Praful Goradia Quotes

The Department of Archaeology, Gwalior, 1952, has in a special book dealt on the Cultural Heritage of Madhya Bharat, which, in 1956, amalgamated with the Central Provinces and came to be known as Madhya Pradesh. This book Dhar and Mandu reiterates what Major C.E. Luard,34 the official gazeteer of Dhar, had said in 1912. The carved pillars used all over the building and the delicately carved ceilings of the prayer hall seem to have belonged to the original Bhojshala. On the pavement of the prayer hall are seen numerous slabs of black slate stone the writings on which were also scraped off. From a few slabs recovered from another part of the building and now exhibited there, which contain the texts of the poetic works of Parijatamanjari and Kurmastotra, it appears that the old college was adorned with numerous Sanskrit and Maharashtri Prakrit texts, beautifully engraved on such slabs.

Bhojshala was a college. The District Gazetteer says that Raja Bhoj school is a mosque, a part of which was converted from a Hindu institution of the 11th century, the Saraswati temple or school. According to the publication, this shrine of Saraswati, the Hindu goddess of learning, is described in the Sanskrit play of Arjunavarma Paramara, 1210-16 as the ornament of the eightyfour squares of Dharanagari. Two slabs were discovered behind the mehrab, one bearing the Prakrit odes of the 11th century (supposed to have been composed by Raja Bhoj himself) and the other the Sanskrit play mentioned above, which praises Arjunavarma. These slabs stand on the north side of the building and are beautiful specimens of the stone cutter's work.

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.

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. · '

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.

The author's colleagues and he were taken aback when several men of the Central Reserve Police in mufti stopped them from entering the famous Bhojshala. They said that normal entry to this temple school founded by Raja Bhoj was prohibited. On persuasive questioning, one of the policemen told us, that if we were Muslim, we could go in for two hours on any Friday. On the other hand, Hindus were allowed entry only once a year, on Vas ant Panchami or the day of Saraswati, the goddess of learning. If we belonged to any other faith, entry was regretted. No amount of coaxing was sufficient to make the policemen change their minds and allow us even a five minute walk through this historic temple school. We then realised why the compound had been barricaded although the neighbouring masjid named after Kamal Maula was functioning. So was a nearby dargaah and a few shops selling trinkets for rituals. This blatantly discriminatory order was issued by the Digvijay Singh government in 1997 when reports said that there was Hindu-Muslim tension in the area.

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.

Octogenarian Niranjan Verma, a former parliamentarian, remembers how Jawaharlal Nehru found some reason or the other not to meet the delegations led by him. Eventually, he diverted Verma to see Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, who could not spare the time to visit Vidisha but deputed Prof Humayun Kabir, the then Education Secretary. The professor was impartial, and immediately conceded in the presence of many a local citizen that it was indeed a temple. However, at this late stage, since the matter would take on political hues, as a bureaucrat, he could do little. Verma and his supporters also approached Dr Kailash Nath Katju when he became Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh. The reply they got was that Verma and his men should first persuade the Congressmen of Vidisha into agreeing that the Chief Minister could intervene in Bijamandal. Not long after that, the delegation met the then Chief Minister Mandloi who, incidentally, was sympathetic. His only problem was the fear of Nehru's wrath, which he candidly admitted. As already mentioned, Mishra did bring a halt to namaz being conducted in the edifice. His government donated Rs.40,000 for the construction of a separate idgaah nearby. By then Jawaharlal Nehru had been succeeded by the not antipathic Lal Bahadur Shastri.

It is all the more unfortunate that the ASI is not being allowed to work on the site despite pressure from local citizens. No other temple turned mosque has witnessed more repeated agitations and satyagraha, than Vijay Mandir. The citizens of Vidisha relate, how year after year, at Eid time they used to offer satyagraha and get arrested. Leaders who agitated even 50 years ago, are still alive to narrate the saga of their efforts.

Not many temples have had the misfortune of having been desecrated four times. Being a huge structure, built in solid stone, it was able to survive and be restituted as a mandir, three times. The ASI has still to undo the damage perpetrated by Aurangzeb. Excavation work which stopped some nine years ago is yet to be resumed. Admittedly, it is difficult to redeem the pristine glory of Vijay Mandir, whose scale and dimensions are reminiscent of the Konark temple. Nevertheless, it would be a shame, if independent India allows its architectural treasures to remain in a state of desecration and remain buried without an attempt to even redeem them.

Sultan Bahadur Shah of Gujarat, 1526-37, was the iconoclast of Vidisha, preceding Aurangzeb. He captured the town and about the first thing he did was to desecrate the Vijay Mandir claiming that the conquest ofBhilsa was in the service of Islam. The episode is recorded in Mirat-I -Sikandri. About 200 years earlier, Sultan Alauddin Khilji, 1293, had also enjoyed the 'devout' pleasure of damaging Vijay Mandir. The honour of being the first iconoclast, however, went to Sultan Shamsuddin Iltutmish, 1234, yet another half a century earlier. This episode is described with relish in Tabqat-I-Nasiri.

Aurangzeb, 1658-1707, was the last of the iconoclasts who had a go at this edifice which was then known as the Vijay Mandir from which the successor mosque was known as Bijamandal. He celebrated the visit by renaming Vidisha as Alamgirpur. Despite some excavations between 1971 and 1974 which clearly showed that Bijamandal was originall y a temple, namaz at Eid time continued right until 1965 when Dr. Dwarka Prasad Mishra's government banned worship in, what was, a protected monument. Mishra earned the gratitude of most Vidishans and many others in Madhya Pradesh.

Rich treasures of sculpture were thus salvaged. Some of the statues were particularly splendid; some were as high as eight feet. The work of the archaeologists, however, did not last long. The ASI soon received instructions to stop further work. The officer of the ASI working on the excavations was transferred, as was the collector. Whether this had anything to do with the new Human Resource Development Minister, Arjun Singh, I 99 1-94, who happened to be the leader of the self-styled secular lobby in Madhya Pradesh, is not known. Since then, the Bijamandal mosque is marking time with a great deal of sculpture hidden under its southern side.

One night during the monsoon of 1991, the rain was so heavy that it washed away the wall that was concealing the frontage of the Bijamandal mosque established by Aurangzeb in 1682. This masjid is a centre of attraction in the district town of Vidisha situated some 40 kms from Bhopal. The broken wall exposed so many Hindu idols that the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) was left with no choice but to excavate. For three centuries, the idols were buried under the platform, on the northern side, which was used as the hall of prayer conducted specially on days of Eid. Fortunately, the district col lector in 1991 happened to offer protection to the surveyors of ASI, who were otherwise reluctant to expose themselves to the wrath of bigots.

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.