New Delhi: In 2019, after the Supreme Court’s Ram Janmabhoomi verdict, when RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat was asked whether the Sangh would also take up the similar temple-mosque controversies in Varanasi (Gyanvapi mosque) and Mathura (Shahi Idgah), he said no.
“The Sangh is associated with the Ram temple movement due to its historical backdrop,” he said. “It is an exception. Now we will again be associated with human development.”
However, following the inauguration last month of the Ram temple in Ayodhya, demands for a relook at the Places of Worship Act, 1991 — which seals the character of places of worship as they stood on 15 August 1947 — have grown.
With a BJP MP calling for the same in Parliament Monday, and in light of the Vishva Hindu Parishad’s (VHP’s) stand on Gyanvapi, the campaign seems to be gaining ground.
Giving wind to the demands is the Archaeological Survey of India’s (ASI’s) January report on Gyanvapi that stated a temple did stand there prior to the construction of the existing structure. Following an order from a Varanasi district judge, prayers were also held in the mosque’s cellar last week.
A senior BJP leader said that, “for Hindus, Kashi and Mathura are the most important religious places”.
“The Ram temple inauguration and recent ASI report is building pressure to review the Places of Worship Act,” the leader added, saying it was “passed by Parliament and is not sacrosanct”.
“Recent developments have changed the entire course of argument. The court has allowed puja (Gyanvapi)… The party will wait for the court to settle the issue but it is true that there is a national awakening to find a solution for both Varanasi and Mathura.”
A second BJP leader said the “prime minister’s statement in Assam reflects the priority given by the government to develop religious sites”.
The BJP has been branding the redevelopment of temples as the renaissance of Hindu culture undertaken by the Modi government.
While laying the foundation stone for the Kamakhya corridor Sunday, Modi said, “Our religious sites are not just sites for darshan. They are the symbol of thousands of years of civilisation. Bharat has remained strong even after facing difficulties. Those who ran the government [earlier] did not realise the importance of sacred places of worship. For political benefit, they started the trend of being ashamed of their own culture.”
Also Read: ‘Mathura isn’t Kashi’: BJP plan to develop Bankey Bihari temple area has riled up Hindus
‘Arbitrary law’
Speaking during the zero hour Monday, BJP Rajya Sabha MP Harnath Singh Yadav raised the demand to scrap the Places of Worship Act, calling it “unconstitutional”.
The MP from Uttar Pradesh said the “Act’s provisions are not only arbitrary but unconstitutional”.
“It violates the principle of uniformity and secularism prescribed in the Constitution. This law prohibits judicial review, which is against the basic fundamentals of law,” he added. “This law favours foreign invaders who captured Gyanwapi and Lord Krishna’s land and other Hindu temples with power. This law creates differences among Lord Ram and Lord Krishna, both are incarnations of Lord Vishnu.”
This law, he said, “is ending social harmony of communities”.
Yadav had made the same demand in 2021, ahead of the 2022 Uttar Pradesh assembly election. In 2022, he submitted a private member’s bill to repeal the Act.
Speaking to ThePrint, Yadav said “he has been demanding that the law be scrapped, for the past few years”.
“After temple inauguration, when Ram has come to his home, how come the law will be different for Krishna”.
In a statement last week, VHP working president Alok Kumar referred to the ASI report submitted to the Varanasi district judge hearing the Gyanvapi matter, and said “the evidence collected by the ASI from the Gyanvapi structure reconfirms that the mosque was constructed after demolishing a magnificent temple”.
Kumar said “a part of the… structure, particularly the western wall, is the remaining part of the Hindu Temple”.
He also referred to 2022 claims about the discovery of a Shivling in the wuzu khana (a pond for ablution) of the mosque, saying it “leaves no doubt that the structure does not have the character of a mosque”.
“The discovery of names such as Janardana, Rudra and Umeswara in the inscriptions found in the structure are tell-tale evidence of this being a temple,” he added.
He said the “evidence collected and the conclusions provided by the ASI do prove that the religious character of this place of worship existed on the 15th day of August, 1947, and, as at present, is of a Hindu temple”.
“Thus, even as per… the Places of Worship Act, 1991, the structure should be declared a Hindu temple,” he added.
The VHP statement also called upon the Gyanvapi mosque management committee to “agree to respectfully shift the Gyanvapi mosque to another appropriate place and to hand over the original site of Kashi Vishwanatha to the Hindu society”.
“The VHP believes that this righteous action shall be an important step towards creating amicable relations between the two prominent communities of Bharat,” he added.
After the Varanasi court allowed Hindu worship at Gyanvapi, the VHP said it expected the judiciary to expeditiously hear the title suit on the ownership of the property, and announce its verdict.
Union minister Giriraj Singh said after the ASI report was made public that the Muslim side should “on its own hand over the temple to the Hindu side”.
“This will provide an opportunity to correct the mistakes made in the past, and will also promote social harmony,” he added.
In July last year, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath said there will be a dispute if one calls Gyanvapi a mosque. “Whoever has eyes can see the structure (read, can understand that it is not a mosque),” he added.
During the Ram Lalla consecration, Bhagwat had called for shunning disputes, while telling RSS workers in 2022 that “there is no need to look for a Shivling in every mosque”.
“The Ayodhya agitation was an exception,” he said. Referring to the Gyanvapi issue, he said “there is history that can’t change”.
“That history is not made by us, not by today’s Hindus or Muslims. It happened at the time when Islam came to India with invaders.”
“We don’t want any more agitation,” he said, adding that everyone involved in the Gyanvapi matter “should sit together and find a mutual solution”. “As this does not happen every time, the decision of the courts should be accepted by all,” he added.
(Edited by Sunanda Ranjan)
Also Read: Judge Vishvesha’s last Gyanvapi order sets his legacy. It’s like Ayodhya all over again