Explained : Aurangzeb vs Modi: Temple Demolition, Power, and the Politics of Hypocrisy and Its Impact

While Aurangzeb is known for destroying several temples, historians confirm around a dozen specific destructions, with some sources pointing to about sixteen confirmed cases. Saffron bigots, however, often inflate this number to thousands. In contrast, the so-called Hindu Hridaya Samrat, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, ordered the destruction of more than 40–50 ancient temples—some of significant architectural importance, including structures from the Samudragupta era—for the creation of the Varanasi Corridor.

The self-proclaimed custodian of Hindu and Hindutva, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), has expressed strong disapproval of the 17th-century Mughal emperor Aurangzeb, describing him as a figure who does not align with India’s “ethos.” By the same logic, the RSS must apply this principle to Modi and clarify whether he represents India’s ethos and adheres to Indian religious and cultural ethics.

Aurangzeb’s temple destruction stemmed from a mix of religious orthodoxy, political expediency, suppression of rebellion, and financial motives such as confiscation of wealth. His actions were not uniformly anti-Hindu. He employed Hindus, sometimes spared temples, and even issued grants to protect others. Destruction often targeted temples associated with rebels or symbols of defiance, while many were left untouched due to local political considerations or the absence of threat. This indicates a complex and shifting policy rather than simple religious bigotry.

Modi, on the other hand, destroyed temples and cultural relics to promote tourism and beautify his parliamentary constituency, Varanasi. The Kashi Vishwanath Corridor project, initiated in 2019, aimed to connect the Kashi Vishwanath Temple directly to the Ganges. This involved demolishing nearly 300–400 old homes and temples. If Mughal actions are interpreted as political acts to assert imperial authority, can Modi’s actions also be seen as an attempt to assert personal authority and project himself as the public face of crony capitalism?

Historians note that “temples patronised by persons who had submitted to state authority but later became enemies were often targeted by Mughal rulers.” According to Professor Richard Eaton, at least 14 temples were certainly demolished during Aurangzeb’s 49-year rule. Eaton documents around 80 instances of temple desecration between the 12th and 18th centuries. He also points out that temple destruction was not limited to Muslim rulers; Hindu kings since at least the 7th century similarly looted or destroyed temples patronised by enemy rulers as a political strategy to dismantle their authority.

Right-wing narratives frequently claim that tens of thousands of temples were destroyed during the medieval period, particularly under Aurangzeb, with figures ranging from 30,000 to 60,000. Yet these voices have remained conspicuously silent on the demolition of temples in Varanasi under the Modi regime.

During the demolition drive in Varanasi, many ancient small temples—hidden or built over by residential houses over centuries—were uncovered. What is most shocking is that the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and the state bureaucracy made no serious effort to protect these structures, despite being fully aware of their existence. Varanasi is known as the city of temples; it is inconceivable that its religious and anthropological significance was unknown to the administration.

Local residents protesting the demolitions allege that numerous statues were thrown into the Ganga. Yogi Adityanath dismissed these allegations, claiming that AI-generated videos were being circulated to defame his government. This was an attempt to wash away responsibility rather than speak the truth. The demolitions occurred only after administrative clearance. While some temples were marked for preservation, many were destroyed to make way for a modern corridor.

In March 2025, senior RSS leader Sunil Ambekar stated that Aurangzeb is “not relevant” today, while RSS Sarkaryavah Dattatreya Hosabale asserted that Aurangzeb’s legacy does not align with India’s ethos. Yet neither has clarified how Modi should be categorised. The RSS contrasts Aurangzeb with his brother Dara Shikoh, praising the latter for promoting harmony. Ironically, Modi falls far short of Dara Shikoh’s ideals. His eleven-year rule has deepened social divisions, with repeated public speeches singling out Muslims. RSS claims that its opposition to Aurangzeb is about national cohesion and “decolonising the mind,” but this argument rings hollow.

The RSS demands reclamation of sites like Gyanvapi and Mathura, claiming restoration of lost heritage. Will it also reclaim the temple sites desecrated during the Varanasi Corridor project? The RSS’s silence suggests otherwise.

The RSS will never raise this issue, as doing so would endanger its own designs. Through Modi, it has brought institutions under its influence. In July 2024, the Modi government lifted a 58-year-old ban on government employees participating in RSS activities. Media, judiciary, police, and other institutions have been steadily subordinated. Only Hindu saints committed to spiritual Hinduism have resisted. The RSS has failed to create “Godi saints.”

This campaign intensified during the Kumbh Mela, where over 60 pilgrims reportedly died. Yogi Adityanath targeted Shankaracharya Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati for criticising administrative failures. On January 18, his chariot procession was stopped; on January 19, he was humiliatingly ordered to prove his legitimacy as Shankaracharya. Throughout this episode, the RSS remained silent.

By denigrating Swami Avimukteshwaranand, the RSS and Yogi sent a clear message that traditional Hindu authority holds no value for them. Hindu ceremonies under Modi have increasingly followed Hindutva diktats. Dismantling the traditional saint system is central to the RSS project of a Hindu Rashtra. The demolition of Hindu vestiges in Varanasi is part of this strategy.

The administration claims redevelopment aims to ease congestion and improve facilities, but controversy erupted after the removal of a madhi during the Manikarnika Tirtha Corridor project. The issue escalated after objections from the families of Ahilyabai Holkar and the Pal community.

Ahilyabai Holkar, a devout Shaivite, had built a temple following a divine vision. Ironically, Aurangzeb issued a farman in 1658—still preserved at Banaras Hindu University—ordering the protection of temples and Brahmin priests. He granted land and funds to the Jangambadi Math to support worship and Sanskrit study.

Around 286 shivlings were uprooted during the corridor construction; only 146 were recovered. The government insists these actions were “renovation” and claims idols were secured, while filing FIRs against protestors to silence dissent.

Temple demolitions have occurred during Modi’s tenure in Gujarat and nationally. In 2008, around 80 temples in Gandhinagar were razed as “encroachments.” Mahant Rajendra Prasad Tiwari rightly questioned how such demolitions could occur in a democracy governed by the Constitution. Aurangzeb was an autocrat; today’s rulers are elected. Yet they behave no differently.

Arun Srivastava is a senior journalist