On 03 January 2021, it surfaced that one temple of Shri Hanuman has been destroyed by Delhi Municipal Corporation where Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) have the majority. Delhi State government is ruled currently by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) lead by Arvind Kejriwaal who is Baniya by caste and belongs to Swarna Hindu community and he himself claims to be Bhagt of Hanuman ji in last Delhi election. Arvind Kejriwal celebrated Diwali on live TV show by doing Lakshmi Pooja by using taxpayers money.
Both BJP and AAP claims to be great saviors of Hindu and both are ruling Delhi, and now you see that one Hindu God Temple of Shri Hanuman has been destroyed by Hindu ruler of current time. (https://in.news.yahoo.com/aap-bjp-blame-other-demolition-180832372.html)
AAP and BJP are in political race as rival to garner the vote of Hindus as Hindu sentiments and assertions of religious superiority over minorities are currently all time high since Narendra Modi assume office in 2014.
The damage has been done and temple has been destroyed in Hindu government of BJP and AAP. Even they restore it, the question remains how did they decide to demolish it first and why hardcore hindutva including Hindu Hirday Samrat is not asking questions? AAP and BJP, both are playing politics over demolition. Here are the some of the tweets from AAP high officials like Raghav Chadda and Aatishi;
While, BJP blames AAP for the demolition of Hanuman Temple.
It is now being left on readers to decide that who loves Hindus more when in both powerful Hindu parties presence, a Hindu Temple has been destroyed and Millions of devotees sentiments has been crushed under bulldozer. Definitely, we dont have reason to blame Mughals now to blame for Hanuman temple demolition.
Eye in History: Hindu Kings destroyed Temple
Demolition of temples:
The dominant trend in the pre-Islamic period was of Hindu kings looting temples and whisking away images, but there are also instances of demolition of temples and idols.
In the early 10th century, the Rashtrakuta king Indra III destroyed the temple of Kalapriya, which their arch enemy, the Pratiharas, patronised. Then again, when the Kashmiri ruler Lalitaditya treacherously killed the king of Gauda (Bengal), his attendants sought to seek revenge. They clandestinely entered Lalitaditya’s capital and made their way to the temple of Vishnu Parihasakesava, the principal deity of the Kashmiri kingdom. However, they mistook a silver image of another deity for Parihasakesava, and took to grounding it to dust even as Kashmiri soldiers fell upon them. (https://scroll.in/article/767065/war-trophies-when-hindu-kings-raided-temples-and-abducted-idols), https://caravanmagazine.in/reviews-and-essays/dn-jha-destruction-buddhist-sites
In early medieval Indian history abounds in instances of temple desecration that occurred amidst inter-dynastic conflicts. In 642 A.D., according to local tradition, the Pallava king Narasimhavarman I looted the image of Ganesha from the Chalukyan capital of Vatapi. Fifty years later armies of those same Chalukyas invaded north India and brou ght back to the Deccan what appear to be images of Ganga and Yamuna, looted from defeated powers there. (https://frontline.thehindu.com/cover-story/article30255557.ece)
In the early ninth century, the Rashtrakuta king Govinda III invaded and occupied Kanchipuram, which so intimidated the king of Sri Lanka that he sent Govinda several (probably Buddhist) images that had represented the Sinhala state, and which the Rashtr akuta king then installed in a Saiva temple in his capital. About the same time, the Pandyan king Srimara Srivallabha also invaded Sri Lanka and took back to his capital a golden Buddha image that had been installed in the kingdom's Jewel Palace. In the early tenth century, the Pratihara king Herambapala seized a solid gold image of Vishnu Vaikuntha when he defeated the Sahi king of Kangra. By the mid-tenth century, the same image was seized from the Pratiharas by the Candella king Yasovarman and instal led in the Lakshmana temple of Khajuraho. (https://frontline.thehindu.com/cover-story/article30255557.ece)
By 605 C.E, Sasanka had established the kingdom of Gauda. From there, he issued gold coins to celebrate his triumph, and came to be addressed as Maharajadhiraja (king of great kings). Sasanka vigorously propagated Hinduism. He was a Shaivaite and built temples to Shiva in his kingdom. The famous Lingaraja Temple of Odisha is said to have been commissioned by him. However, a 12th century text states that Sasanka persecuted Buddhists with a vengeance and endeavored to extirpate the Buddhists from his dominions. He allegedly destroyed innumerable Buddhist stupas and converted viharas to Hindu temples in places such as Nalanda, Bodhgaya, Sarnath and Mathura. It is also alleged that he cut the Bodhi tree where the Buddha found enlightenment, in the Mahabodhi Temple of Bodh Gaya. What we see today is not the original tree. (https://www.getbengal.com/details/even-hindu-rulers-destroyed-buddhist-stupas-and-built-temples-on-them), https://www.counterview.net/2018/06/buddhist-shrines-massively-destroyed-by.html
Did Hindu forcibly converted to Islam by Muslim rulers in India?
In an interview Richard M Eaton professor of history, University of Arizona on question *It is said the writings of colonial historians have contributed to the perception that Hindus were forcibly converted to Islam. On what kind of evidence were such claims made? Why has this theory of forcible conversion persisted even to this day?* The professor Richard M Eaton replied as below:
There is no evidence that significant numbers of Hindus were forcibly converted to Islam. Emperor Jahangir issued many edicts admonishing his nobles not to convert anybody by force. Of course, the very fact that such orders were issued suggests that such conversions must have occurred. We know, for example, that when the son of Bir Singh of Orccha rebelled against Jahangir, the rebel’s sons were spared execution on the condition that they convert to Islam. So there are these scattered references to forced conversion. But for the most part, the Mughals were scrupulously secular in outlook. They focused on stability, loyalty, and revenue, not on religious change among their subjects. On one occasion, the Mughal governor of Bengal actually demoted a high-ranking officer for having converted his personal servant to Islam.
In the face of such evidence to the contrary, one is led to wonder why the trope of forced conversion has found such a secure hold in popular perceptions of Indian history. I suspect that the answer lies in how the British justified their occupation of India. They did this, in part, by contrasting their claims to ruling with justice, virtue, and integrity with the alleged tyranny and violence of the Indo-Muslim states they had replaced. The notion that Muslim rulers had forcibly converted Indians served the colonial need to portray Muslim rule as violent, tyrannical, and hence illegitimate and deserving of removal.
The trope of forced conversions has persisted into the present mainly because of the pervasive Islamophobia of our own times. This is by no means confined to India, of course. Ben Carson, a leading candidate for the American presidency, has recently declared that a Muslim should be unqualified to serve as president because, so he claims, Islam is not consistent with the US Constitution. (https://scroll.in/article/769463/we-will-never-know-the-number-of-temples-desecrated-through-indias-history-richard-eaton)
