Erasing Hindu suffering: Kashi Vishwanath temple’s destruction whitewashed
India 
4 June, 2025
Case Summary
On a recent episode of comedian Kunal Kamra's talk show, Ram Puniyani made the following assertion: Aurangzeb did not demolish the temple in Varanasi (Kashi Vishwanath) out of religious fanaticism, but to stop "immoral activities" being conducted in the temple premises. To validate his claim, Puniyani gave a reference to Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya's book "Feathers and Stones". Ram Puniyani, an Indian author and former professor of biomedical engineering, has a history of making controversial statements. He has been flagged as a repeat offender by Hinduphobia Tracker for his attempts to downplay or obscure the religious persecution of Hindus in Indian history. In a previous article titled “History turned into a political weapon: Muslim rulers disappear from the curriculum,” Puniyani lamented the removal of details about the Delhi Sultanate and Mughal rule from textbooks, claiming this erased around 700 years of history. Hinduphobia Tracker has already documented the problematic nature of such claims, which were attempts to whitewash the atrocities committed against Hindus and undermine their historical suffering.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of - Hate speech against Hindus. The sub-category selected here is - Denial or mocking of genocide/large-scale persecution. Denial or mocking of genocide/large-scale persecution/ethnic cleansing refers to the act of denying or minimizing the fact of the ethnic cleansing and/or genocide and/or religious persecution of Hindus. This often involves denying the scale, mechanisms, religious intent, or even the occurrence of the ethnic cleansing and/or genocide and/or religious persecution of Hindus. Hate speech of this kind involves the dissemination of falsehoods that deny or distort established historical facts or mock the suffering of Hindus by saying that they deserved the persecution, motivated by Hinduphobia. Denying such atrocities is not only about the denial of facts or rewriting/revising history, but it also delegitimises the religiously motivated persecution of Hindus, the religious hate/motivation/animosity that led to the persecution, and dehumanises Hindus as a religious group. Such denial of ethnic cleansing and/or genocide and/or religious persecution of Hindus not only denies the suffering but also paves the way for future/present atrocities and hate speech, inciting prejudice and violence against Hindus. It also provides a justification for violence by delinking religious animosity from religiously motivated crimes committed against Hindus. Since such denial and/or mocking of genocide/ethnic cleansing/atrocities motivated by religious animosity leads to present and future ramifications of creating more hate speech, violence, dehumanisation and delegitimisation, it would be considered hate speech under this category. The other sub-category selected is - Anti Hindu subversion and prejudice, and within it the tertiary category selected is - Anti-Hindu Fake News or Downplaying. Hate speech is defined as any speech, gesture, conduct, writing, or display that is prejudicial against a specific individual and/or group of people, which is leading to or may lead to violence, prejudicial action or hate against that individual and/or group. Media plays a specific and overarching reach in perpetuating prejudicial attitudes towards a community owing to unfair, untrue coverage and/or misrepresentation/misinterpretation, selective coverage and/or omission of facts of/pertaining to issues affecting a specific religious group. This type of bias can dehumanise the victim group, making it easier for others to justify harmful actions against them, which aligns with the objectives of hate speech laws aimed at preventing such harm. It is often observed that the media takes a prejudicial stand against the Hindu community driven by their need to shield the aggressor community which happens to be a numeric minority, however, is the one perpetrating violence against Hindus. For example, the media is often quick to contextualise religiously motivated crimes against Hindus, omit or misrepresent facts that point towards religiously motivated hate crimes, justify and/or downplay religiously motivated hate crimes or simply present fake news to stereotype Hindus. Such media bias leads to the denial of persecution and is often used to dehumanise Hindus, leading to justification for violence against them. For example, the media covered several fake allegations of Hindus targeting Muslims and forcing them to chant Jai Shree Ram. Most of these cases were proved false and fabricated after police investigation. These fake news reports were subsequently never retracted or clarified. Such fake news led to the justification of violence and dehumanisation of Hindus based on the argument that since Hindus targeted Muslims and forced them to chant Jai Shree Ram, the dehumanisation of Hindus and violence against them was par for the course and merely a retaliation. Such media bias leads to prejudicial portrayal of Hindus and offers a justification for violence against them and therefore, is considered hate speech under this category. Ram Puniyani’s assertion on Kunal Kamra’s show that Aurangzeb did not demolish the Kashi Vishwanath Temple in Varanasi out of religious fanaticism but to stop "immoral activities" in the temple, and his use of Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya’s book as a reference is an example of hate speech against Hindus. According to established historical scholarship and contemporary evidence, Aurangzeb’s demolition of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple is well documented. The destruction was not motivated by claims of "immoral activities" but, as evidenced by contemporary Mughal records and accounts such as the Maasir-i-Alamgiri, was explicitly ordered with the intent “to establish Islam” and to suppress Hindu religious practices, which Aurangzeb considered “false”. The religious motivation behind this act is corroborated by multiple historians and contemporary sources, and the act is widely regarded as a form of religious persecution targeting a sacred site of Hindu worship. Aurangzeb stands out in history for his systematic destruction of Hindu temples—most notably the Kashi Vishwanath Temple in Varanasi and the Keshavdev Temple in Mathura—and for his harsh policies against Hindus, including the reimposition of the jizya tax and forced conversions. He issued orders to demolish Hindu temples, and his reign is remembered for its religious intolerance and suppression of Hindu practices. Mosques were sometimes built over the ruins of temples, and Murtis were destroyed as part of his efforts to establish Islamic dominance. This pattern of religious intolerance and destruction was not unique to Aurangzeb. Earlier Mughal tyrants, too, engaged in the demolition of Hindu temples and the persecution of Hindus. Babur, the founder of the Mughal dynasty, destroyed Hindu temples and idols during his campaigns, as documented in his memoirs. Akbar committed violent acts, such as the massacre of civilians after the Siege of Chittorgarh. Jahangir executed the Sikh Guru Arjan Dev and imposed heavy penalties on Hindus, while Shah Jahan destroyed Hindu temples and imposed discriminatory taxes. Thus, the Mughal history is marked by recurring episodes of religious persecution and cultural suppression, with each ruler contributing to a legacy of intolerance against Hindus in varying degrees. Denying the religiously motivated nature of this destruction, or minimising it by suggesting it was due to “immoral activities” rather than religious animosity, constitutes a form of historical distortion that delegitimises the suffering and persecution of Hindus. Such denial not only distorts established facts but also dehumanises Hindus as a community by implying that their religious practices or institutions were deserving of destruction. This is particularly harmful because it undermines the recognition of religiously motivated violence and persecution, and can be seen as mocking or trivialising the trauma experienced by the Hindu community. By delinking the act from its religious motivation and instead attributing it to vague or unsubstantiated claims of immorality, such statements provide a justification for violence and incite further prejudice and hate speech against Hindus. Ram Puniyani’s reliance on Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya’s Feathers and Stones as evidence for the claim that Aurangzeb demolished the Kashi Vishwanath Temple in Varanasi due to “immoral activities” rather than religious fanaticism is highly problematic from a historical perspective. The work cited lacks credible merit for serious historical analysis. Sitaramayya’s account, as described in Feathers and Stones, is based on an unverifiable story. It is entirely undocumented and unverifiable, making it inadmissible as historical evidence. No reputable historian accepts such sources as valid, especially when weighed against contemporary Mughal chronicles like the Maasir-i-Alamgiri, which clearly document Aurangzeb’s religious motivations for temple destruction. Thus, using Feathers and Stones to support claims about Aurangzeb’s actions at Kashi Vishwanath is not only factually incorrect but also constitutes a form of historical distortion. When such narratives are invoked to deny or mock the religious persecution of Hindus, they function as hate speech by delegitimising the community’s suffering, distorting historical truth, and fostering prejudice and dehumanisation. The lack of merit in the cited work only underscores the irresponsibility of relying on it to justify or minimise acts of religious persecution. This amounts to vilifying the victims (Hindus) and whitewashing the actions of a known religious oppressor, thereby justifying religious violence. Hence, this case is documented as a hate crime.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Others
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
