360 Degree View | RSS’s Multifaceted Approach On Aurangzeb: Rewrite, Reassess, And Move On
Different kinds of comments on the same issue, coming from senior ranks within the RSS, reflect the organisation’s evolving approach to its “decolonisation” process.
Different kinds of comments on the same issue, coming from senior ranks within the RSS, reflect the organisation’s evolving approach to its “decolonisation" process. These are not merely personal opinions, but part of a broader strategy shaped by the unfolding circumstances around the issue.
related stories
Recently, former RSS general secretary and senior functionary Suresh Bhaiyyaji Joshi took a broader, more pragmatic stance on the Aurangzeb controversy, calling it an “unnecessary" issue. He emphasised that Hindu Maratha kings like Shivaji were large-hearted enough to even build graves for their fallen rivals. Citing Shivaji’s greatness as a true reflection of Hindutva’s magnanimity, Joshi asserted that the Mughal emperor’s grave should be left undisturbed — a position that now appears to nod to a legacy of strength with dignity, rather than fuelling reactionary politics.
A week earlier, Dattatreya Hosabale, the RSS’s General Secretary, while speaking to the media after the ABPS (Akhil Bharatiya Pratinidhi Sabha), echoed a similar sentiment — though in different words. He stated that the ‘invader’ (Aurangzeb) is no longer relevant to Bharat, but added that Indians must introspect.
Addressing the issues of historical distortion and the misplaced glorification of ‘invaders’, he remarked that the country’s ethos has always rejected such figures, as they attempted to destroy its cultural and civilisational values.
In another media address, Sunil Ambekar, Akhil Bharatiya Prachar Pramukh (National Spokesperson) of the RSS, also referred to Aurangzeb as ‘irrelevant’ to present-day India.
CONTRASTING COMMENTS, CONTEMPORARY APPROACH
At the heart of the controversy lies the question of whether Mughal emperor Aurangzeb should be viewed as a historical figure worthy of acknowledgement, or as an invader and tyrant whose actions ran counter to India’s cultural ethos.
Dattatreya Hosabale has been unequivocal in his stance, arguing that glorifying Aurangzeb undermines India’s foundational values — and suggesting that those who worship him might possess similar traits. He has questioned why figures like Dara Shikoh, known for efforts to bridge cultural and religious divides, remain overshadowed and sidelined in mainstream narratives. “Why do those who speak of Ganga-Jamuni tehzeeb never highlight Dara Shikoh?" he asked, emphasising the need to promote historical figures who fostered unity rather than division.
By contrast, Bhaiyyaji Joshi has taken a more measured approach, urging people to avoid unnecessary controversies over Aurangzeb’s tomb. He pointed out that Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, despite being Aurangzeb’s adversary, upheld India’s tradition of respect by ensuring a tomb for Afzal Khan, a commander he had defeated.
Bhaiyyaji Joshi’s remarks suggest that while Aurangzeb’s legacy is open to scrutiny, India’s broader ethos of generosity and inclusivity should not be compromised in the process.
A DOUBLE-PRONGED STRATEGY FOR ‘DECOLONISATION’
The RSS’s positioning on the issue is clear — it is seeking to reshape India’s historical consciousness by emphasising figures who align with its vision of cultural nationalism. This is also part of its broader strategy for what it terms the ‘decolonisation’ of Indian history and public consciousness.
However, within the Sangh Parivar — which comprises several affiliates and hundreds of inspired or linked organisations — there remains a recognition that historical grievances must be handled with maturity, rather than through reactionary responses.
Hosabale’s call for a reassessment of historical heroes indicates a long-term strategy to influence public memory, while Joshi’s emphasis on maintaining India’s civilisational dignity serves as a reminder that ideological battles should not descend into social unrest, which could lead to violence if left unchecked.
As the Aurangzeb issue continues to unfold, these remarks are likely to fuel further debate on how India chooses to remember its past. The RSS’s multifaceted approach — redefining historical narratives while advocating restraint in public reactions — signals an evolving strategy in shaping the national discourse on history, identity, and cultural pride.
- Location :
- First Published: