New Delhi: Even as Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Adityanath maintains a studied silence over the alleged misappropriation of Ram temple donations, he continues to aggressively leverage the temple’s political capital ahead of the 2027 assembly election.The stinging controversy in Ayodhya has not deterred him from mobilising the Hindu electorate by framing the temple as a crowning achievement of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s “double-engine” governments in Lucknow and Delhi. In government and public events over the past few weeks – and even after the controversy broke out on June 7 – Adityanath has continued to advertise the Ram Mandir as a symbol of development and Hindu unity.The latest occasion came on June 15 at the Digital Democracy Dialogue (D3) ‘D3 Triveni,’ an event conceptualised by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh-backed Ramabai Mhalgi Prabodhini. When asked by an audience member about his 10-year master plan for Ayodhya now that the temple is built, Adityanath explained in detail how the government had promoted the city as a hub of “spiritual tourism.” However, he swiftly pivoted to target opposition parties. Without referring to the current debate over donations or the Opposition’s allegations, Adityanath said, “Those who used to fire bullets at Ram’s devotees are also talking about devotion to Ram. They, too, have realised the power of devotion to Ram. They have also started talking about faith on this issue. Now, they are reminded of faith and they recall the need to respect sadhus and sants,” he said.The controversy over the temple erupted on June 7 when Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav alleged that crores of rupees from the donations made to the Ram Temple had gone missing. Yadav demanded that courts take suo motu cognisance of the matter. He argued that the issue was “directly linked to the deep faith in Lord Ram held by the entire Sanatan society at a global level.”On June 13, the Adityanath-led Uttar Pradesh government constituted a Special Investigation Team under intense political and internal pressure to probe the allegations of financial misappropriation of donations at the temple. While those in the saffron camp, including Nripendra Misra, an important member of the Trust that manages the temple, rushed to credit Adityanath for the decision to order a probe, Adityanath has maintained a silence over the actual corruption charges. Instead, he has focused on invoking the historical grievances of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement to appease majoritarian sentiments.Warped history for ‘Hindu unity’On June 13, while launching development schemes in Azamgarh, Adityanath tried to link the Ram Temple to the story of Suheldev, a legendary Bhar chieftain. Suheldev’s depiction as an archetype Hindutva foot-soldier who halted the Islamisation of the region for 150 years has been for decades used by the RSS and BJP to pit backward caste and Dalit Hindus against Muslims.Adityanath went on to state that had Suheldev been alive in the 16th century, the Ram Mandir would not have been demolished. He was referring to the ancient temple dedicated to Ram that a section of Hindus believe existed at the site of the Babri Masjid before it was built during the rule of Mughal ruler Babur. Adityanath’s assertion rests on highly-contested ground. Despite a pervasive Hindutva narrative, there has been no evidence of a Ram Mandir ever being demolished in Ayodhya on the land where the Babri Masjid was built. Even the Supreme Court in 2019, while awarding the title of the land to Hindu claimants, ruled that there was no conclusive archaeological evidence to suggest that a temple was demolished to directly pave way for the construction of the Babri Masjid. Also, little is historically known about Suheldev except for a reference in Mirat-i-Masaudi, a historical romance by Abd-ur Rehman Chisti, written during the reign of Jahangir. The text mentions that Suheldev “turned the tide of victory” in favour of the local chieftains against Saiyad Salar Masud Ghazi, a semi-legendary military figure from the 11th century popularly believed to be a nephew of Ghaznavid ruler Mahmud of Ghazni.Despite the weak historical foundations, Adityanath used the narratives of both Suheldev and the Ram Mandir to pitch for “Hindu unity.”He said: “Had Maharaj Suheldev been there, the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya would never have been destroyed. But Maharaj Suheldev was not there – we were divided. The temple was destroyed, and there followed a struggle and a wait spanning 500 years – an entire era. Generations passed, and years rolled by, yet the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya could not be built.”‘500 years ago we were all humiliated’Adityanath credited Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his own government for the construction of the temple, despite it being built on the direct orders of the apex court after a protracted legal battle. “After the arrival of Modi ji, this ‘double-engine’ government resolved a 500-year-old issue, and the grand temple of Lord Ram was constructed in Ayodhya,” said Adityanath.He also asked if the Congress or the Samajwadi Party could have built the Ram Mandir. “When they cannot respect your faith, your ancestors, or your deities, what great achievement do you expect to accomplish by associating with them?” asked the chief minister.On the same day, while launching developmental programmes in Gorakhpur, Adityanath said, “What was the condition of Ayodhya Dham, where 500 years ago we were all humiliated? The struggle and movement continued for 500 years. Modi became PM. The double engine government arrived and a grand temple of Bhagwan Ram was built.”At an event In Varanasi on June 12, Adityanath suggested that the construction of Ram Mandir was unthinkable at one point of time. “Did anyone ever think it would happen? Today, it has happened,” he said.On June 6, in Gonda, Adityanath said that if people wanted to see the “power of the double-engine” government, they should come see the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. Referring to those aged 40 or above, he said that they might have participated in the ‘andolan’ (Ram Mandir movement), accusing previous governments of committing atrocities against them. “Back then, there was even a ban on uttering the name of Ram. Batons rained down, and bullets were fired. Devotees of Ram could not go to Ayodhya. What a state of anarchy prevailed! Now, however, no adversary of Ram can even set foot in Ayodhya. Only Ram bhakts [devotees] can. Such arrangements have been put in place,” he said. Adityanath claimed that Ayodhya was now “shining” and a “model of a new Ayodhya” stood before everyone.At other events, Adityanath has consistently reminded voters that their “single vote” had washed away the “stigma” of “500 years of slavery” and paved the way for the construction of the temple. On May 22, Adityanath said in Deoria that the fact that the temple was built in Ayodhya showed the “power” of the people’s vote.Omar Rashid is an independent journalist.