Budaun: Jama Masjid
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
Contents |
Jama Masjid
A backgrounder
Manish Sahu, Arjun Sengupta, Dec 5, 2024: The Indian Express
A court in Budaun is hearing a plea seeking nod for Hindus to pray inside the 800-year-old mosque built by Sultan Iltutmish of Delhi. What does the historical record say about claims that the mosque was built after demolishing a Hindu temple?
Here is a brief history of the historic 800-year-old mosque in western Uttar Pradesh, and the dispute surrounding it.
What is the dispute, and the case before the court?
In August 2022, the Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha (ABHM), through its convener Mukesh Patel, and three residents of Budaun filed a petition in a local court claiming that the Jama Masjid ‘Shamsi’ (alternatively referred to as the ‘Jami’ Masjid) was built after demolishing the Neelkanth Mahadev Temple that stood at the site.
The respondents in the case include the Intizamia Committee of the mosque, the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board, the Union of India, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), the District Magistrate of Budaun (on behalf of the state government), and the Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh.
What is the argument of the Hindu side?
According to the Hindu side, the ancient Neelkanth Mahadev Temple was part of a fort belonging to a Hindu king named Raja Mahipal, who prayed at the temple.
The petition says that the temple was destroyed by the third Mamluk Sultan of Delhi, Shams ud-Din Iltutmish (1211-36) in the early 13th century.
Vivek Render, an advocate for the Hindu side, said that the remains of the demolished temple can still be found at the site. Two large pillars of the mosque bear images of Hindu deities, he said. According to Render, a book published by the Budaun district administration too, identifies the site as “Raja Mahipal Kila and Neelkanth Mahadev Temple”.
What is the position taken by the Muslim side?
The Muslim side has rejected the claim that the mosque was built after destroying a temple, and has maintained that the ABHM lacks any legal standing to file the petition.
The mosque committee has claimed that Muslims had regularly offered namaaz at the mosque for almost eight centuries before the August 15, 1947 cut-off date prescribed by the Places of Worship Act for determining the religious character of a place of worship. This, the committee argues, effectively bars suits such as the one filed by the ABHM.
And what is the history of the mosque itself?
The Jama Masjid Shamsi, located in the Maulvi Tola area of the Budaun district, is one of the oldest mosques in North India, and possibly the oldest mosque in the region in which prayers continue to be held even today.
The mosque has the capacity to accommodate 20,000 people, and the premises are spread out over acres of land. It used to be the largest congregational mosque in India until the construction of the Jama Masjid Delhi during the reign of Shah Jahan in the 17th century.
The moniker ‘Shamsi’ comes from the fact that it was commissioned by Shamsuddin Iltutmish (also spelt ‘Altamash’ in some older documents), who served as the governor of Budaun before becoming Sultan of Delhi in 1211.
J F Blackiston, a British-era Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) official, wrote “… The mosque…was built by Altamsh in the year 1223 AD during the governorship of his son Rukn-ud-din Firoz. It possesses four inscriptions, the first mentioning its erection by Altamsh…” (The Jami Masjid At Badaun And Other Buildings In The United Provinces, 1926).
According to the 1907 district gazetteer, however, the mosque was constructed in 1230. (H R Neville, Budaun: a Gazetteer, Volume XV of the District Gazetteers of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh, 1907).
After being gutted in a fire in the 16th century, an official from the court of Akbar commissioned major repairs, including the construction of the domes that stand today.
What does the historical record show about claims that the mosque was built after destroying a temple?
Blackiston mentioned that the structure was built using material from demolished Hindu temples.
“Up to a height of some 12 feet the mosque is constructed almost entirely of sandstone blocks, plundered from more ancient Hindu temples, and above, excepting later additions such as the dome which was restored at the end of Akbar’s reign, the structure is of brick,” he wrote.
He further stated: “On either side of [the mihrab] is a dwarf pillar probably taken from some Hindu building and shortened to suit its present position”. This is what the Hindu petitioners have been referring to.
But Blackiston did not specify which temple was destroyed, and where that temple stood.
That said, a number of historical sources have pointed to the existence of a Neelkanth Mahadev Temple in Budaun. The aforementioned gazetteer noted that “Tradition assigns the foundation of the chief town, under the name of Budhgaon, to Budh, an Ahar prince who is said to have lived in the tenth century of the Christian era… There is nothing improbable in the story that the district was once under the Tomars of Delhi, to whom Mahipal belonged.”
However, instead of Mahipal, the gazetteer credits the 12th century Chauhan king Ajaypal with building the Neelkanth Mahadev Temple. “…In 1175…Ajaypal built or reconstructed the fortress, and temple to Nilkanth Mahadeo”, it says.
Alexander Cunningham, founder director of the Archaeological Survey of India, in his Report of a Tour in the Gangetic Provinces: from Badaon to Bihar in 1875-76 and 1877-78 wrote that the Jama Masjid in Badaun was built at the site of the Harmandar temple, which he said was destroyed by Muslims.
“Mahipal is also said to have built a temple named Harmandar, which was destroyed by the Muhammadans, and the present Jami Masjid built on its site. The people are unanimous in their belief that all the statues of the temple were buried under the floor of the Masjid, in front of the pulpit,” he wrote.
The dispute
As in 2023
Kanwardeep Singh, June 1, 2023: The Times of India
From: Kanwardeep Singh, June 1, 2023: The Times of India
Bareilly: Responding to a petition filed by the Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha (ABHM) on August 8 last year in a civil court of Budaun, in which they claimed that the 800-year-old Jama masjid in the district “was built after demolishing an ancient Shiva temple” and that the court should conduct a survey to confirm this, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) submitted that the mosque is protected under Places of Worship (special provisions) Act 1991, which mandates places of worship will stay as they stood on August 15, 1947. The district government counsel (civil) Sanjeev Kumar Vaish, on behalf of the ASI and Centre, filed a reply in court. Kumar told TOI, “We have raised four objections and the court will decide whether the case is maintainable. First, the fact that the ASI Lucknow division was made a party in this case, while this mosque falls under the Meerut division of ASI. The second is that the mosque is protected under Places of Worship (special provisions) Act 1991. The third objection is that under sub section 3 of the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904, the government by notification in an official gazette had declared the mosque as a protected monument. The fourth objection was made under Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958, which says the ‘form’ of protected monuments cannot be changed. ”
After hearing ABHM’s petition, the court on September 2, 2021 ordered the registration of a civil case and had sought replies from the Intzamiya committee of Jama Masjid, UP Sunni Waqf Board, UP archaeology department, Union of India and UP government.
Advocate Vivek Kumar, representing ABHM, told TOI,“ASI submitted that the property belongs to them and that the petition deserves to be dismissed in the early stage, as per the provisions of section 7 and 11 of Civil Procedure Code (CPC). We say those sections are not applicable if the property has been acquired by ASI, as we only want permission to offer prayers inside the premises as per Hindu traditions. We will file our reply before next date of hearing. ”
Advocate Asrar Ahmad, who represented the Jama Masjid committee, said, “We are assessing the ASI’s reply and will take steps soon. ”
The next date of hearing is July 30. The site is significant for Muslims as it is considered to be the birthplace of empress Razia Sultana and to Hindus as they believe the mosque was built after razing an ancient temple of Neelkanth.
