<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->5. Why does the "mosque" face due west instead of facing Meccah? Certainly, by the seventeenth century there was no problem in orienting a building precisely!
6. Why has the Archaeological Survey of India blocked any dating of the Taj by means of Carbon-14 or thermo-luminiscnece? Any controversy over which century the Taj was built could easily be resolved. [Radiocarbon dating of a piece of wood surreptiously taken from one of the doors gave 13th century as a possible date. But more data is needed.]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->IDB Board Approves 5-Year Strategic Plan
Habib Shaikh ⢠Arab News
JEDDAH, 1 December 2004 â The 227th session of the Board of Executive Directors (BED) of the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) that concluded at the bank headquarters here on Monday approved the five-year strategic plan of the IDB Group and the implementation of nearly $1.3 billion toward project financing and trade operations.
....
The highest amount â $285,000 â under the IDB Waqf Fund goes to Alberta in Canada, followed by Ukraine ($275,000), Bangkok City, Thailand ($245,000), Kaduna, in Nigeria and Massawa in Eritrea ($235,000 each), Cape Town, South Africa ($220,000), Orenburg Province in the Russian Federation ($210,000), Mandera, North Eastern Province of Kenya ($195,000), and <b>Uttar Pradesh state in India ($150,000)</b>.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Mar 16 2005, 07:18 PM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Mar 16 2005, 07:18 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->timing <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No medium size riots for sometimes in UP may be major reason behind this itch. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hmm...let's think about it for a minute. There's trouble in paradise between Cong and Mulayam. Another supari-taking type governor was already put in UP back in July. So, one screw up and it's curtains for Mulayam.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Hmm...let's think about it for a minute. There's trouble in paradise between Cong and Mulayam. Another supari-taking type governor was already put in UP back in July. So, one screw up and it's curtains for Mulayam<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't forget history of Muslims from that part of world, they were first and dead serious about Pakistan, But some how they stayed back and kicked out rich and border area Muslims to Pakistan and they are back in same old strategy. Grab by hook or crook, exploitation and blackmail.
Lack of medium size riots means they are gaining strength and will create some nuisance, after riots and will sit for another 5-6 years at least.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Mantri wants UP waqf board to control Taj
- By Amita Verma
Lucknow, March 16: The Uttar Pradesh government has laid claim to the control of the Taj Mahal. UP parliamentary affairs minister Mohammed Azam Khan has said the Centreâs control over the Taj Mahal is illegal and the monument should rightly belong to the Waqf Board, which is a part of the state government.
"The Taj Mahal is a grave, and even if it is studded with precious stones, it remains a grave. As per the rules, all graves and graveyards, Idgahs and mosques are under the control of the Waqf Board and the Taj Mahal should be no exception. The Central Sunni Waqf Board is already fighting a battle to gain control of the monument and we fully support their stand," he said.
According to the minister, the Central government is holding on to the Taj Mahal merely because it brings in substantial income. Central Sunni Waqf Board chairman Mohammed Hafiz Usman, meanwhile, told this newspaper on Wednesday that a PIL seeking transfer of the monumentâs ownership to the Waqf Board is already pending in the Allahabad high court.
In January this year, the court directed the Waqf Board to give its opinion on whether the Taj Mahal should be registered as waqf property. "After receiving the court directives, I issued notices to the ASI and the Central government asking them to present their case, but neither has even replied to the notices so far. I have now fixed April 19 as the date for hearing if the ASI and the Central government do not furnish their arguments, I will take the decision ex parte and inform the court accordingly," he said. According to the chairman, any property can be registered with the Waqf Board if the owner so decides. "In the case of the Taj Mahal, Emperor Shahjahanâs will, in the book Badshahnama, clearly says that the Taj Mahal should go to Waqf and the hakim should be appointed as muttawalli (a person entrusted with the management of a religious foundation)," he explains and adds that in this case, the hakim is the Waqf Board (also as per the Waqf Act of 1995).
The board chairman further said that as per norms, the Waqf Board should get a seven per cent share of the annual income from the Taj Mahal while the ASI, even if it continues to oversee the monumentâs maintenance, should give the board details of the spending made from the remaining 93 per cent of the income.
Interestingly, about 25 years ago, Mr Azam Khan had demanded that the ownership of the Taj Mahal should rest with the Waqf Board and he should be appointed the muttawalli.
The revival of the issue by the Samajwadi minister at this juncture clearly indicates that the state government is ready for another confrontation with the Centre and it is the monument of love which will be used this time as a tool in the battle. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here is a copy of a page of the Badshahnama, the history of Shah Jahan, the so-called builder of the Taj Mahal. This is from the Government of India's National Archives, and available from the instituional libraries dealing with the medieval history of India.
This is supposed to have been written by the emperor's chronicler, the Mullah Abdul Hamid Lahori. It describes the site of the Taj Mahal as being full of majestic and lush gardens just south of the city (Agra). It goes on to say that the palace of Raja Mansingh, which was owned by his grandson Raja Jaisingh, was selected as the place for the burial of the queen Mumtaz. This means, of course, that Shah Jahan never built the Taj Mahal but only acquired it from the previous owner, who was Jaisingh. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Letters to editor in Pioneer. Shri KRPhanda looks like a jedi master.. <!--emo&:rocker--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rocker.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='rocker.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Question of sovereignty
The UP Sunni Wakf Boardâs notice to the Government to hand it over the Taj Mahal, raises questions about the countryâs sovereignty. It is definitely an act of treason. After all, every association, regardless of its character, is subject to the authority of the state. During the medieval period, Muslims alone were regarded as citizens and Hindus were treated as dhimmis. When Muslim invaders persecuted Hindus, destroyed their places of worship and extracted jazia from them, were the Hindu traditions and practices given any consideration? None, whatsoever. With the advent of the British, the English law held sway over India. Cases that came up before courts and the Privy Council, were decided according to the laws framed by the British Parliament. In the Sheikh Kudratullah vs Mahani Mohan Shaha, a full bench of the Calcutta High Court held that the Mohammdan Law is not the law of India. Sir Barnes Peacock CJ observed: âThe Mohammadan law is not the law of British India. It is only the law so for as the laws of India have directed it to be observed. We are not bound by all the rules of the Mohammadan laws which are in force under the Mohammadan Government, nor by the law as laid down by the Fatwa Alamgiri prepared under Mughal ruler Aurangzeb Alamgir. We are bound by Regulation four of 1793, except so far as that law has been modified by Regulation seven of 1832.â (Ramzan Momin vs Dasrath Rauth, AIR, 1953, Patna). Earlier, in 1940, the Privy Council, in the case relating to Masjid Shahid Ganj, had emphasised similar sentiments. In the words of the council: âWho, then, immediately prior to the British annexation, was the local sovereign of Lahore? What law was applicable in that state to the present case? Who was recognised by the local sovereign or other authority as owner of the property in dispute? These matters do not appear to their lordships to have received sufficient attention in the present case. The plaintiff would seem to have ignored them. It is idle to call upon the courts to apply Mohammadan law to events taking place between 1762 and 1849 without first establishing that this law was at that time the law of the land recognised and enforced as such. If it be assumed, for example, that the property in dispute was by general law or by special decree, or by revenue free grant, vested in the Sikh gurudwara according to the law prevailing under the Sikh rulers, the case made by the plaintiff becomes irrelevantâ. (Indian Appeals, Vol LXVII, May 2, 1940). The Government needs to take appropriate action, otherwise Muslim Wakf boards can claim the entire country as graves can be found everywhere. The non-assertion of authority would reduce India to the status of a banana republic. Had Mahatma Gandhi agreed to Mohammad Ali Jinnahâs proposal of the exchange of populations in 1947, there would have been no such problem today.
KR Phanda
Janakpuri, New Delhi<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Wakf eyes more monuments
Siddharth Kalhans/ Lucknow
For the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Wakf Board, its no more only 'Wah Taj'. After raking up a controversy over the title of Taj Mahal, the board is eyeing few more such historical monuments which comes under the direct purview of the Archeological Survey of India (ASI). The board has considered the report of the joint parliamentary committee (JPC) headed by Syed Shahbuddin and very soon it may make a move to stake claim on several other historical buildings.
In the list prepared by the JPC there are 70 such building which are currently under the possession of ASI. <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> While 17 such monuments are from Agra 14 buildings have been identified in Lucknow. Different Muslim organisations including the All India Muslim Majlis-E-Mushawarat too asked the board for restoration of protected mosques to the state Wakf boards.
The Muslim organisations have stated that in view of the persistent and deliberate intention by the ASI and its failure even to protect and physically repair, maintain and conserve the mosques, the Wakf boards should be given full control of these buildings.
In the list prepared by the JPC the Fatehpur Masjid within the complex of Taj Mahal and four mosques standing inside the Agra Fort are also included.
Quoting the report of Syed Shahabuddin, the chairman of UP Sunni Wakf Board, Hafiz Usman said that Taj Mahal must be given to the state Wakf board and ASI should concede to this demand. In Lucknow, the Shia Wakf Board has already claimed that Chota and Bada Imambada which are currently under the possession of Hussainabad Trust be handed over to it. In Lucknow the Jama Masjid near Hussainabad, Mosque connected with Asfi Imambada, Mosque within the complex of Karbala Talkatora and inside Kazman have been identified as Wakf property.
After Agra and Lucknow, the maximum number of such buildings have been identified in Jaunpur where seven structures are under the control of Archeological Survey of India. The state Wakf board has also identified famous Jama Masjid of Behraich as its property.
A case in which the English version of a major book by a renowned Muslim
scholar, the fourth Rector of one of the greatest centres of Islamic learning in
India, listing some of the mosques, including the Babri Masjid, which were built
on the sites and foundations of temples, using their stones and structures, is
found to have the tell-tale passages censored out;
The book is said to have become difficult to get;
It is traced: And is found to have been commanded just 15 years a-o by the most
influential living Muslim scholar of our country today, the current Rector of
that great centre of Islamic learning, and the Chairman of the Muslim Personal
Law Board.
Evasion, concealment, have become a national habit. And they have terrible
consequences. But first I must give you some background.
The Nadwatul-Ulama of Lucknow is one of the principal centres of Islamic
learning in India. It was founded in 1894. It ranks today next only to the
Darul-Ulum at Deoband. The government publication, Centres of Islamic Learning
in India, recalls how the founders âaimed at producing capable scholars who
could project a true image of Islam before the modern world in an effective
wayâ; it recalls how âTowards fulfilling its avowed aim in the matter of
educational reform, it (the group) decided to establish an ideal educational
institution which would not only provide education in religious and temporal
sciences but also offer technical trainingâ; it recalls how âIt (the Nadwa)
stands out today-with its college, a vast and rich library and Research and
Publication Departments housed in fine buildings-as one of the most outstanding
institutions for imparting instruction in the Islamic Sciencesâ; it recalls how
âA salient feature of this institution is its emphasis on independent
researchâ; it recalls how âThe library of the Nadwa, housed in the Central Hall
and the surrounding rooms of the main building, is, with more than 75,000 titles
including about 3,000 handwritten books mostly in Arabic and also in Persian,
Urdu, English etc., one of the finest libraries of the sub-continent.â That was
written 10 years ago. The library now has 125,000 books.
Its Head
Today the institution is headed by Maulana Abul-Hasan Ali Nadwi. Ali Mian, as
he is known to one and all, is almost without doubt the most influential Muslim
teacher and figure today-among the laity, in government circles, and among
scholars and governments abroad.
He was among the founders of the Jamaat-e-Islami, the fundamentalist
organisation; but because of differences with Maulana Maudoodi, lie left it
soon.
Today lie is the Chairman of the Muslim Personal Law Board.
He is a founder member of the Raabta Alam-e-Islami, the Pan-Islamic body with
headquarters in Mecca, which decides among other things the amounts that
different Islamic organisations the world over should receive.
He has been the Nazim, that is the Rector, of the Darul Ulum Nadwatul-Ulama
since 1961, that is for well over a quarter of a century. The Nadwa owes not a
small part of its eminence to the scholarship, the exertions, tile national and
international contacts of Ali Mian.
Politicians of all hues ---Rajiv Gandhi, V.P. Singh, Chandrashekhar-seek him
out.
He is the author of several books, including the well known Insaani Duniya Par
Musalmanon Ke Uruj-o-Zaval Ka Asar (âThe impact of the Rise and Fall of Muslims
on Mankindâ), and is taken as the authority on Islamic law, jurisprudence,
theology, and specially history.
And he has great, in fact decisive, influence on the politics of Muslims in
India.
His Father and His Book
His father, Maulana Hakim Sayid Abdul Hai, was an equally well known and
influential figure. When the Nadwa was founded, the first Rector, Maulana
Muhammad Monghyri, the scholar at whose initiative the original meeting in 1892
which led to the establishment of the Nadwa was called, had chosen Maulana Abdul
Hai as the Madadgar Nazim, the Additional Rector.
Abdul Hai served in that capacity till July 1915 when he was appointed the
Rector.
Because of his scholarship and his services to the institution and to Islam, he
was reappointed as the Rector in 1920. He continued in that post till his death
in February 1923.
He too wrote several books, including a famous directory which has just been
republished from Hyderabad, of thousands of Muslims who had served the cause of Islam in India, chiefly by the numbers they had converted to the faith.
During some work I came across the reference to a book of his and began to look
for it.
It was a long, discursive book, I learnt, which began with descriptions of the
geography, flora and fauna, languages, people and the regions of India. These
were written for the Arabic speaking peoples, the book having been written in
Arabic.
In 1972, I learnt, the Nadwatul-Ulama had the book translated into Urdu and
published the most important chapters of the book under the title Hindustan
Islami Ahad Mein (âHindustan under Islamic Ruleâ). Ali Mian, I was told, had
himself written the foreword in which he had commanded the book most highly.Â
The book as published had left out descriptions of geography etc., on the
premise that facts about these are well known to Indian readers.
A Sudden Reluctance
A curious fact hit me in the face. Many of the persons who one would have
normally expected to be knowledgeable about such publications were suddenly
reluctant to recall this book. I was told, in fact, that copies of the book had
been removed, for instance from the Aligarh Muslim University Library. Some
even suggested that a determined effort had been made three or four years ago to get back each and every copy of this book.
Fortunately the suggestion turned out to be untrue. While some of the libraries
one would normally expect, to have the book-the Jamia Millia Islamia in Delhi;
the famous libraries in Hyderabad-those of the Dairutual Maarifal-Osmania, of
the Salar Jung Museum, of the Nizamâs Trust, of the Osmania University, the
Kutubkhana-i-Saidiya - did not have it, others did. Among the latter were the
Nadwaâs library itself, the justly famous Khuda Baksh Library in Patna, that of
the Institute of Islamic Studies in Delhi.
The fact that the book was available in all these libraries came as a great
reassurance. I felt that if reactionaries and propagandists have become so well
organised that they can secure the disappearance from every library of a book
they have come not to like, we are in deep trouble. Clearly they were not that
resourceful.
The fact that, contrary to what I had been told, the book was available also
taught me another reassuring thing: factional fights among Muslim
fundamentalists are as sharp and intense as are the factional fights among
fundamentalists of other hues. For the suggestion of there being something
sinister in the inaccessibility of the book had come to me from responsible
Muslim quarters.
âThis valuable gift, this historical testamentâ
The book is the publication number 66 of the Majlis Tehqiqat wa Nashriat Islam,
the publication house of the Nadwatul-Ulama, Lucknow.
The Arabic version was published in 1972 in Hyderabad, the Urdu version in 1973
in Lucknow. An English version was published in 1977. I will use the Urdu
version as the illustration.
Maulana Abul-Hasan Ali Nadwi, that is Ali Mian himself, contributes the
foreword. It is an eloquent, almost lyrical foreword.
Islam has imbued its followers with the quest for truth, with patriotism, he
writes. Their nature, their culture has made Muslims the writers of true
history, he writes.
Muslims had but to reach a country, he writes, and its fortunes lit up and it
awakened from the slumber of hundreds and thousands of years. The country
thereby ascended from darkness to light, he writes, from oblivion and obscurity
to the pinnacle of name and fame. Leaving its parochial ambit, he writes, it
joined the family of man, it joined the wide and vast creation of God. And the
luminescence of Islam, he writes, transformed its hidden treasures into the
light of eyes.
It did not stick away the wealth of the country, he writes, and vomit it
elsewhere as western powers did. On the contrary, it brought sophistication,
culture, beneficient administration, peace, tranquility to the country. It
raised the country from the age of savagery to the age of progress, he writes,
from infantilism to adulthood. It transformed its barren lands into swaying
fields, he writes, its wild shrubs into fruit-laden trees of such munificence
that the residents could not even have dreamt of them.
And so on.
He then recalls the vast learning and prodigious exertions of Maulana Abdul Hai,
his 8-volume work on 4500 Muslims who served the cause of Islam in India, his
directory of Islamic scholars.
He recalls how after completing these books the Maulana turned to subjects which
had till then remained obscure, how in these labours the Maulana was like the
proverbial bee collecting honey from varied flowers. He recounts the wide range
of the Maulanaâs scholarship. He recounts how the latter collected rare data,
how a person like him accomplished single-handed what entire academies are
unable these days to do.
He recounts the structure of the present book. He recalls how it lay neglected
for long, how, even as the work of re-transcribing a moth-eaten manuscript was
going on, a complete manuscript was discovered in Azamgarh, how in 1933 the
grace of Providence saved it from destruction and obscurity.
He writes that the book brings into bold relief those hallmarks of Islamic rule
which have been unjustly and untruthfully dealt with by western and Indian
historians, which in fact many Muslim historians and scholars in universities
and academies too have treated with neglect and lack of appreciation.
Recalling how Maulana Abdul Hai had to study thousands of pages on a subject,
Ali Mian writes that only he who has himself worked on the subject can
appreciate the effort that has gone into the study. You will get in a single
chapter of this book, he tells the reader, the essence which you cannot obtain
by reading scores of books. This is the result, he writes, of the fact that the
author laboured only for the pleasure of God, for the service of learning, and
the fulfilment of his own soul. Such authors expected no rewards, no applause,
he tells us. Work was their entire satisfaction. That is how they were able to
put in such herculean labours, to spend their entire life on one subject.
We are immensely pleased, he concludes, to present this valuable gift and
historical testament to our countrymen and hope that Allah will accept this act
of service and scholars will also receive it with respect and approbation.
The Explanation
Such being the eminence of the author, such being the greatness of the work, why
is it not the cynosure of the fundamentalistsââ eyes?
The answer is in the chapter âHindustan ki Masjideinâ, âThe Mosques of
Hindustanâ.
Barely seventeen pages; the chapter is simply written. A few facts about some
of the principal mosques are described in a few lines each.
The facts are well-known, they are elementary, and setting them out in a few
lines each should attract no attention. And yet, as we shall see, there is
furtiveness in regard to them. Why? Descriptions of seven mosques provide the
answer.
The devout constructed so many mosques, Maulana Abdul Hai records, they lavished such huge amounts and such labours on them that they cannot all be reckoned, that every city, town, hamlet came to be adorned by a mosque. He says that he will therefore have to be content with setting out the facts of just a few of the well-known ones.
A few sentences from what he says about seven mosques will do:
âQawwat al-Islam Mosque
According to my findings the first mosque of Delhi is Qubbat all-Islam or Quwwat
al-Islam which, it is said, Qutbud-Din Aibak constructed in H. 587 after
demolishing the temple built by Prithvi Raj and leaving certain parts of the
temple (outside the mosque proper); and when he returned from Ghazni in H. 592,
he started building, under orders from Shihabud-Din Ghori, a huge mosque of
inimitable red stones, and certain parts of the temple were included in the
mosque. After that, when Shamsud-Din Altamish became the king, he built, on
both sides of it, edifices of white stones, and on one side of it he started
constructing that loftiest of all towers which has no equal in the world for its
beauty and strengthâ¦
The Mosque at Jaunpur
This was built by Sultan Ibrahim Sharqi with chiselled stones. Originally it
was a Hindu temple after demolishing which he constructed the mosque. It is
known as the Atala Masjid. The Sultan used to offer his Friday and Id prayers
in it, and Qazi Shihabud-Din gave lessons in itâ¦
The Mosque at Qanauj
This mosque stands on an elevated ground inside the Fort of Qanauj. It is
well-known that it was built on the foundations of some Hindu temple (that
stood) here. It is a beautiful mosque. They say that it was built by Ibrahim
Sharqi in H. 809 as is (recorded) in âGharabat Nigarâ.
Jami (Masjid) at Etawah
This mosque stands on the bank of the Jamuna at Etawah. There was a Hindu
temple at this place, on the site of which this mosque was constructed. It is
also patterned after the mosque at Qanauj. Probably it is one of the monuments
of the Sharqi Sultans.
Babri Masjid at Ayodhya
This mosque was constructed by Babar at Ayodhya which Hindus call the birth
place of Ramchanderji. There is a famous story about his wife Sita. It is said
that Sita had a temple here in which she lived and cooked food for her husband.Â
On that very site Babar constructed this mosque in H. 963â¦
Mosques of Alamgir (Aurangzeb)
It is said that the mosque of Benares was built by Alamgir on the site of the
Bisheshwar Temple. That temple was very tall and (held as) holy among the
Hindus. On this very site and with those very stones he constructed a lofty
mosque, and its ancient stones were rearranged after being embedded in the walls
of the mosque. It is one of the renowed mosques of Hindustan. The second
mosque at Benares (is the one) which was built by Alamgir on the bank of the
Ganga with chiselled stones. This also is a renowned mosque of Hindustan. It
has 28 towers, each of which is 238 feet tall. This is on the bank of the Ganga
and its foundations extend to the depth of the waters.
Alamgir built a mosque at Mathura. It is said that this mosque was built on the
site of the Gobind Dev Temple which was very strong and beautiful as well as
exquisiteâ¦â
âIt is saidâ
But the Maulana is not testifying to the facts. He is merely reporting what was
believed. He repeatedly says, âIt is said thatâ¦â
That seems to be a figure of speech with the Maulana. When describing the
construction of the Quwwatul Islam mosque by Qutubuddin Aibak, for instance, he
uses the same âIt is said.â
If the facts were in doubt, would a âscholar of Ali Mianâs diligence and
commitment not have commented on them in his full-bodied foreward? Indeed, he
would have decided against republishing them as he decided not to republish much
of the original book.
And if the scholars had felt that the passages could be that easily disposed of,
why should any effort have been made to take a work to the excellence of which a
scholar of Ali Mianâs stature has testified in such a fulsome manner, and do
what has been done to this one? And what is that?
Each reference to each of these mosques having been constructed on the sites of
temples with, as in the case of the mosque at Benaras, the stones of the very
temple which was demolished for that very purpose have been censored out of the
English version of the book! Each one of the passages on each one of the seven
mosques! No accident that.
Indeed there is not just censorship but substitution. In the Urdu volume we are
told in regard to the mosque at Qanauj for instance that âThis mosque stands on
an elevated ground inside the fort of Qanauj. It is well known that it was
built on the foundation of some Hindu Temple (that stood) here.â In the English
volume we are told in regard to the same mosque that âIt occupied a commanding
site, believed to have been the place earlier occupied by an old and decayed
fort.â
If the passages could have been so easily explained away by referring to the âIt
is saidsâ, why would anyone have thought it necessary to remove these passages
from the English version-that is the version which was more likely to be read by
persons other than the faithful? Why would anyone bowdlerise the book of a major
scholar in this way?
Conclusions
But that, though obvious, weighs little with me. The fact that temples were
broken and mosques constructed in their place is well known. Nor is the fact
that the materials of the temples-the stones and idols--were used in
constructing the mosque, news. It was thought that this was the way to announce
hegemony. It was thought that this was the way to strike at the heart of the
conquered-for in those days the temple was not just a place of worship; it was
the hub of the communityâs life, of its learning, of its social life. So the
lines in the book which bear on this practice are of no earth-shaking
significance in themselves. Their real significance- and I dare say that they
are but the smallest, most innocuous example that one can think of on the
mosque-temple business-lies in the evasion and concealment they have spurred. I
have it on good authority that the passages have been known for long, and well
known to those who have been stoking the Babri Masjid issue.1
That is the significant thing; they have known them, and their impulse has been
to conceal and bury rather than to ascertain the truth.
I have little doubt that a rational solution can be found for the Babri
Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi tangle, a solution which will respect the sentiments, the
essentials, of the religions of all.
But no solution can be devised if the issue is going to be made the occasion for
h show of strength by either side, if it is going to be converted into a symbol
for establishing who shall prevail.
The fate of Maulana Abdul Haiâs passages-and I do, not know whether the Urdu
version itself was not a conveniently sanitised version of the original Arabic
volume-illustrates the cynical manner in which those who stoke the passions of
religion to further their politics are going about the matter.
Those who proceed by such cynical calculations sow havoc for all of us, for
Muslims, for Hindus, for all.
Those who remain silent in the face of such cynicism, such calculations help
them sow the havoc.
Will we shed our evasions and concealments? Will we at last learn to speak and
face the whole truth? To see how communalism of one side justifies and stokes
that of the other? To see that these âleadersâ are not interested in facts, not
in religion, not in a building or a site, but in power, in their personal power,
and in that alone? That for them religion is but an instrument, an instrument
which is so attractive because the costs of weilding it fall on others, on their
followers, and not on them?
Will we never call a halt to them?
Indian Express, February 5, 1989
Footnotes: 1 Several other modern Muslim historians and epigraphists accept the
fact that many other mosques including the Babari Masjid at Ayodhya stand on the
sites of Hindu temples.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Was Taj Mahal a Shiv temple?
March 24, 2005 13:13 IST
Last Updated: March 24, 2005 13:34 IST
Bharatiya Janata Party leader Vinay Katiyar on Wednesday claimed that the Taj Mahal in Agra was actually a Shiva temple built by Raja Jai Singh and was named 'Tejo Mai Mahal'.
"This fact finds mention in the book Badshahnama by Abdul Hamid Lahori, a close associate of Mughal emperor Shah Jahan," Katiyar said in Lucknow.
That the Taj Mahal was a graveyard "is only a half truth", Katiyar said.
He added: "It is no doubt a graveyard as Shah Jahan brought back the body of his wife Mumtaz Mahal from Burahanpur village, where she died, and buried it in the temple after removing the Shivalinga."
"It actually belongs to us (Hindus) and we will do everything possible to reclaim it," Katiyar said.
He added that a 'Shankar Sena' would soon be formed and Damrus distributed among the people to create awareness on this issue.
His statement came close on the heels of claims of ownership of the Taj by the Shia community and Uttar Pradesh Sunni Waqf Board with the support of UP Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Azam Khan.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Monumental absurdity
SirâApropos the editorial, âWhose Taj Mahal?â (March 23), âclaimsâ by Muslim bodies to âownershipâ of the Taj Mahal are both illogical and unjustified. But they also seem the product of some deeper conspiracy against Indiaâs democratic and secular foundations in general and the Hindu community in particular. The Taj Mahal is a monument of great historical and architectural importance. Though built by a Mughal emperor, it is yet cherished as a monument to national pride by all Indians irrespective of their caste or creed. The Taj is national property, and its upkeep a collective responsibility. No particular individual or community, be it Sunnis, Shiasâor even the descendants of Shah Jahan!âhave any usurpation rights over the monument. As for I&B Minister Jaipal Reddyâs statement that âthe claim is not objectionable at allâ, I can only say that he belongs to the very pseudo-secular breed that never tires of minority appeasement and Hindu-bashing. Would he ever consider the legitimate claim of Hindus to their temples in Ayodhya, Kashi or Mathura? It would not come as a surprise to me if the UPAâs self-proclaimed âsecularistsâ actually allowed a takeover of the Taj Mahal.
Atri Joshi
via e-mail<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Revenue records list Taj as Shahi Imarat </b>
Agencies/ Agra
Revenue records pertaining to Taj Mahal do not show the historic monument as a Waqf property as claimed by the UP Sunni Waqf board, official sources said here today.
A report prepared by the tehsildar, in whose area the monument is located, said that <b>land records show it as 'Shahi Imarat' (royal building</b>), the sources said.
They said the record did not mention Taj as a Waqf property though all other Waqf properties were listed in it.
The report has been prepared in response to a letter by the Waqf board seeking information from Agra district magistrate on ownership and allied matters related to the Taj.
The District Magistrate is expected to send the required information to the Waqf board after further investigation, the sources said.
The board had earlier claimed that Taj was a waqf property and that its control and management should be transferred to it.
It issued notices to the Archaelogical Survey of India and the central government saying that it had received applications for the registration of Maqbara Shahjehan and Mumtaz Mahal property known as 'Taj Mahal' at Agra under the provision 36 of the Waqf Act, 1995.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>High Court slaps contempt notice on Wakf Board </b>
Staff Reporter/ New Delhi
The Delhi High Court has issued a contempt notice to the Central Wakf Council and the Delhi Wakf Board for not complying with<b> its earlier order to regulate offerings by devotees at the capital's Hazrat Nizamuddin Aulia shrine</b>.
The notices were issued on the basis of a petition filed by a voluntary agency, "Hum Aap Ke", which suggested that the Wakf Board and the Central Wakf Council had failed to "ensure proper use of the offerings at the shrine" as ordered by the High Court in November 2004.
Justice S Ravindra Bhat issued the notice to Central Wakf Council officer on special duty Ghaziul Islam, Delhi Wakf Board (DWB) chairman Mateen Ahmad and chief executive officer FO Hashmi to file a reply by the next date of hearing on April 19.
Chief Justice BC Patel and Justice BD Ahmed on November 20, 2004 had directed that<b> "it was required to be noted that it was the duty of the Wakf commissioner and survey commissioner to see that no third party collects any offerings and that all the money received is accounted for".</b>
Mr Tahir Siddiqui, advocate for the petitioner, said the daily offerings at the dargah amounted to Rs 10,000 on an average, next to the Hazrat Khawaja Garib Nawaz of Ajmer.
But <b>the board did not take any step to help the poor with the money collected in compliance with the rules enshrined in the Wakf Act, 1995</b>, the petition contended.
Though the DWB authorities had received copies of the order, it could not comply with<b> the directives because of the pressure mounted by over 500 "pirzadas (godmen)", </b>the petition said. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Wakf, walk off
SirâAs resolved at a public meeting on April 21 at the Constitution Club in New Delhi, we demand that all wakfs should be abolished in India. The main reason for this is that all property owned by them belong to Allah, the merciful. In an Islamic state, sovereignty rests with Allah. This means that all wakf property is micro-Islamistan. Wakfs function outside the purview of all laws like, income tax, Urban Land Ceiling Act, etc. Most wakf properties are results of conquests and confiscation. They were either a part of war booty distributed to commandersâ favourites as rewards or a source of funds for the pursuit of jihad. It is not sacred since this property does not find any mention in the holy Quran. Moreover, wakfs have been abolished in a number of Islamic countries such as Turkey-1924, Egypt-1842, Tunisia-1957, Syria and Lebanon post-World War l and the Muslim-populated provinces of the erstwhile Soviet Union in the wake of the 1917 Revolution. If we combine all that the wakf possesses as property, it would emerge as the greatest urban feudal body in India. According to a report in a national daily, in Delhi alone the wakf owns maximum property, next only to the DDA. The UP Sunni Wakf Board has demanded ownership of the Taj Mahal on the ground that it contains qabrs. If this logic were to prevail, innumerable areas across the country would sprout up as micro-Islamistans. The princely states were integrated in 1948 and the zamindari system abolished. Why then have wakfs not been taken over? This reflects the stateâs bias for one community over the others and this anomaly must be rectified at the earliest.
Prafull Goradia
General Secretary, Jana Sangh <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->HC takes exception to PM writing to Bukhari on Jama Masjid
Press Trust of India
New Delhi, April 27, 2005
Taking exception to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's communication that the Jama Masjid will not be declared a protected monument, the Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked Ministry of Culture to produce the records relating to the decision.
The order came from a Division Bench of Chief Justice BC Patel and Justice SK Kaul after Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) counsel Sanjay Jain informed the court that the Prime Minister has already written to Masjid's Imam Syed Ahmed Bukhari about Ministry of Culture's decision not to declare it a protected monument.
The Bench wanted to know how the decision was taken when the matter was subj udice.
"If it is not declared a protected monument, why should the Government spend money on it," the court observed.
The Bench is seized of a PIL by Heritage and Culture Forum (HCF) for declaring the 355-year-old Jama Masjid a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
When Jain said the monument could be preserved without being declared a protected one, the Bench shot back "why are the authorities shying away? Are you afraid of anybody?"
"Tell me in how many cases the Prime Minister has issued such directions? If there is an objection from some quarter, the Government will not declare it a protected monument but still pay money for it," the Chief Justice asked.
When the court asked who controlled the Masjid, Wakf Board counsel Najmi Waziri said, "it is Wakf Board". However, HCF counsel Usha Kumar contradicted his submission, saying it had been made a domain of a particular person.
"Everybody knows the answer but nobody will tell you. Everybody knows who controls the affairs of Jama Masjid," she said.
The Court suggested that the Wakf Board may control the affairs inside the mosque while the ASI will control the same outside it.
The Bench, which had earlier directed ASI and Delhi Wakf Board to work out modalities to declare the masjid built by Mughal emperor Shahjahan in 1650 a protected monument, asked both the parties to examine the matter in the light of the suggestion and assist it on May 25 the next date of hearing.
The court also asked the Board to do the repair works needed to preserve the monument with the help of experts.
Terming it an emotive issue for the Muslim community, Waziri submitted that Wakf Board was not in favour of declaring the masjid a protected monument.
Changing its earlier stand on the issue, the Board, which earlier favoured the idea, had on February 23 changed its stand and opposed the move to declare it a protected monument, saying the Board had to take care of Muslim sentiments as ASI did not permit namaz inside protected monuments.
ASI counsel Sanjay Jain had said that the expert body was ready to allow all the ongoing religious rites, rituals and practices and sign a special Memorandum of Understanding with the Wakf Board, the owner of the property.
The court had agreed to the suggestion and asked Waziri to get instruction from the Board on the ASI's suggestion and clarify what all rights it would like to be protected.
The Bench had emphasied that Jama Masjid was a part of history and culture of Delhi which needed to be preserved and clarified that the religious practices would not be disturbed.
The court said if it was declared a protected monument, construction activities within 100 meters of the structure would be prohibited and it would be regulated in a further 200 meters leading to its better maintenance.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Waqf board climbs down from demand on Taj Mahal
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Lucknow, April 19 (IANS) The Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board seems to have retracted its earlier demand for complete control over the Taj Mahal and is now saying it would be content if the monument was just registered as a waqf in the records.
In what appears to be a climb down from the earlier position asking for a formal take over of the monument by the waqf board, state Urban Development Minister Azam Khan said: "We would be content if Taj Mahal is entered as a waqf in the board's records; we are not asking for its possession any more."
The demand had triggered an ugly row over India's most famous monument in Agra with Hindu rightwing groups like the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) saying that the mausoleum by Mughal emperor Shahjahan for his wife Mumtaz Mahal was built on a Shiva temple.
Board president Hafiz Usman agreed with Khan, saying that that <b>registration of the Taj as a waqf -- "trust" under Islamic law and tombs are listed as waqf properties which may include other buildings as well -- would prevent any mischief by the VHP or its hardliner allies.
"Besides, that will also entitle the waqf board to seven percent of the revenue earned by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in the name of Taj Mahal," he said.</b>
The ASI manages the Taj Mahal, which houses the graves of Shahjahan and his wife, as it does all national monuments.
The waqf board has issued notices to the ASI, demanding formal possession of the monument. An ASI representative will appear before the board Tuesday.
According to Usman: "ASI should not have any objection to this proposal as other heritage monuments like Fatehpur Sikri are already registered as waqf property."
Khan added: "The fact that the monument is a tomb with has two graves is the most potent testimony to the waqf board's claim. No matter how many precious stones with which a grave might be studded a tomb remains a tomb."
The minister expressed apprehensions that the Taj Mahal could go the way of the 16th century Babri mosque, pulled down by violent Hindu mobs in 1992.
Khan, who has also been convenor of the Babri Masjid Action Committee (BMAC), told IANS: "The campaign by VHP leaders, Ashok Singhal and Pravin Togadia, terming Taj Mahal as an ancient Shiva temple appears to be part of a vicious design to take this wonder monument the same way as Babri Masjid."
Retorted Vinay Katiyar, former Bharatiya Janata Party state president: "If the Sunni Waqf Board can claim right over Taj Mahal, we have a stronger claim which is supported by carbon dating of certain stones used in the construction."
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->PM courts trouble with letter to Imam
Abraham Thomas / New Delhi
In a scathing criticism of the Prime Minister, the Delhi High Court on Wednesday enquired whether the Prime Minister responds to any private person's queries?
"How can you (the Prime Minister) entertain communication with any private person," asked the bench referring to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's letter to Shahi Imam of Jama Masjid assuring that the mosque would not be declared a protected monument.
Having been apprised of the letter written by the Prime Minister on October 20, 2004, the Division Bench of Chief Justice BC Patel and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul had directed the Centre to produce the files containing the said letter.
Hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) that sought the court's intervention to preserve the 17th century mosque for its better maintenance, the High Court failed to understand why the Prime Minister was required to respond to the Shahi Imam of Jama Masjid, that too on an issue which is subjudice before the court.
While the Delhi Wakf Board is the custodian of the mosque property, the court held the view that the "government must deal with the owner of the property". The court thus took strong exception to the Prime Minister's letter to Imam, who was virtually a nobody as regards the matter.
The Centre produced the 35-page file of the Ministry of Culture which contained the said letter of the Prime Minister before the court. However on perusal, the court noted that the relevant portion of the file relating to the Prime Minister's communication was missing. Observing this in its order, the bench said, "Page number 9 is missing from the file which has 35 pages. Produce it in the court before the hearing tomorrow (Thursday)." Even the end notings on the file were missing, they noted.
The judges also asked the government to file an affidavit stating how much money of the public exchequer was spent on sites such as Jama Masjid without declaring them as protected monuments. The court further questioned how the government gave money to Shahi Imam for the upkeep of a property which was in possession of the Wakf Board.
The court while taking cognisance of the fading elegance of the mosque, sought to know why the Wakf had failed to take up this issue with the Centre. Minor and major repairs were required to be carried out in the mosque, which can only commence once the structure is declared a protected monument, the court opined.
The court has made several futile efforts to broker a deal between the ASI and Delhi Wakf Board. While ASI is agreeable to draw out a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the Wakf Board, making adequate provisions to protect the religious rights of 'masjid' in terms of the Act, the Wakf has been expressing reservations on the issue since it fears the same would infringe on the rights of the Muslim community.
Since the mosque needs to be protected as a place of worship where devotees can offer prayers and religious rites can be performed without any interruption, the Wakf is apprehensive that by declaring the structure as protected, the ASI is bound to effect certain restrictions.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Wakf go-slow for Imam's sake? </b>
Rajesh Kumar / New Delhi
In a bid to avoid confrontation with Shahi Imam Syed Ahmed Bukhari, the Wakf Board seems to be dragging its feet on implementing the Delhi High Court's decision of vesting authority in the Centre and the Wakf Board for the upkeep and maintenance of the historic Jama Masjid.
Following the ensuing debate in the court over the ownership of Jama Masjid, Delhi Wakf Board chairman Mateen Ahmed on Saturday said that the Board is in no hurry to take a decision on the Shahi Imam.
"The Board has no problem with the Imam," he said, adding, "We will decide our future action in our next Wakf Board meeting."
However, the Wakf is wary about involving the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in maintaining Jama Masjid.
Expressing concern on the issue, he said, "We would like ASI to consult us before initiating its conservation plan. <b>The Muslim community will not allow the historic monument to be handed over to ASI or any individual, including the Shahi Imam," </b>he added.
Refuting <b>Syed Bukhari's claim that Muslims will launch a nationwide agitation if Jama Masjid is declared a protected monument, the Wakf Board chairman said the political significance of the Shahi Imam has faded away and Muslims no longer follow his 'fatwas'.</b>
"For instance, Bukhari has been issuing farman (instructions) against Shoaib Iqbal for the last three Assembly elections, <b>but Muslims have ignored his calls and voted heavily for Shoaib." </b>he said.
The Board is flooded with complaints against the Shahi Imam and his alleged misuse of the position.
"In 1970, the board was gazetted and the present Imam's grandfather was our employee who received Rs 501 as nazrana," Mr Ahmed added.
According to Ahmed, the Muslim community is apprehensive that if the Jama Masjid is declared a protected monument, the movement of people would be restricted, since as per the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, the Masjid would have to be closed by 5 pm, thus, depriving people from offering their evening prayers.
<b>"People also apprehend that the Government will impose an entry fee, making the Masjid out of reach of a majority of Muslims,"</b> he added.
However, ASI has made it clear that it is ready to make adequate provisions to protect people's religious rights.
<b>Muslims in Old Delhi are divided over the issue. Shopkeepers and residents in and around the Masjid support the Imam. The reason is simple. Once the monument is declared protected, shops within the 300 metre range will have to be removed.</b>
There is a section of Muslims which feels that Bukhari should treat the issue like other Imams and the Masjid should be handed over to Wakf Board.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
