Aurangzeb’s burial site,

• His connection to Sufi saint Hazrat Zainuddin Shirazi,

• The government expenditure on the tomb,

• And the emerging political and religious controversies.

The Reality of Aurangzeb’s Final Years: From Ruthless Emperor to Ascetic

Aurangzeb ruled India from 1658 to 1707 as the sixth emperor of the Mughal dynasty. He seized the throne by imprisoning his father Shah Jahan, executing his brothers, and waging a relentless campaign to expand the empire.

Unlike his predecessors, his reign was marked by rigid orthodoxy, the reimposition of the jizya tax, temple demolitions, and forced conversions. Historians often call him both the last real Mughal emperor and a religious zealot.

Yet, few know that in his final years, Aurangzeb adopted an ascetic lifestyle and withdrew from the imperial grandeur he once embodied.

Why Is Aurangzeb’s Tomb in Maharashtra? His Last Wish

Aurangzeb spent the last 27 years of his life in the Deccan region. In 1636, his father Shah Jahan appointed him as the Subedar (governor) of the Deccan, and he soon established Aurangabad as his base for military operations in southern India.

During his time in Khuldabad, he became spiritually drawn to Sufi saint Hazrat Sayyid Zainuddin Shirazi, eventually accepting him as his spiritual guide. In his will, Aurangzeb expressed a desire to be buried beside his Pir’s grave. That’s why, after his death on 3 March 1707 in Ahmednagar, he was interred in Khuldabad.

Who Was Hazrat Sayyid Zainuddin Shirazi?

Born in 1302 CE in Shiraz, Iran, Zainuddin Shirazi traveled to India via Mecca and Delhi and became a disciple of Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya, the famed Sufi saint. He later settled in Daulatabad and Khuldabad in Maharashtra, where he spread Chishti Sufi teachings.

His messages emphasized humility, simplicity, service to humanity, and absolute devotion to God. These teachings profoundly influenced even a ruler as harsh as Aurangzeb.

Aurangzeb’s Last Will: “Don’t Spend Money on My Tomb”

Aurangzeb’s final testament offers a glimpse into his transformation. In it, he directed that:

• Only ₹4 and 2 annas be spent on his burial.

• The expenses should come from the money he earned by knitting caps and writing copies of the Quran.

• No shady trees should be planted near his grave.

• His tomb should remain plain and simple, without embellishments.

This will starkly contrasts his life in lavish palaces and demonstrates a wish to return to dust in all humility.

Does the Government Really Spend Lakhs on His Tomb?

A recent RTI (Right to Information) query revealed that Aurangzeb’s tomb is categorized as a National Heritage Site, under the protection of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). The maintenance and conservation work cost between ₹1.7 to ₹2 lakh annually—a modest amount in the context of heritage conservation.

However, given the strong public sentiments against Aurangzeb, this government expenditure has become a political flashpoint.

Political Protests and Outrage

After the release of Chhava, protests erupted in cities like Nagpur and Pune, where signboards bearing Aurangzeb’s name were defaced. In Nagpur, calls to demolish the tomb led to violent clashes and the imposition of curfew.

Political parties and right-wing groups have questioned:

• Why should taxpayer money preserve the tomb of a “tyrant”?

• Is it justifiable to honor a ruler seen by many as anti-Hindu?

On the other hand, historians and secular groups argue that erasing history won’t change the past. Instead, understanding it can help build a more tolerant future.

Bibi Ka Maqbara: Aurangzeb’s Architectural Tribute

Though Aurangzeb chose a humble grave for himself, he did commission the construction of the Bibi Ka Maqbara in Aurangabad in memory of his wife Rabia-ud-Daurani. This monument, often called the “Taj of the Deccan”, closely resembles the Taj Mahal in design and grandeur.

Lord Curzon’s Role in Decorating the Tomb

In 1905, British Viceroy Lord Curzon visited Aurangzeb’s tomb and was reportedly moved by its simplicity. He ordered the installation of marble railings and an iron grille around the grave to preserve its sanctity. Ironically, a ruler who eschewed monuments had his tomb beautified by British colonials.

Conclusion: More Than Just Dust and Stone

Aurangzeb’s tomb is not merely a physical structure of mud and stone—it is a symbol of a complex past that continues to influence India’s ideological, cultural, and religious landscape.

Should the government spend money on it? It’s a valid question tied to public sentiment. But we must also ask: Can history be erased by tearing down graves, or should we learn from it?

Destroying the tomb won’t erase the past, but understanding history could help us build bridges in a divided society.

As India grapples with rising religious polarization, preserving such monuments—not to glorify but to remember and reflect—becomes more important than ever.