Did the Tughlaq and Mughal dynasties in India use force to spread Islam?

It’s important to remember that the Muslim rulers of India (who were from Central Asia) were consistently in the minority, ethnically and religiously. India was and is a geographically, linguistically, and culturally diverse place and was never an easy place to rule- the concept of a unified Indian subcontinent is a relatively rare/modern one. As such, Mughal policy towards local faiths and belief systems diverged from what we might consider standard Islamic practice in order to strike a balance between Islamic and local elites (though the approach did vary from ruler to ruler).

The first challenge was how to classify the Hindu belief systems of the subcontinent. For the most part, native peoples were incorporated under ahl al-dhimma, the category of religious groups that dealt with the rights and obligations of non-Muslims within the Islamic state. Traditionally, this was a designation used for Jews and Christians, but in the case of India, it was expanded to include the Hindu belief systems as well. This was mainly pragmatic; during the reign of Akbar, Muslims probably consisted of less than 10% of the population, and the classification of local beliefs under the dhimmi label allowed the state to peacefully co-exist with their subjects.

Now Akbar (1556-1605) reflects one extreme in state approaches to religious policies, adopting what we might call an all-inclusive approach to the varied beliefs of his subjects. In what must have come as a shock to Sunni traditionalists, Akbar abolished the jizyah, the poll tax on non-Muslims and incorporated the Rajput nobles into the ruling elite, supported through marital alliances and even went as far as to abolish the Hindu pilgrimage tax. Yes, eventually Akbar seems to have formed a personal cult of sorts that celebrated his pantheistic approach to God. Known alternatively as Din-I Ilahi, or Tawhid-I Ilahi (Faith of God, or Divine Unity), the royal cult was comprised only of a select number of disciples, chosen by Akbar, who pledged to him absolute devotion in the pursuit of a sort of spiritual integration on the elite level. For most part it seemed confined to the aristocracy, more concerned with creating cohesion among the aristocracy than the creation of a new, comprehensive religion for the masses. At any rate, the cult died with him- the whole approach tended to alienate some of the elites, Muslim and local alike. However, some of his policies remained. While his successors abandoned Akbar's religious cult, the tolerant approach to local faiths was maintained. The Rajputs were a continual presence within the Mughal court, the construction of new, non-Muslim temples was allowed, and -perhaps most importantly- the jizyah was not reinstated (and would remain so for nearly one hundred years). Again, I can’t emphasize enough the balance the Mughal rulers had to shoot for. It’s tough to rule over such a big and diverse place from a central location, compromises with the local elite were made to ensure effective rule.

Under Aurangzeb (1658-1707), imperial policy definitely did swing to the more conservative. By 1679 the jizyah had been reinstated, reemphasizing Sunni orthodoxy among the aristocratic elite of Mughal society, and alienating the Rajput and other non-Muslim groups. Conventional readings of Aurangzeb’s reign have painted him as an orthodox ruler absorbed in an attempt to create a traditional Islamic state in India, but this reading may not be entirely fair. The political climate in the second half of the seventeenth century was ripe for an orthodox revival. Increased pressure from the ulama (the class of Islamic legal scholars), who relied on imperial patronage for support, forced Aurangzeb to reevaluate the allocation of his resources. Furthermore, growing discontent among the Rajput elite also resulted in a rebellion led by the emperor’s own son. After his defeat, the son fled south to the Deccan where he joined himself to the Marathas, a ‘native’ kingdom that had arisen to challenge the authority of the Mughals in the region. The Maratha kingdom made a point to differentiate themselves from the Mughal emperors with Shivaji, the kingdom’s charismatic ruler, being crowned Chhatrapati in 1674, a title given to a traditional Hindu ruler. The move challenged Mughal authority in the region, creating a homegrown alternative to the Muslim emperors. The upswing in political unrest coincided with the dramatic increase in Aurangzeb’s orthodox measures. Aurangzeb attempted to rally the Muslim elite under the banner of Islam, hoping to galvanize and unite the nobility against the Maratha threat in the Deccan. The reimplementation of the jizya, then, could be seen as a rallying cry meant to unite Muslim public opinion behind him. The reinstatement of the jizya in 1679 coincided with increased religious overtones in political rhetoric, urging the Deccani nobility to turn on the Maratha infidels out of devotion to Islam. Aurangzeb, like Akbar, believed in the unifying power of faith, and hoped he could awaken the sense of moral obligation that would compel his subjects to defend the Islamic state. The policy ultimately fell short of its intended goals and only furthered the alienation of the important Rajput power base. Aurangzeb seemed to take the hint, and in the closing years of his reign shifted back towards the traditional moderate approach and focused his efforts on checking the emerging Maratha polity.

TL;DR Early Modern India was a culturally, geographically, and religiously diverse place, making effective, centralized rule difficult for a minority Muslim ruling class. While there were notable outliers who tended towards more radical (Akbar) or more conservative (Aurangzeb) approaches, policy towards local belief systems tended to be moderately relaxed in order to strike a balance of power that would not alienate either the local aristocracies or the Islamic religious elite.