MaxEntropy_Man wrote:this whole thread can be summarized by this excellent quote i found upon rereading midnight's children by salman rushdie recently.

sometimes legends make reality, and become more useful than the facts.
-- sir salman rushdie (midnight's children)

Such hero worship of Rushdie, Il professore! Isn't this a variation of what someone wrote long before Rushdie did?

why not hellsu? some people worship the nizzy of hyd and some the great moghal emperors. rushdie is my poison.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:why not hellsu? some people worship the nizzy of hyd and some the great moghal emperors. rushdie is my poison.

Max what do u think of this criticism of Rushdie?

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2831403.ece

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:why not hellsu? some people worship the nizzy of hyd and some the great moghal emperors. rushdie is my poison.

Max what do u think of this criticism of Rushdie?

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2831403.ece

he doesn't say why. so hard to take his criticism seriously.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:why not hellsu? some people worship the nizzy of hyd and some the great moghal emperors. rushdie is my poison.

Max what do u think of this criticism of Rushdie?

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2831403.ece

he doesn't say why. so hard to take his criticism seriously.

in the panel discussion (i had the posted the link earlier) he had elaborated a little bit: he said he found Rushdie 'unreadable'. he read 'Midnight's children' a few times and was utterly unable to comprehend what Rushdie was trying to say. he said that today literature which is difficult or impossible to comprehend is hailed as 'great literature'.

i have read it and find it perfectly comprehensible as have thousands of others including quite a few on this board.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have read it and find it perfectly comprehensible as have thousands of others including quite a few on this board.

which is the very first book of Rushdie i should read ?

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have read it and find it perfectly comprehensible as have thousands of others including quite a few on this board.

which is the very first book of Rushdie i should read ?

haroun and the sea of stories. it's quite adult humor but written for kids.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have read it and find it perfectly comprehensible as have thousands of others including quite a few on this board.

which is the very first book of Rushdie i should read ?

haroun and the sea of stories. it's quite adult humor but written for kids.

thanks. i'll try it out.

Veteran freedom fighter Shanker Rao pays tributes to Nizam VII


Veteran freedom fighter from Gulbarga, Mr. Shanker Rao paid rich tribute to the generosity of Mir Osman Ali Khan, Nizam of Hyderabad. He has especially come from Gulbarga to pay homage to the late Nizam. He came to Siasat office and met Mr. Zahid Ali Khan, Editor Siasat. He told that the people of Hyderabad Karnataka still remember the generosity, kindness and secular character of the late Nizam.

He condemned the campaign against the Nizam of Hyderabad by BJP and other communal minded organizations. He told that he himself witnessed the welfare schemes of the late Nizam for the poor people.

He told that he had struggled against the ‘Razakars’ from Hyderabad Karnataka region majority of the Razakarars from this region were the Hindus who had joined this group for looting the people.

He deplored that BJP is spreading venom among the people. He told that communal elements have entered Congress these days. He told that Nehru was against the partition of India but he couldn’t control it.

He mentioned that the day of merger of Hyderabad State in the Indian union is celebrated every year on 17 September in Hyderabad Karnataka Region but nobody says anything against the late Nizam of Hyderabad.

http://www.siasat.com/english/news/veteran-freedom-fighter-shanker-rao-pays-tributes-nizam-vii

Rashmun wrote:Subhash Reddy dismisses Goebbelian propaganda of PP:

Before I address some points raised by PP, let me quote his statements, on Telangana State Movement, he made in 2008 and published in The Hindu Newspaper on Thursday, October 8, 2008 (Three years and one month ago):

http://www.hindu.com/2008/10/16/stories/2008101656990300.htm

THE HINDU

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Andhra Pradesh - Nizamabad

Huge response to Chiru's Telangana tour predicted

Staff Reporter

NIZAMABAD: Praja Rajyam spokesman Parakala Prabhakar on Wednesday predicted that there would be an overwhelming response to PR chief Chiranjeevi's tour of Telangana districts if the response to his ongoing tour in north coastal Andhra was any indication. …………..

On separate Telangana, he said no party other than Praja Rajyam had clarity on the issue. "We want the State to be divided like brothers in a family. We respect the `atma gouravam' and `atma abhimanam' of the Telangana people and we said we will never come in the way if separation is necessary," he said.

Mr PP ( Dr. Parakala Prabhakar ) is a founder-member of Visalandhra Mahasabha, dedicated to its mission statement "Visalandhra Mahasabha … are dedicated to the cause of unity of Telugu people. We feel that it is our sacred duty to preserve the unity of our State."

Can you reconcile the statement PP made in 2008 with the above mission? Which one of the facades is real? What reason could PP give to defend such an about turn in his conviction? PP promised never to come in the way if separation is necessary but then indulges in this Goebbels propaganda against Telangana and Telangana people not just to oppose them politically but also to destroy their atma gowram and atma abhmanam which he vowed to respect!

So, when PP says "I'm pretty secure about the strength of my arguments", which argument is he pretty secure? Both? Or whichever suits his day's needs?


Indeed, I have great passion just as any scientist, any farmer, any artist, and any social organizer would have in his/her work. Passion comes out of strong conviction based on learning facts. In contrast, one who can function well without passion or conviction is a Broker, like in Securities trading ( stocks). The Broker will tell the customer to buy and not sell no matter what the stock market is doing.

I am glad I am not a Broker.

Let me quote P Sunderayya's admission of the hidden agenda of his party (The Communist Party) " It is true that only our Party (communist party) came out with the slogan of people's raj in Vishalandhra, advocated dissolution of Hyderabad State and merging it in its neighboring linguistic areas (Andhra)".

So, this conspiracy to erase Telangana off the map and to deny even its history to the future generations has been in the making even before Andhra State was created by breaking up Madras State.

About Nizam VII's accomplishments: It is not I who sang praises, PP, it is your own Andhra Government official website that sang the "praises". Let me give you again the reference to it. The web link is: http://www.aponline.gov.in/quick%20links/hist-cult/history_modern.html#Asaf

And let me make it easy and fast for you, PP. Just count the paragraphs and start reading from the 14th paragraph through para 19. You will learn the truth. No amount of propaganda will change the truths.

In contrast, please enlighten me what all things did Andhra Pradesh build since 1956 in Hyderabad or Telangana, for the betterment of Telangana people – not just for the government ministers and Andhra robber barons. The Andhra government couldn't function without going to those monumental infrastructure facilities that Nizam VII built in a matter of two decades – from the Legislative Assembly to the High Court and a bunch in between.

Please read the article published on this august forum a few days ago "Telangana Development : Regional Imbalances In Human Development". That's just a tip of the …

"Self Rule" is a bogey? Only for Telangana? "Self Rule" was NOT a bogey when Andhras demanded a separate State from Madras Presidency for Andhras?

I do appreciate it much for Mr. Markaneyulu gari suggestion for a meeting of minds between I and Mr PP but is it not necessary that the minds be objective, and honest?

Sincerely,

Subhash C. Reddy, Ph.D.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/karmayog-hyd/message/4512

.

Rashmun wrote:Acting Consul General Michael Yoder inaugurated a two-day seminar ‘The Socio Economic and Cultural Contribution of Mir Osman Ali Khan Nizam VII’ organized by the The Nizam’s Museum on September 13.

Speaking on the occasion Mr. Yoder said, “We so often get caught up in the emergencies and crises of daily life, I think it’s important to pause, and to appreciate our historical heritage. And in this context this seminar assumes great significance as the Asaf Jahi rulers, and in particular, Mir Osman Ali Khan, the last Nizam of Hyderabad, contributed extensively to the growth of literature, art, architecture, culture and rich food–a legacy that lives on today.”

He added that it was very heartening to know that the foundation for Hyderabad’s success was laid by a wise and benevolent leader who demonstrated religious tolerance while devoting himself to advancing Islamic scholarship. “Many of today’s politicians are following the ideas that were originally from the period of the Nizams. Once again, the philosophy of this historical period continues to shape our modern history,” Mr. Yoder said.

The idea behind the seminar was to create awareness about the achievements made by the Asaf Jahi rulers apart from the contributions made by Mir Osman Ali Khan. Nine scholars and historians were contributing research papers as part of the seminar.

While wishing the seminar a success Mr, Yoder said, “I would like conclude by stating that visitors to Hyderabad will leave with a lasting impression of the grandeur that was once the Hyderabad State.

http://hyderabad.usconsulate.gov/pe091411.html

.

Rashmun wrote: Putting the Nizam's rule in perspective

I promise you this is going to be a short post. That is because even though the subject is big, it has been dealt with many times at different points in the blog in conjunction with the question of who developed Hyderabad. The other day the famous Telugu poet and participant in the original Telangana Armed Struggle, Dasaradhi Rangachari was quoted by the Hindu as having said that he was disheartened by the attempts being made to project the Nizam of Hyderabad, especially the last Nizam, Mir Osman Ali Khan as a person who was responsible for the development of the city. He is also quoted by the Hindu as having said that the only thing that the Nizam had done was set up the Osmania University and that too with the money of the people which he had collected as taxes.

Without in anyway questioning the credentials of the great poet and his contribution to the reduction of feudalism in the Telangana region, I would like to join issue with his reported utterances. I am aware that he is an octogenarian and has seen more of life and the region than I have, but I have on my side an octogenarian (yes, my father, I will invoke his experience here again) and also more than forty years of living in Hyderabad to know what was the contribution of the last Nizam to the development of the city of Hyderabad and also perhaps to some areas of the region which was once the Hyderabad State. After having read the reports in the newspaper cited above as usual it became a subject of discussion between my father and me. While we have different views on the Telangana question (he believes in separation and I don't) we have agreements on many other things pertaining to Hyderabad.

After reading the report I sat back thinking and the first thought that came into my head was that when I was a child going to school we were taught that Hyderabad was the fifth biggest city in India. The other four cities were (in the order then) Calcutta, Delhi, Bombay and Madras. Delhi was the Capital of not only the British Empire but also of the other big empire that preceded it; the Mughal Empire. Calcutta, Bombay and Madras were port cities that were developed by the British as connection to the hinterland of India so that they could carry out trade through shipping. So in effect we are talking of these four cities having been developed due to the necessities of colonialism. But the fifth biggest city Hyderabad, thanks to the policies of the Nizam was never directly under British Colonialism even though it hosted a British Resident for my years. Yet it had developed. It was in the hinterland, not a port, did not have any solid agriculture, but it had started nascent industrial development. Hyderabad always had wide roads, an underground drainage and sewerage system and an architectural style that was uniquely its own. Most constructions used the now famed Indo-Sarcenic style and more importantly the city had a unique character that was derived out of its tehzeeb or loosely put hospitality (I cannot find a better word and therefore the loose translation). It also had a system of drinking water which was a form of rain harvesting and this was done by linking various tanks that were created to hold water.

So where did this all come from? Obviously it came from the Nizam's rule. Dasaradhi Rangachari is not right in believing that it was only the Osmania University that was the contribution of the Nizam to development. And which ruler of any kind would do things without collecting taxes from the people? Let me put it this way; it was possible for the Nizam to collect taxes and do nothing for the people. But he did do something for the people. The Osmania University was set up and along with it a translation bureau to translate technical terms of medicine, engineering and agriculture from English to Urdu. My father tells me that the bureau was fully functional, unlike the Telugu Academy which was set up in the 1970s, which has done nothing except bring out English textbooks now. One cannot forget that even prior to the setting up of the Osmania University, there was the Nizam College set up in 1887 (hope my date is right) which was offering courses in English medium and was affiliated to the Madras University till 1948-49 when it was made a part of Osmania University when the university had switched over to offering education in English.

The Nizam also gave scholarships to students to pursue higher studies in other regions with the rider that they come back and serve him. My grand father and his brothers were beneficiaries of this. The Nizam set up the Hyderabad Administrative Service and paid salaries that were higher than what the British were paying to the Indian Civil Service officers to attract good talent to his state. He enlisted the services of the famed Mokshagundam Vishweshwaraiah who not only plotted the course of the Isa and the Musi river and created the Himayat Sagar and Osman Sagar (Gandipet) reservoirs but also created a system of interlinked tanks from Medchal tank through the Fox Sagar tank to the Hussain Sagar tank. I am not even talking of other linkages here since I do not remember them too well. Then he tried to create a circular railway and did create it actually much like the ring roads of today. So where is the question of his not bringing about development? My father tells me there was no religious bigotry either and that many jagirdars were not even Muslims.

I am not lionising the Nizam, but I think it is extremely invidious to accuse someone of having contributed only to backwardness when there are glaring examples of conscious contribution to development. This post also does not belittle the greatness of people such as Dasaradhi Rangachari. It has only been made because of a fervent desire to project things as they should be; sometimes even people that we may not like do good things and just because we do not like them we cannot say they never did any good. This post will also not deny the excesses of the Razakars. That is also a true piece of history. But this is about the contribution of the Nizam to development and therefore I have only limited myself to it. The State of Andhra Pradesh is passing through a critical phase and at this juncture it is imperative that we do not distort history and create unnecessary antipathies between people.

P.S: I only seem to make these posts in great haste and therefore not proof read. Errors may please by excused.

http://avspolitics.blogspot.com/2012/01/putting-nizams-rule-in-perspective.html

.

sufficient information about the Nizams, particularly the last Nizam (Osman Ali Khan), has been given in this thread so that i would like to now do some preliminary analysis of the available knowledge about the Nizam Osman.

There is sufficient evidence to show that he did a lot of developmental activity in his state, he tried to introduce modern technology in his state, and that he was not wasteful with public funds. In other words, he was a good ruler.

But there is another field of thought which says he was a bad ruler. my thinking is that the people who consider him to be a bad ruler do so because:

1. He was, after all, a king. His state was not a democracy. Hence people in his state fighting for democracy are to be appreciated. On the other hand, my point is that we should not compare him and his state to democratic states. We should compare him and his state to other monarchies. The Nizam seems to come off favorably when compared to any other contemporary king in terms of developmental activities carried out during his reign.

2. After independence, the Nizam should have had the foresight to merge his state with India. But probably due to the poor advise he received from his foolish advisors he thought he might be able to make his state independent. After all he had seen before his eyes the creation of Pakistan and Bangladesh. A para-military organization called the razakars was formed to protect his state. The creation of this organization may have met with his approval but from what we know he quickly lost control over its day to day activities.

It is important to note that the razakars also included hindus, but since hindus were in the majority in the Nizam's state their targets (those who wanted the Nizam's state to merge with India) were also frequently hindus.

It could be said that the razakars were 'misguided patriots' providing we keep in mind that they were serving the interests of the state of hyderabad, for the preservation of the state of hyderabad.

the reason the razakars could not possibly have been targeting only hindus is because many muslims had also joined the struggle to merge the state of hyderabad with India and it is inevitable that these would have become targets of the razakars.

Blasphemy!

Rashmun wrote:sufficient information about the Nizams, particularly the last Nizam (Osman Ali Khan), has been given in this thread so that i would like to now do some preliminary analysis of the available knowledge about the Nizam Osman.

There is sufficient evidence to show that he did a lot of developmental activity in his state, he tried to introduce modern technology in his state, and that he was not wasteful with public funds. In other words, he was a good ruler.

But there is another field of thought which says he was a bad ruler. my thinking is that the people who consider him to be a bad ruler do so because:

1. He was, after all, a king. His state was not a democracy. Hence people in his state fighting for democracy are to be appreciated. On the other hand, my point is that we should not compare him and his state to democratic states. We should compare him and his state to other monarchies. The Nizam seems to come off favorably when compared to any other contemporary king in terms of developmental activities carried out during his reign.

2. After independence, the Nizam should have had the foresight to merge his state with India. But probably due to the poor advise he received from his foolish advisors he thought he might be able to make his state independent. After all he had seen before his eyes the creation of Pakistan and Bangladesh. A para-military organization called the razakars was formed to protect his state. The creation of this organization may have met with his approval but from what we know he quickly lost control over its day to day activities.

It is important to note that the razakars also included hindus, but since hindus were in the majority in the Nizam's state their targets (those who wanted the Nizam's state to merge with India) were also frequently hindus.

It could be said that the razakars were 'misguided patriots' providing we keep in mind that they were serving the interests of the state of hyderabad, for the preservation of the state of hyderabad.

the reason the razakars could not possibly have been targeting only hindus is because many muslims had also joined the struggle to merge the state of hyderabad with India and it is inevitable that these would have become targets of the razakars.

to those who oppose the Nizam unequivocally i would like to say that they should cease to see him in black and white terms.

the fractured legacy of the Nizam because of Indian independence and the struggle to merge his state with India (because the Nizam did not do so voluntarily) means that we come across some seemingly strange (from the point of view of someone who agrees that the Nizam was essentially a good king) news items from time to time. for instance:

July 29:
Hyderabad, July 30: The heroic freedom fighter, Jagadish Arya, who hurled a bomb at the Nizam Mir Osman Ali Khan on the evening of December 4, 1947, is likely to be honoured by the President, Ms Pratibha Patil, on August 9, on the occasion of the 69th anniversary celebrations of the Quit India Movement. The Hyderabad Collector, Mr Natarajan Gulzar, has recommended that he be given a place of honour in the reception.

The collector also nominated Mr M. Ramachandra Reddy from the city as another freedom fighter to be felicitated. The list of freedom fighters and their escorts will be forwarded to the revenue department which would in turn be sent it to the Centre, if the state government approves of it. Jagadish Arya, and his comrades, Narayana Rao Pawar and Gandaiah, threw a powerful bomb at the Nizam as he entered All Saint’s High School Crossroads on the King Koti Road.

But the Nizam escaped the attack by a whisker. The 90-year-old freedom fighter and his wife Neela Devi, who has been nominated as the escort, stay at Sultan Bazaar in Hyderabad.

http://www.siasat.com/english/news/president-honor-nizam-bomber

on another thread Charvaka writes:

panini press wrote:I notice that Rashmun is furiously trying to move the goalpost to call the Nizam a good king. Let me tackle his latest nonsense.

Rashmun wrote:There is sufficient evidence to show that he did a lot of developmental activity in his state, he tried to introduce modern technology in his state, and that he was not wasteful with public funds. In other words, he was a good ruler.

By this yardstick, Aurangzeb comes across as a great ruler, better than Akbar. Unlike Akbar, Aurangzeb used public funds rather carefully. He didn't spend it lavishly on himself.

Aurangzeb had bankrupted his treasury because of his ceaseless wars. In fact he died 'with his boots on'. So in fact he was wasteful with public funds; its just that he spent the funds on wars.

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:It is important to note that the razakars also included hindus, but since hindus were in the majority in the Nizam's state their targets (those who wanted the Nizam's state to merge with India) were also frequently hindus.

It is important to note that Aurangzeb's army also included Hindus, but since Hindus were in the majority in Aurangzeb's state their targets (those who wanted an Islamic state in India) were also frequently Hindus.

Again, the sort of justification offered here for the behavior of the Nizam's private army can also be used to defend Aurangzeb. If Rashmun wants to be logically consistent, he should defend both Aurangzeb and the Nizam.

Charvaka's argument is nonsensical because it is the Nizam's army which should be compared to Aurangzeb's army. Nizam's army never targeted any hindu (or muslim) who wanted to merge the state with India. Nizam did not have direct control over razakars. Furthermore, razakars included hindus.

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Aurangzeb had bankrupted his treasury because of his ceaseless wars. In fact he died 'with his boots on'. So in fact he was wasteful with public funds; its just that he spent the funds on wars.

He spent all the money for developing the Mughal state and extending its borders. This was the duty of kings in those times. Also, he could have collected more revenues, but he chose not to by abolishing 80 different taxes, most of which were paid by Hindus.

one will not dispute the fact that extending borders was a duty of a king in those times. the problem with aurangzeb was that he 'chewed off a lot more than he could swallow'. before his rule over conquered territories had stablized he was off conquering other territories. this was one reason why his kingdom collapsed after his death. (the other reason is that his successors were all weaklings.)

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:the reason the razakars could not possibly have been targeting only hindus is because many muslims had also joined the struggle to merge the state of hyderabad with India and it is inevitable that these would have become targets of the razakars.

The reason Aurangzeb could not possible have been targeting only Hindus is because many Muslims also were opposed to the Mughal empire and it is inevitable that these would have become targets of Aurangzeb.

In fact, Aurangzeb attacked the Muslim state of Golconda and conquered it through treachery. It is as a result of that treacherous conquest that the Nizams came to rule Hyderabad in the first place!

This makes Aurangzeb secular.

but aurangzeb imposed jaziya (special tax on non-muslims). Sure, jaziya was not imposed on women, children, and the elderly but the fact that it was a discriminatory tax was recognized by Akbar, Jahangir, and Shivaji. Akbar abolished it, Jahangir continued Akbar's policy on jaziya, and Shivaji protested against the imposition of jaziya by Aurangzeb.

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:After independence, the Nizam should have had the foresight to merge his state with India. But probably due to the poor advise he received from his foolish advisors he thought he might be able to make his state independent.

After he became king, Aurangzeb should had the foresight to not impose jaziya. But probably due to the poor advice he received from his foolish advisers he thought he might be able to get away with it.

If "poor advice" from "foolish advisers" is a reasonable justification for the Razakar massacres, then it is a reasonable justification also for the excesses of Aurangzeb and Hitler.

if you would have been in the Nizam's position, even you might have been tempted to see if you could pull off independence for your state. After all, pakistan had been granted independence (together with the chunk of land in eastern india which is now bangladesh). nizam thought that if jinnah could get some land from India, why couldn't he?

Rashmun wrote:Charvaka's grievance against the Nizam stems from the fact that the Razakars roughed up some people he knew personally. The point is that Nizam had no control over Razakars and hence Charvaka should consider forgiving the Nizam.

------



TNN Sep 17, 2006, 01.07am IST


GULBARGA:
For the first time after the liberation of the erstwhile Hyderabad
state, which include Bidar, Gulbarga and Raichur districts of Karnataka,
the prince of the erstwhile Nizam dynasty, Fazalza Bahaddur, has
expressed regret over any 'untoward incidents' that would have occurred
happened during the rule of his father Mir Usman Alikhan Bahaddur, the
last Nizam of Hyderabad.
The
prince, who is here for the Hyderabad-Karnataka Liberation Day
celebrations to be observed on Sunday, said that neither the Nizam nor
his soldiers had done any harm to the Hindu community during the Nizam
rule.

Only
the razakars (chieftains who were not under the direct control of the
Nizam) may have harmed the people of Hindu community, he felt.
Fazalza
Bahaddur claimed that his father was a kindhearted man and helped
people irrespective of creed and caste. He started 135 trusts in
Hyderabad for the welfare of different sections like students, disabled
persons, patients, old age persons.
"How
can a man of such character harm anybody", he questioned. Disputing
claims that Hyderabad state was liberated on September 18, 1948, the
prince said that as per records available with him, his father handed
over the administration of Hyderabad state to the Government of India on
September 17,1948.






http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2006-09-17/bangalore/27788973_1_nizam-prince-gulbarga

.

Rashmun wrote:Andhra Pradesh - Hyderabad

The enigma that was Mir Osman Ali Khan

J.S. Ifthekhar

Last Asaf Jahi ruler considered architect of modern Hyderabad The last Asaf Jahi ruler is best remembered as the architect of modern Hyderabad


Hyderabad: It was one of those chilly winter nights. Mir Osman Ali Khan, the seventh Nizam, feels like acquiring a new blanket and calls his ADC and orders him to buy a blanket. But there is a rider - the price should not exceed Rs. 25. The ADC goes around the bazaar and comes back crestfallen. The minimum price of a blanket is Rs. 35. When the Nizam learns this he decides to make do with the old blanket.

A few hours later, he gets a request from the Maharaja of Bikaner for a donation for the Benaras Hindu University. Without thinking twice he orders the sanction of Rs. 1 lakh! Sounds incredible. But that was the last Nizam for you. He would use the 185-carat Jacob diamond as a paperweight and at the same time settle for a simple sherwani and pyjama for a dress. Stories of his frugal habits are dime a dozen.

Defies definition


Once he contributed gold coins worth crores of rupees to the National Defence Fund of the Government of India. When the trunks containing the coins were being loaded into vans, the Nizam told the officer in his characteristic style. "I am donating the coins not the trunk. See that they are returned."

Call him tight-fisted or open-handed, Osman Ali Khan defies definition. The last of the Asaf Jahi rulers, whose 124th birth anniversary is being observed today, he is best remembered as the architect of modern Hyderabad. His vision in developing a planned city couldn't be glossed over. The flash floods of 2000 submerged several posh localities in the new city while life in the old city went on unhindered. Old-timers recall how Hyderabad was one of the best-administered States under the Nizam. His 37-year rule saw the expansion of roadways, railways and postal services. Industries like the Shahbad cement factory and Nizam Sugar Factory were set up. The façade of Patharghatti underwent a change.

All the important buildings one can think of today were the result of his enlightened policies. The High Court, Assembly Hall, Osmania General Hospital, Nizamia Unani Hospital, Nampally railway station, Jubilee Hall, Osmansagar and Himayatsagar - the list is endless.

Biggest contribution


Osmania University remains the Nizam's biggest contribution to education. Another noteworthy aspect of his rule was communal harmony. After his death in 1967, his grandson, Mukkaram Jah Bahadur, was asked whether he planned to raise a monument for his grandfather. Pat came the reply: "Go around Hyderabad and you will find so many of them."


http://www.hindu.com/2006/07/27/stories/2006072723360200.htm

.

Rashmun wrote:The official Andhra Government site extolls the good deeds of the Nizams:


It was during the period of Nizam III -- Sikandar Jah (A.D.1803--1829), that the English cantonment, raised on the other side of Hussain Sagar, was named after him as Secunderabad. This township grew rapidly as the modern town with Railway station and other commercial establishments. The notable events under the rule (A.D. 1857--1869) of Nizam V, Afzal-ud-Daula, were the construction of the Afzal Gunj Bridge or the Nayapul, over the river Musi and the establishment of a General Hospital.

The modern era of the development of the twin cities began soon after the last flood of the river Musi in A.D.1908 which had shattered the life of the people living in Hyderabad. This necessitated the planned development of the city in a phased manner. Sri M.Vishweshwarayya, the great engineer of Mysore, was specially invited for this purpose and was appointed as adviser to the Nizam's Government to suggest measures for flood control and improvement of the city. As a result of his suggestion, Osman Sagar and Himayat Sagar were constructed in A.D.1917. These two dams not only controlled the floods from river Musi, but also supplied drinking water to the city. These spots have also become recreational centres for many people in Hyderabad. Another step taken for the development of the city was the formation of the City Improvement Board in A.D.1912, which paid greater attention to the construction of roads, markets, housing sites and shopping centres in the city. Nizam VII, Osman Ali Khan, also moved to Kingkothi, the northern suburb of the city in A.D.1914, which helped in the development of its surroundings. Several public utility services were commissioned in A.D.1922. Electricity was commissioned in A.D.1923. In A.D.1928 with the establishment of rail connection to Bangalore, the city was brought on the metre-gauge map of India. By A.D.1932 bus service was started in the city and in A.D.1936 the bus routes radiated from the capital to all the district headquarters. In A.D.1935, the Madras-Karachi Air Service was linked with Hyderabad with Hakimpet as landing ground.

Many buildings of utility like Legislative Assembly, Hyderabad and Secunderabad railway stations, the High Court, City College, the Asafia Library (present State Central Library), the Unani Hospital, the Osmania University, were constructed during the reign of Nizam VII.

If Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah was the founder of Hyderabad City, Osman Ali Khan, the Nizam VII, can be called as the maker of modern Hyderabad, in a variety of ways. The buildings constructed during his reign are impressive and represent a rich variety of architecture, such as the magnificent Osmania University, synthesizing the modern, the medieval and the ancient styles of architecture. The sprawling Osmania General Hospital in the Mughal style, the lofty High Court in Indo-Saracenic style, the stately well-proportioned Legislative Assembly building in Saracenic-Rajasthani style, symbolize his desire to build modern and majestic Hyderabad. The engineers or the architects and craftsmen of the period have to be congratulated for their talent.

A fascinating pretty edifice in the centre of the city is the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly building, with the lawns of the Public Gardens, to form the needed premises.

The noble buildings during the Asafjahis' period were the Chow Mahalla during Nizam V, Pancha Mahal, and the Falaknuma Palace. The Falaknuma, built by Nawab Viquar-ul-Umra, a Paigha Noble in A.D.1892 at a cost of Rs.40 lakhs, has become a land mark like Charminar.

The hereditary Diwans of the Nizams, the Salar Jungs were as colourful and dazzling as their masters. The Mir Alam Tank, the Mir Alam Mandi, the Salar Jung Museum, their Devdi, the Aliya School are inalienable parts of Hyderabad.

http://www.aponline.gov.in/quick%20links/hist-cult/history_modern.html#Asaf

.

it is interesting to note that the official andhra govt. website extolls the good deeds of the Nizam. What does this imply? It implies that Charvaka's view on the Nizam is not the mainstream view on the Nizams.

The Nizam comes across as a harmless individual. for instance:

Nizam VII: The original Grunge Icon

now that Charvaka's view on Nizam Osman Ali Khan has been shown to to be a view belonging to the lunatic fringe, he has cleverly started talking about the misdeeds of some 18th century Nizam hoping against hope that people would think he is talking about the misdeeds of Nizam Osman.

chaitanya wrote:

mahadeva wrote:

chaitanya wrote:

mahadeva wrote:
Yes!

telangana culture is not a perfect telugu culture. This is not same telangana belongs to Salivahana or Ganapathideva or Rudramadevi.

This a culture developed during the rule of nizam. Nizam did not allow the people to study, to cultivate, to speak,

He made these people in to slaves. Nizam goverment force the people to study urdu medium, they were force to speak in urdu. As a result the culture, habbits changed a lot. Now the present generation thinks Irony chai is their culture, thai biscuits are the culture, The langauge used by KCR is the langauge. They forget that Kcr son speaks a beautiful. sweet telugu. People forgot Rangacharya, Dr c.narayana reddy, suddala ashok teja and many others. Many of us like to speak the langauge introduced by nizam. We are trying to continue the legacy nizam. When descent of NIZAM joined in TRS non of us questioned? why?

I heard telangana means a place where telugupeople live. AM i wrong?

Hmm ...when you guys can have Krishnadeva raya as you greatest ruler , I dont see any problem with Nizam ! Atleast we dont claim that Nizam's mother tounge was Telugu ! Good or bad Nizam was our ruler just as Tamilians and British were your rulers .Just as you claim our telugu is "corrupt" by Urdu , the language you speak is "corrupt" by Tamil and Kannada .

Why shouldnt Nizam decendants join TRS ? When you guys can worship a British ruler why cant we have Nizam amongst us ! Atleast we have not built temples of the Nizam !


P.S - For the uninstantiated ..Krishnadeva Raya was Tuluvian ruler who had no geneological relation to anyone that spoke Telugu !

congratulations!

at least one accepted the true colour. Now i understand how muslim rulers enterd in to this country. Now i understand why prataparudra a great king of warngal was defeted by muslim rulers. Now i understand why decendants of prataparudra ran to Bustar in orissa. I say my language is not corruted by tamil and kannada, but it is influnced by samskrit. Even any body say still it is corrupted i feel proud, because they are indian. The aye not imported from Iron or iraqor other places.

Is so sad that many don't know that Harihara and bukka are from so called telngana( kingdom of great rani rudrama) After the fall of orugal kingdom reddies, kapus and many people migrated to various places of the state. Harihara and bukka were given shelter by vidyaranya and as a result there was a vijayanagara kingdom. It is sad that many telangana people dont know that Even i vijayanagara empire , they follwed the administation established by Rudrama.

It is very sad and heart breaking, when sme body support, british or nizam or bahamani sultan

I was referring to Krishnadevaraya the empitome of Telugu culture , is not even a Telugu speaking person ..but anyways you have circumvented the question.

So which Telugu are you talking about ? is it the Chittor area Telugu which is heavily influenced by Tamil , or the Karnool area that is influenced by Kannada , or the Srikakulam area that is influenced by Oriya ? Which Telugu are you talking about ? Can you be more specific ?

http://ourtelangana.com/content/language-difference-explained-kcr#comment-3589

-----------------

The extent of cultural synthesis achieved in Hyderabad has been vigorously debated over the past decades. Post merger polarization is often cited as conclusive proof that the famed 'Ganga-Jamuni' culture which promoted a mutual respect for the 'other' was superficial and was brought about chiefly due to the necessities of coexistence. This oft repeated argument of usually ill informed scholars is easily negated by an unbiased study of the quintessential Hyderabadi.

Maharaja Kishen Pershad was undoubtedly the most prominent among iconic personalities who defined the culture and society of Hyderabad in the last century. Born in 1864, the Maharaja traced his ancestry to Raja Todar Mal, the finance minister and a navratan of Akbar. Ranked among the Umera-e-Uzzam (premier nobles) of Hyderabad, Kishen Pershad was the most respected grandee of his time and his popularity was next only to that of the Nizam himself. A poet of renown, he used the nom de plume 'Shad'. A patron of the arts and literature, he supported numerous scholars who flocked to his palace seeking favours. This galaxy of talent at his court, comprising men of letters from diverse religious and cultural backgrounds, testify to his firm belief in a secular and cosmopolitan society. His own convictions are reflected in a poem in his inimitable and simple diction, where the Maharaja declares that 'na main Hindu, na main Musalman / har mazhab hai mera iman/ Shad ka mazhab Shad hi jane/ /azadi azad hi jane/' (I am neither Hindu nor Muslim/Every religion is my faith /Shad alone knows of his religious beliefs/ As only a freeman can fathom the true value of freedom).

Shad was the author of numerous books on a multitude of subjects apart from being a master in the art of calligraphy. He pursued myriad hobbies which included playing the sitar, painting, photography and sculpture. An avid sportsman, he loved to wrestle, was an ace horseman and loved big game hunting. He loved to call himself a fakir in the Sufi sense. Throughout his life he meticulously maintained the time-honoured traditions of Hyderabad, prime among them being a fierce loyalty to the Nizam and the state. Although a childhood companion of the Nizam, he considered maintaining the dignity of his sovereign to be his prime responsibility and being a staunch adherent of eastern court etiquette, he always maintained due respect and honour for his sovereign.

Maharaja Kishen Pershad succeeded to the hereditary post of Peshkar in 1892 and was appointed Divan (Prime Minister) in1900. After the death of his beloved monarch Mahbub Ali Khan in 1911, Maharaja found it increasingly difficult to continue under the new Nizam, Osman Ali Khan, and relinquished office a year later in 1912. It was a long time before he was brought back to the fore of Hyderabad affairs as president of the executive council in 1927. To the satisfaction of the people of Hyderabad, Maharaja's return brought back some of the lost pomp and grace of the glorious days of their beloved, Mahbub. He continued in the post for the next ten years up to his final retirement from public service in 1937. Among the most notable contributions during his second tenure was the protection afforded to locals through promulgation of the Mulki regulations. The influx of outsiders in large numbers who got the most coveted posts and were paid higher salaries on the grounds of supposedly possessing better qualifications had given birth to feelings of strong resentment among the locals. The Maharaja, being a public figure of long standing, knew the ground realities, and sympathized with the sentiment and put a restriction on appointment of outsiders and fixed a retirement age for public service.

This further endeared him to the masses who considered him a champion of Mulki rights. He was, however, careful to accommodate outsiders when necessary as the interest of the state and its people was uppermost in his mind. By reorganizing the salary structure and making state service lucrative for the talented, he took steps to ensure that the best candidates opted for government service.

The maharaja will be long remembered for his largesse, patronage of arts and literature, his literary contributions and for being the last icon of the Mughal way of life. On his demise in 1940, the Nizam remarked that in his death, society has witnessed the departure of the last vestige of the Mughal empire.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-11-14/hyderabad/30396684_1_nizam-osman-ali-khan-hyderabad

Very interesting. Let me try a less reverential summary:

Rashmun wrote:Born in 1864, the Maharaja traced his ancestry to Raja Todar Mal, the finance minister and a navratan of Akbar. Ranked among the Umera-e-Uzzam (premier nobles) of Hyderabad, Kishen Pershad was the most respected grandee of his time and his popularity was next only to that of the Nizam himself....Throughout his life he meticulously maintained the time-honoured traditions of .... fierce loyalty to the Nizam and the state. Although a childhood companion of the Nizam, he considered maintaining the dignity of his sovereign

1. Shad was a highly successful courtier whose success came from flaunting his childhood friendship with the Nizam, his fierce loyalty to the ruler and of course his illustrious lineage.

Rashmun wrote:A patron of the arts and literature, he supported numerous scholars who flocked to his palace seeking favours...Shad was the author of numerous books on a multitude of subjects apart from being a master in the art of calligraphy. He pursued myriad hobbies which included playing the sitar, painting, photography and sculpture. An avid sportsman, he loved to wrestle, was an ace horseman and loved big game hunting.

2. By cultivating the interests and hobbies of the rich and famous of the day, Shad became a highly successful networker and influence peddler.

Rashmun wrote:I am neither Hindu nor Muslim/Every religion is my faith /Shad alone knows of his religious beliefs/ As only a freeman can fathom the true value of freedom....He loved to call himself a fakir in the Sufi sense.

3. He overcame the disadvantage of his religion by disavowing his Hindu origins and calling himself a sufi fakir, without actually converting to Islam.

Rashmun wrote:Maharaja Kishen Pershad succeeded to the hereditary post of Peshkar in 1892 and was appointed Divan (Prime Minister) in1900. After the death of his beloved monarch Mahbub Ali Khan in 1911, Maharaja found it increasingly difficult to continue under the new Nizam, Osman Ali Khan, and relinquished office a year later in 1912. It was a long time before he was brought back to the fore of Hyderabad affairs as president of the executive council in 1927.

4. He fell from grace when the new Nizam took over. It took him 15 years to lobby various parties and call in past favors and get back to a position of power.

Rashmun wrote:Maharaja's return brought back some of the lost pomp and grace of the glorious days of their beloved, Mahbub. Among the most notable contributions during his second tenure was the protection afforded to locals through promulgation of the Mulki regulations... This further endeared him to the masses who considered him a champion of Mulki rights.

5. Back in power, Shad restored his earlier system of patronage and populism through lavishly spending public money on private interests. He took revenge on many of the Turkish and Persian courtiers who had ousted him earlier, by retiring many of them and giving preference to locals in all appointments.

Rashmun wrote:He was, however, careful to accommodate outsiders when necessary as the interest of the state and its people was uppermost in his mind.

6. And yet, he accommodate those outsiders who were close to the Nizam and who allied themselves to him.

Rashmun wrote:On his demise in 1940, the Nizam remarked that in his death, society has witnessed the departure of the last vestige of the Mughal empire.

On his death, the Nizam of the day noted the passing away of a relic and made plans for the proper disposal of the massive estates and large harem that the deceased had accumulated over a lifetime.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:Very interesting. Let me try a less reverential summary:

Rashmun wrote:Born in 1864, the Maharaja traced his ancestry to Raja Todar Mal, the finance minister and a navratan of Akbar. Ranked among the Umera-e-Uzzam (premier nobles) of Hyderabad, Kishen Pershad was the most respected grandee of his time and his popularity was next only to that of the Nizam himself....Throughout his life he meticulously maintained the time-honoured traditions of .... fierce loyalty to the Nizam and the state. Although a childhood companion of the Nizam, he considered maintaining the dignity of his sovereign

1. Shad was a highly successful courtier whose success came from flaunting his childhood friendship with the Nizam, his fierce loyalty to the ruler and of course his illustrious lineage.

Rashmun wrote:A patron of the arts and literature, he supported numerous scholars who flocked to his palace seeking favours...Shad was the author of numerous books on a multitude of subjects apart from being a master in the art of calligraphy. He pursued myriad hobbies which included playing the sitar, painting, photography and sculpture. An avid sportsman, he loved to wrestle, was an ace horseman and loved big game hunting.

2. By cultivating the interests and hobbies of the rich and famous of the day, Shad became a highly successful networker and influence peddler.

Rashmun wrote:I am neither Hindu nor Muslim/Every religion is my faith /Shad alone knows of his religious beliefs/ As only a freeman can fathom the true value of freedom....He loved to call himself a fakir in the Sufi sense.

3. He overcame the disadvantage of his religion by disavowing his Hindu origins and calling himself a sufi fakir, without actually converting to Islam.

sufis are considered heretics by orthodox muslims. the fact that Shad continued to play a dominant role at the court of the Nizam despite calling himself a sufi implies that the the Nizam was not a religious bigot but a liberal.

Rashmun wrote:sufis are considered heretics by orthodox muslims. the fact that Shad continued to play a dominant role at the court of the Nizam despite calling himself a sufi implies that the the Nizam was not a religious bigot but a liberal.

No, it only means the Nizam did not think Shad was a heretic. We don't know what he would have thought if Shad had had not been a childhood friend or if he had not disavowed his Hindu origins.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:

Rashmun wrote:sufis are considered heretics by orthodox muslims. the fact that Shad continued to play a dominant role at the court of the Nizam despite calling himself a sufi implies that the the Nizam was not a religious bigot but a liberal.

No, it only means the Nizam did not think Shad was a heretic. We don't know what he would have thought if Shad had had not been a childhood friend or if he had not disavowed his Hindu origins.

my contention is that if you proclaim yourself to be a sufi then you are closer to hinduism than to islam. two reasons:

1. sufis believe in monism. they believe that it is possible to become 'one with God' in mystical ecstasy through music and dancing. this is also what many orthodox hindu saints and philosophers believe (though the path for this union with God is to be achieved through yoga according to the hindus) although this view of God being within you is considered anathema by orthodox muslims.

2. sufis sing songs praising hindu Gods.

Rashmun wrote:

Merlot Daruwala wrote:

Rashmun wrote:sufis are considered heretics by orthodox muslims. the fact that Shad continued to play a dominant role at the court of the Nizam despite calling himself a sufi implies that the the Nizam was not a religious bigot but a liberal.

No, it only means the Nizam did not think Shad was a heretic. We don't know what he would have thought if Shad had had not been a childhood friend or if he had not disavowed his Hindu origins.

my contention is that if you proclaim yourself to be a sufi then you are closer to hinduism than to islam.

Sure, Sufism is closer to Hinduism than Islam but Shad had the option of remaining a Hindu. Can't get any closer to Hinduism than remaining within the fold, right? Instead, he distanced himself from his birth religion by claiming to be a Sufi fakir.

according to this site, the Nizam was a freemason:

http://www.reachouthyderabad.com/newsmaker/hw56.htm

Merlot Daruwala wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Merlot Daruwala wrote:

Rashmun wrote:sufis are considered heretics by orthodox muslims. the fact that Shad continued to play a dominant role at the court of the Nizam despite calling himself a sufi implies that the the Nizam was not a religious bigot but a liberal.

No, it only means the Nizam did not think Shad was a heretic. We don't know what he would have thought if Shad had had not been a childhood friend or if he had not disavowed his Hindu origins.

my contention is that if you proclaim yourself to be a sufi then you are closer to hinduism than to islam.

Sure, Sufism is closer to Hinduism than Islam but Shad had the option of remaining a Hindu. Can't get any closer to Hinduism than remaining within the fold, right? Instead, he distanced himself from his birth religion by claiming to be a Sufi fakir.

hinduism has got many sects and sub-sects within it. in my opinion Indian sufism should be considered a hindu sect. i know of hindus who are devotees of specific sufi saints. they find sufism to be indistinguishable from hinduism and i agree with them. This is crude answer to your question.

The more refined answer is that sufis are mystics and mystics do not have any religion. they are beyond the narrow confines of any religious dogma or ritual. this is also true for hindu mystics. in this sense also sufis and hindu mystics are indistinguishable.

Rashmun wrote:according to this site, the Nizam was a freemason:

http://www.reachouthyderabad.com/newsmaker/hw56.htm

about freemasonry:

Freemasonry is one of the world’s oldest secular fraternal societies. It is a world-wide organisation based on the principle of the ‘Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man’. It is a society of men concerned with moral and spiritual values. Its members are taught its precepts by series of rituals which follow ancient forms and use stone mason’s cutoms and tools and allegorical guides. It seeks to make good men better and there by make the world a better place in which to live.

The motto of Freemasonry is Brotherly Love, Relief & Truth.

http://www.reachouthyderabad.com/newsmaker/hw56.htm

in another thread Charvaka writes that Aurangzeb himself was a sufi. My response: Aurangzeb was clearly not a sufi at the time that he reimposed jaziya. Any kind of religious discrimination is anathema to sufis.

What may have happened is that Aurangzeb may have turned towards sufism in his old age shortly before he died. In one of his last letters he writes that 'i do not know what will happen to this sinner full of sins'.

Also, Nizam was not just friends with the sufi. The sufi was the most important person at his court. sufism is indistinguishable from mystical hinduism as i have earlier pointed out.

Further, Nizam did not impose jaziya on his people. So on the question of jaziya we have (Shivaji + Akbar + Jahangir + Nizam) vs Aurangzeb.

Also, Nizam was a freemason. This is further evidence of the fact the was not a religious bigot.

another point to note is that the official AP govt website extolls the good deeds of the Nizam. This is further evidence of the fact that Charvaka's view of the Nizam is not the mainstream view on the Nizam.

even though Aurangzeb was 3/8th hindu he made many serious mistakes like antagonizing the rajputs and reimposing jaziya. Which is why he wrote 'i do not know what will happen to this sinner full of sins' shortly before he died. Nizam only made one major mistake: he should have agreed to his state's merger with India. Even after this mistake the Indian govt. decided to make Nizam the governor of his state after Indian independence. Also, Nizam did not antagonize members of different communities and faiths like Aurangzeb did.

you know who else was a freemason? anders behring breivik, the anti secular, anti muslim mass murderer from norway that killed 80+ ppl last year.

Propagandhi711 wrote:you know who else was a freemason? anders behring breivik, the anti secular, anti muslim mass murderer from norway that killed 80+ ppl last year.

freemasons expelled anders from their organization after he went berserk. the man was mentally ill. do not compare him to Nizam.

now that charvaka has lost the argument he is busy dotting the same post again and again. One can only sympathize with Charvaka.

it is sad to see Charvaka telling lies about the Nizam. Charvaka, Freemasonry is not a religion. anybody of any religion can become a fremason without relinquishing the religion of their belief.

you would of course not be permitted to join Freemasons since a pre-requisite for joining the organization is that the prospective member should believe in God.

Aurangzeb wrote 'i do not know what will happen to this sinner full of sins' shortly before he died. Aurangzeb realized that he had made many serious mistakes. In contrast, Nizam had reconciled himself to India taking over his state. Nizam wrote a fine poem illustrating his reconciliation:

What splendour for our eyes – suspicious, fair!
What fragrance wafted on the morning air!
The tidings that from Delhi’s wails rang wide
Brought solace to all hearts, and joy and pride
To hearts released from bonds of caste and race -
Yea, hearts that only bend before God’s Grace.
How wondrous is the bond of Love! No heart
Disowns the spell it works by mystic art.

“Karbalas’ martyrdom” – love’s glorious meed -
proclaims what blessings crown the pure heart’s creed
‘Tis not the throned seat, the waving plume;
The heart’s the throne that golden deeds illume.
The feast’s prepared, the sparkling bowl o’erflows!
What joyous strains towards thee the Zephyr blows!
The new Dawn’s greetings, “OSMAN”, rich and strange,
And the four quarters hail the promised change!

http://cbkwgl.wordpress.com/2012/04/28/written-by-the-deposed-nizam-mir-osman-ali-khan-on-the-occassion-of-indias-becoming-a-republic/

Rashmun wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:you know who else was a freemason? anders behring breivik, the anti secular, anti muslim mass murderer from norway that killed 80+ ppl last year.

freemasons expelled anders from their organization after he went berserk. the man was mentally ill. do not compare him to Nizam.

it can be argued that anders did some bad things in the heat of youth that he felt remorse for and might do some good things if they just let him out. we just dont know yet, it's only been 1 yr. also, nizam might have done similar things if freemasons expelled him from their org too.

so it's only a matter of chance and happenstance that nizam did not also kill several innocent hyderabadis.

Rashmun wrote:even though Aurangzeb was 3/8th hindu he made many serious mistakes like antagonizing the rajputs and reimposing jaziya. Which is why he wrote 'i do not know what will happen to this sinner full of sins' shortly before he died. Nizam only made one major mistake: he should have agreed to his state's merger with India. Even after this mistake the Indian govt. decided to make Nizam the governor of his state after Indian independence. Also, Nizam did not antagonize members of different communities and faiths like Aurangzeb did.

Aurangzeb, despite being 3/8th hindu, imposed jaziya on hindus. Nizam never imposed jaziya on hindus.

Rashmun wrote:

Rashmun wrote:even though Aurangzeb was 3/8th hindu he made many serious mistakes like antagonizing the rajputs and reimposing jaziya. Which is why he wrote 'i do not know what will happen to this sinner full of sins' shortly before he died. Nizam only made one major mistake: he should have agreed to his state's merger with India. Even after this mistake the Indian govt. decided to make Nizam the governor of his state after Indian independence. Also, Nizam did not antagonize members of different communities and faiths like Aurangzeb did.

Aurangzeb, despite being 3/8th hindu, imposed jaziya on hindus. Nizam never imposed jaziya on hindus.

.