Bajrang Dal Threatens ‘Karseva 2.0’ to Uproot Aurangzeb’s Tomb

In a move reminiscent of the early ’90s fervor, the Bajrang Dal has issued an ultimatum to the Maharashtra government: remove the tomb of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb or face a mass mobilization of Hindus to undertake a ‘karseva’ for its removal. The organization lambasted Aurangzeb as a “Hindu-hater, cruel oppressor, and villain from Sambhajinagar,” asserting that his resting place has no rightful position in Maharashtra.

Historical Context of Aurangzeb’s Tomb

Aurangzeb, the sixth Mughal emperor, ruled a vast expanse of the Indian subcontinent from 1658 until his death in 1707. Contrary to the grand mausoleums of his predecessors, Aurangzeb chose a modest burial. His tomb, located in Khuldabad near Aurangabad, is a simple, unmarked grave within the shrine complex of Sheikh Zainuddin. This austerity was in line with his personal wishes, reflecting his adherence to a minimalist lifestyle.

Political Reactions and Legal Implications

The demand to dismantle Aurangzeb’s tomb has found resonance among certain political figures. Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis acknowledged the sentiment but emphasized the necessity of adhering to legal protocols. He pointed out that the site was designated as a protected monument under the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) during the previous Congress administration. “We all also want the same thing, but you need to do it within the framework of the law, because it is a protected site,” Fadnavis remarked, highlighting the legal constraints involved.

A Glimpse into the Past: Echoes of 1992

The Bajrang Dal’s reference to ‘karseva’ harks back to the 1992 demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, a watershed moment in India’s communal history. The term ‘karseva’ signifies voluntary labor, often associated with religious endeavors. The organization’s invocation of this term in the current context underscores the gravity of their threat and the potential for mobilizing large numbers of supporters.

A Divisive Debate: Heritage vs. Historical Wrongs

This development has reignited debates over how India should reconcile its rich, albeit tumultuous, history. Critics argue that erasing historical monuments amounts to denying the past, while proponents believe that symbols of oppression should not be glorified. The controversy over Aurangzeb’s tomb encapsulates this broader discourse, challenging the nation to balance preservation with the rectification of historical grievances.