Gyanvapi mosque 'discovery': A Shivling or a fountain?

BJP can legislate a new law to do away with the 1991 enactment and acquire the mosque, but political expediency propels it to build a hype

The ruling Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) and its allies are busy raising the pitch on the latest development at the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi by proclaiming that the survey carried out at the site had eventually led to the "discovery" of a Shivling.

However, systematically drowned in the din is the counterargument that what was described as a Shivling is an old fountain in the water body created for routine wazu – the ritual of washing hands and other body parts before offering namaz.

Even as court commissioner Ajay Misra, who has now been removed, did not file his survey report yesterday and sought more time to complete the task, his lieutenants and others backing him in his mission to brand the mosque as a temple have been giving a twist to the whole issue. Word has already been spread across the globe that the petitioners have achieved their ultimate goal of fishing out a Shivling from the precincts of the 350-year old mosque built by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb in the late 17th century after the demolition of an ancient Shiva temple.

Also Read — Protect area of 'Shivling' but no restriction for Namaz: SC on Gyanvyapi mosque complex

To top it all, UP's Deputy Chief Minister Keshav Prasad Maurya, who has his roots in the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP), declared, "Truth cannot be hidden for long, and today on Buddha Purnima, Lord Shiva has appeared where we were looking for him." He added, “Satya saamne aa gaya hai kyunki satya hi Shiva hai; Baba Vishwanath ki jai; Har-har Mahadev."

It is, however, being systematically ignored that the existing Kashi-Vishwanath Temple at Varanasi was built by Maharani Ahilyabai Holkar much after the downfall of the Mughal empire in the mid-18th century. She was in complete command and in a position to take over that portion of the mosque where today's Hindutva brigade is claiming the existence of the original 'Jyotirling' that was supposedly installed when the ancient temple was originally built.

Today's torchbearers of Hindutva are negating or undermining the capability and commitment of Ahilyabai Holkar to identify and reclaim the most integral part of the original temple. Obviously, she did not attach any significance to what is being today propagated as 'Jyotirlinga' or the 'Nandi' and 'Shringar Gauri' - now being hyped as integral parts of the original Kashi-Vishwanath temple.

Abhay Yadav, the legal counsel for the Gyanvapi Mosque management committee, believes that the BJP-RSS combine is trying to fool millions of Hindus by misrepresenting facts "only to further the party's politics of communal divide." According to him, "Water tanks or pools (often termed as hauz in Arabic) are usually part and parcel of most old mosques to facilitate the mandatory wazu, and many old mosques also have fountains to add to the aesthetics."

Also Read — Explained | What is the Places of Worship Act, 1991?

To bolster his argument, Yadav contends, "There is a clear cut hole in this fountain which is embedded in the hauz – and that also goes to show that it cannot be a 'Shivling' as no 'Shivling' has a hole, which is obviously meant for spraying water out of a fountain."

Rajnath Tiwari, a Varanasi-based veteran journalist and a former president of the Kashi Patrakar Sangh, also believes what was projected by the BJP-RSS lawyers as the "discovery" of a Shivling is nothing other than a fountain. "My home is in the vicinity of the Kashi-Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi Mosque, and I have spent my childhood in and out of the complex where the two places of worship have co-existed for centuries," he told this scribe. "It was only in the past 30-35 years since the hype of the Ayodhya movement that this place has been caged in iron barricades bringing an end to the free access that was earlier available to both shrines," he lamented.

Another local journalist Himanshu Sharma, who has been witness to the various events in and around these shrines, points out, "Whether it is a 'Shivling' or a fountain, it is for the courts to decide, but let me tell you that I have yet to see any 'Shivling' on the first floor of any temple. This one that these people are claiming to be a 'Shivling' happens to be on the first floor of the Gyanvapi mosque."

Furthermore, it was rightly argued that the idea behind describing the 'find' as a "discovery" is to give the impression that the petitioners have fished out something that was hidden. But that is not the case. Anyone, including this scribe, who has been a witness to the precincts of the Gyanvapi mosque, knows that the 'hauz' has always been open to public view.

Significantly, even the figure of 'Nandi' has been a part of the mosque premises for 350 years, much like the motif of 'Shringar Gauri' that was always clearly visible on the rear wall of the mosque. Yet, those representing the temple were busy projecting all these as some relic dug out of history by them now.

The local court that ordered a survey inside the mosque, on the plea of lawyer Hari Shankar Jain, pleading for the temple, also promptly ordered the sealing of the 'wazu-khana' on Monday. The judge flatly ignored the argument of the Mosque management committee advocate Abhay Yadav that it was premature to seal the place when the survey report was yet to be submitted before the court.

"The judge of the lower court refused to listen to my plea and ordered sealing of the 'wazu-khana' in gross violations of the principles of natural justice and equity," said Yadav. "Even earlier, the judge rejected my argument that it was not judicious to even entertain the plea for a survey as it would amount to a violation of the Places of Worship Act 1991, whereby the status quo of all religious places of worship (except Ayodhya) was to be maintained as on the day of independence – August 15, 1947," he pointed out. "That law enacted by Parliament remains the law of the land until it is overruled by some new enactment," he emphasised.

Considering the majority that the BJP enjoys in Parliament today, it is surely within their means to legislate a new law to do away with the 1991 enactment and acquire the now disputed mosque at Varanasi. But apparently, political expediency propels them into adopting the current course. Building a hype by raising a bogey based on falsehood or half-truth can make it convenient to whip up religious passions, which could conveniently translate into votes and fulfil the larger objectives of the ruling political class. So what if all this deepens the communal divide that has already brought things to such a dangerous pass.

(Sharat Pradhan is a journalist and author based in Lucknow)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.