On Thursday (May 19), ‘activist’ Yogendra Yadav courted controversy after he suggested that the Hindu community might face the wrath of Islamists for reclaiming the old Kashi Vishwanath temple when they will no longer be a majority.
While speaking to news anchor and fake Harvard Professor Nidhi Razdan on NDTV, he claimed, “Okay, we were defied for 500 years when they ruled and today it is our rule, we shall decide what happens. Don’t stop us because you could not stop someone else 500 years ago.”
“To all those friends and enthusiasts, I want to say with folded hands – Please remember, if you want to do something today because you are in majority and you can get your way past, for something that happened 500 years ago, please think about what may happen from 500 years for now,” he warned.
Yogendra Yadav then insinuated that Hindus might have to pay the price, for staking a claim at the disputed Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi, at the hands of the Islamists 500 years later.
“Are we willing that our children, our generations to come, may then pay a price for what happened in 2022? Are we into this game,” he inquired.
The supposed ‘activist’, who was an active participant in the anti-CAA fiasco that led to Delhi anti-Hindu riots, also tried to whitewash the destruction of Hindu temples by Islamic invaders by claiming that several temples were built on the ruins of Holy Buddhist and Jain structures. He said that someone would say that several Hindu temples were built on Jain temples, so should we demand that they be dug up to find the truth? Asking this question, he also wondered how far were we willing to go.
“This country has to draw a line somewhere”, said Yogendra Yadav, saying that the line should be 15th of August 1947. “This country has to say we stop going into the past, whatever existed on that day, good or bad, exists there and let us move forward”, he said.
It was after this statement that he issued the veiled threat and intimidation to Hindus for wanting to reclaim their religious and cultural heritage, dismantled, ruined and demolished by Mughal barbarians. Yogendra Yadav essentially warned Hindus of retributive action when Muslims become a majority in the country, like they were 500 years ago. In an attempt to intimidate Hindus, Yadav was trying to tell Hindus to stop trying to reclaim their religious heritage or their future generations might have to “pay the price” at the hands of the Muslim majority – the price, if history has taught us anything, would be rape, murder and loot.
Interestingly, after Yogendra Yadav issued his veiled threat to Hindus, fake Harvard professor Nidhi Razdan chimed in to clarify essentially that she is holding this debate not because she has any particular affinity towards Hindus or their faith, but because she cares about “interfaith harmony”.
“Honestly, the only reason we are talking about it on this channel is because it has consequences on interfaith harmony, not because we are worried about whether there is a Shivling or not, to be very honest, that is a completely separate matter”, she said, with her hand on her heart, gesticulating feverishly.
Gyanvapi mosque dispute and survey
The Gyanvapi Mosque is a disputed structure built over the ruins of the desecrated old Kashi Vishwanath Temple by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb.
The Kashi Vishwanath Temple complex, which is adjacent to the disputed mosque complex and where devotees can do puja and prayers, was built by Ahilya Bai Holkar of Indore in 1780. A Varanasi court on May 12 allowed a videographic survey of the disputed structure.
Varanasi’s Civil Judge (Senior Division) Ravi Kumar Diwakar issued guidelines for the same and added that a report of the survey must be submitted by May 17. A 54-member team, led by advocate commissioner Ajay Kumar Mishra, surveyed the Gyanvapi complex basement and the western wall on May 14.
According to the reports, the survey team opened eight vaults of the disputed structure of the Gyanvapi mosque. On May 16, counsel Hari Shankar Jain representing the Hindu side informed the court that a Shivling was discovered inside the premises during the survey.
While speaking to Aaj Tak, he claimed that the Shivling was originally studded with a diamond and was removed after occupation. He explained the missing diamond as the cause behind the crack on the upper part of the Shivling.
Madan Mohan Yadav, another lawyer representing the Hindu side, said the Shivling is 12 feet by 8 inches in diameter and is in the direction where Nandi is facing, as is customary.
