The excuse given was that the Bhojshala was, in any case, a protected monument and barricading it would be the best way to secure its protection. Incidentally, there was no threat from anyone either damaging or demolishing the structure. The discriminatory order of entry 52 times a year to one community, and only once a year to another and none to the rest is based on an extraordinary precedent. The author understands that-in 1935 on the insistence by some local residents of Dhar, which was then a princely state, that the Bhojshala was a Hindu institution -the temple of Goddess Saraswati, on the one hand, and a school, on the other. A photograph of the deity's image which adorned the temple is reproduced in this book. The idol is still on display in the British Museum in London. A part of the Sanskrit inscription which is engraved on a wall of the Bhojshala is also reproduced. It is called Dhar Prasasti of Arjunavarma: Parijatamanjari-natika by Madana.
Indian politician, the indian school
Praful Dwarkadas Goradia is a politician from Akhil Bharatiya Jan Sangh party. He was a Member of the Parliament of India representing Gujarat in the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of the Parliament from 1998 to 2000 as member of Bharatiya Janata Party. Currently, he is general secretary of the Akhil Bharatiya Jan Sangh.
From: Wikiquote (CC BY-SA 4.0)
From Wikidata (CC0)
What however is of interest to us is the unusual shuddhi that the temple undervent inside the outer wall of the fortress. This historical event took place in 1948 on the morrow of the police action by the Government of India during the takeover of the Nizam' s Hyderabad. There had been a great deal of local pressure for the restitution of the temple. Leaders like Sardar Val1abhbhai Patel as well as Shri Kanhaiyalal Munshi were also aware that it was a Jain mandir which had been forcibly converted into a masjid by Alauddin Khilji.
Enhance Your Quote Experience
Enjoy ad-free browsing, unlimited collections, and advanced search features with Premium.
A few masjids have undergone shuddhi, whether in full or part, while others are still unattended and deserve a change. For example, the Gobind Dev mandir at Vrindavan was returned to the Hindus by the British some 130 years ago. While Sultan Ghari at Delhi became a place of worship for all people; when, no one really knows. The saga at Ayodhya is incomplete. While the Nand and Rohini temple palace at Mahaban is believed to have been redeemed in the wake of independence. The edifices at Kannauj and Etawah have not undergone any stage of shuddhi. Since the cities are situated in Uttar Pradesh, the Waterloo of Aryavrat is a part of the series in the area. Quwwatul Islam at Delhi and the Adhai Din Ka Jhopra at Ajmer tell the tale of vandalism so eloquently that the viewer is shocked as he enters these masjids. The Krishnajanmabhoomi as well as Kashi Vishwanath are making do with pathetic alternatives for no shuddhi whatsoever has taken place. So also Ataladevi at Jaunpur and Bhojshala at Dhar. At Vidisha, all worship has been suspended while a great deal of the Rudra Mahalaya complex remains buried. The Adina masjid. at Maida has fallen into disuse as a place of worship, whereas Jungle Pir Baba as well as the shrine at Pavagadh are in full use as dargahs. Daulatabad is a case of redemption which took place on the morrow of the police action in 1948 against the Nizam of Hyderabad.
Hardly had on e walked a few steps after entering the main gate, when one noticed, on the wall outside, distinct remnants of Hindu deities. They are carved on solid stone which on the outside mingles quite naturally with the tile work of the same stone. One stone slab displays Ganesh by the side of his consort. There are several others including the crests of doorways at the entrance of the northern as well as the eastern face. Inside the mosque, the stone work is equall y convincing that the original building was a temple.
The temple today is 55 feet tall. Before its upper part was destroyed on Aurangzeb's orders in anticipation of his visit to Vrindavan in 1670 AD, the mandir was reputed to be twice that height. On its roof, after the destruction, a mehrab or prayer wall was erected and the iconoclastic emperor offered namaaz. Almost two centuries later, F.S. Growse, who belonged to the Bengal Civil Service and was Collector of Mathura District, had the mehrab removed. First, because it was an eyesore, and second, in an endeavour to redeem whatever character was left of the temple. Although the original idol remained at Jaipur, another set of deities was installed by the pujaris or priests. Since then, the temple has a flat roof. Probably, no other desecrated temple had been the subject of so much repair and refurbishment by British rulers. Of supreme importance was the fact of the mandir being restituted to Hindu devotees. It was the greatest act of shuddhi or purification although performed before Swami Dayanand Saraswati reintroduced Vedic procedures.... The Gobind Dev temple at Vrindavan, Mathura, is indeed massive its plinth is 105 feet by 117 feet. It is estimated that the original height was about 110 feet without which it would not have been possible to see the mashaal or torch either from Agra or from Delhi. The temple was built in 1590 AD by Maharaja Mansingh of Jaipur.
A visit to Vidisha and interaction with the man in the street, would reflect that there is a lingering, although suppressed, but bitter resentment against the government treatment of what they believe to be their dearest treasure, architectural as well as sentimental. The moral of a pilgrimage to Vidisha is that no purpose would be served by hushing up what is naked history.
It is best to quote the letter dated May 1, 1952 issued by the Collector of Dhar district of the then Madhya Bharat state which later became a part of Madhya Pradesh: I am directed to request you kindly to inform the Hindu Maha Sabha that the building called Bhoj shala situated at Dhar cannot be given to either the Hindu or the Muslim communities for conversion into a temple or a full-fledged mosque and that this being an archaeological monument the right of entry to it would be conceded to all sections of people for purpose of sight seeing. The Muslim community may also be kindly informed, if necessary, that while the Muslims may continue to say their Friday prayers in the building, no effects must be kept there and nobody should use any part of it for residence. The Dhar State Huzur Durbar office file year 1935-36.
Mukhlis and Khalis were in tum governors of Jaunpur under Ibrahim Naib Barbak, who was anxious to build an edifice for the residence of a celebrated saint named Saiyid Usman ofShiraz, who had fled from Delhi during Timur's invasion. In 1908, when the gazetteer was published by Nevill, the descendants of the saint still resided near the mosque. The style of architecture is not very different from that of the Jhanj hari masj id. The roof stands on ten rows of Hindu temple pillars. According to the gazetteer; the mandir had been built by Raja Vijaya Chandra. The river Gomti flows through the city of Jaunpur and there is an impressive bridge across the river. It is a massive stone structure built in the 1560s. The bridge does not rise towards its centre but is flat. It is an original construction. The only feature that mars its originality is a colossal stone lion standing over a small elephant. According to Nevill, it bears the stamp of ancient Hindu workmanship and must have adorned the gateway of some building erected by the Raja ofKannauj. To the west of the northern end of the bridge is the big fort of Jaunpur, built in the time of Ibrahim. But Firoz Shah Tughlaq is credited with having rebuilt the fortress on an old structure inherited from the Hindu era. Evidence of the legacy. is the masjid inside the fort, built on temple pillars of various shapes and designs. Nevill has remarked that some of the pillars are upside down which supports the theory that a number of temples in Jaunpur were destroyed in order to provide stones required to build the fort; the inner face of almost every stone bore carvings, which had decorated Hindu temples.
There are some 20 alcoves in the northern wall. They all give the impression of temp le carvings. If there be any doubt, it is set at rest by what was used as mimbar or the pulpit for the Imam . The face of t he last step is covered with carvings of two female figures which, of course, have been defaced but are still unmistakably human statuettes.
The desecration at Mehrauli was probably the first perpetrated by Muhammad Ghauri. It is situated next to the famous Qutb Minar. The masjid was named after its builder, Qutbuddin Aibak, as Quwwatul Islam, which, translated into English, means the Might of Islam. The name itself is arrogant; for a place Of worship it is even more so.
As Mr Quereshi wanted to visit the site along with the Superintendent, Archaeological Department, he went to Siddhpur on March 8, 1980. At first, he agreed to the preservation but later he insisted on getting the trenches closed in his presence that day. The superintendent ordered closure of the trenches and construction of the compound wall and both the works were started in his presence. Should the work of the ASI be allowed to be halted by the intervention of the Minorities Commission? Should a commission work at the behest of narrow local vested interests? Or, should not the government rein in the commission from undertaking such obstructionist activity? If there is legitimacy in such activity, would it not be logical that the ASI be wound up? Which, of course, would imply that we have lost interest in the search for our civilisational heritage.
According to the report, Begum Ayesha, MLA, played a leading part in the cover up operation. K.T. Satarawala, the then Adviser to the Governor of Gujarat, also played a yeoman's role by providing a detailed report on the subject. That Muslim appellants were able to push the ASI, is best quoted from the Fourth Annual Report itself.
However, to avoid giving a religious or a communal colour to the shuddhi or reconversion, the idol installed in the sanctum sanctorum was that of Bharat Mata. It is therefore now known as the Bharat Mata temple, although for 700 years it had been called Jami masjid. The mandir was built on a plan not dissimilar to Palitana in Gujarat and Dilwara at Mount Abu, Rajasthan. There is a large courtyard. There were the usual traditional 52 pillars as in Jain places of worship. At the western end was a hall, typical of an ancient temple. A flat roof was held aloft by 152 stone pillars. The author and his colleagues during their visit in 200-1 were told on authority that the pillars were constructed according to the Himar Panti style of architecture, one of whose special characteristics was the interlocking of stones without the use of any cementing material.
Try QuoteGPT
Chat naturally about what you need. Each answer links back to real quotes with citations.
On the strength of their conviction, the local residents demanded that the Bhojshala masjid be reconverted into a mandir. Although the Maharaja of Dhar was a Hindu, he was under the influence of the British Resident, who was reported to have advised him to ban entry into the edifice for a while. The Maharaja therefore did as advised, except for allowing Hindus to enter on Vasant Panchami day which is the day of Saraswati puja. Similarly, the Muslims were allowed entry on one day in the year. This precedent was twisted by the Digvijay Singh government into a discriminatory order mentioned earlier. Such are the wages of secularism in our country. · '
On the intervention of the National Minorities Commission in 1983, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has been prevented from carrying on any excavations in or around the Rudramahalaya complex where once existed the tallest temple in Gujarat. From its top could be seen glimpses ofPatan, the capital of the ancient kings of Gujarat, some 25 kms away. From the top it is believed were also visible some temple mashaals in Ahmedabad when the capital was shifted there by Ahmed Shah in the 15th century. That is 112 kms away.