Ziya Us Salam on the Controversy Over the Taj Mahal
The Taj Mahal is caught in a controversy. Some Hindu groups are claiming that the 17th-century white marble mausoleum that Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan built in memory of his favorite wife was originally “Tejo Mahalaya,” a Hindu temple dedicated to the deity Shiva. Both the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the courts have dismissed the claims of Hindu groups so far. However, recent developments provide cause for concern. The Allahabad High Court issued directives to the central government and the ASI, asking them to respond to a petition, which, while seeking permission for Hindus to offer prayers in the Taj, sought a survey of the monument. Will the Allahabad court’s directives prove to be the thin end of the wedge, opening the floodgates to political meddling and court rulings to strengthen Hindu claims over the Taj?
In an interview with The Diplomat’s South Asia editor Sudha Ramachandran, journalist and scholar Ziya Us Salam pointed out that in 2017, the ASI was unambiguous in declaring the Taj as a 17th-century tomb. “One expects that the body will maintain its stand and not succumb to political pressure from right-wing bodies.” As for the central government, it is unlikely to go against the ASI report, as “the Taj earns the highest revenue for the exchequer. Any unseemly controversy could keep the tourists away.” Besides, unlike the Babri masjid, the Taj is famous globally. “The stakes are too high to ignore the facts of history in Agra,” Salam said.
What is the dispute over the Taj Mahal?
Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan’s monument of love, the Taj Mahal, has been mired in a controversy for many years. It all started more than 60 years ago when P.N. Oak, a teacher-turned-journalist-turned-lawyer, but never a historian, alleged that the Taj was originally a Rajput palace built more than 1,500 years ago. That allegation was made in 1965. In 1989, under immense scrutiny from historians, Oak revised his claim and this time alleged that the Taj was actually Tejo Mahlaya, a temple dedicated to the Hindu deity Shiva, built in the 11th century.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly dismissed all such contentions, coming down hard on Oak’s claim particularly in 2000.
Last month, though, it all changed when the Allahabad High Court issued notices to the central government and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), asking for their response to a plea challenging an Agra trial court order that refused a survey of the Taj Mahal. A Bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal passed the order on a petition filed by advocate Harishankar Jain contending that the Taj, a UNESCO World Heritage monument, is actually “Tejo Mahalaya.”
The petitioner had sought permission for Hindus to offer prayers there, and also sought the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the monument.
Incidentally, soon after the Allahabad High Court notice, a Hindu body tried to offer Ganga jal (water) at the Taj on the Kanwariya route. Also, there have been periodic attempts by right-wing Hindu bodies to undermine the authenticity of the Taj, with a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Sangeet Som leading the way in 2019 with fresh allegations of the Taj being a Shiva temple. Interestingly, he got his history lesson mixed up, alleging that the Taj was built by a man who had imprisoned his father!
Is there evidence to prove the claims of either side?
There is no debate in the circle of historians and scholars that the Taj Mahal was built by Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan in memory of his favorite wife Arjumand Bano, popularly known as Mumtaz Mahal. Built over 22 years, its chief architect was Ustad Ahmed Lahori. The land for building it was procured from Mirza Raja Jai Singh of Amber, who had inherited it from Raja Man Singh, a celebrated general of Emperor Akbar, who also happened to be Shah Jahan’s grandfather. Shah Jahan compensated Jai Singh with four havelis from the royal property for the massive haveli. His firman to Jai Singh, the latter’s agreement and the Mughal emperor’s subsequent letter granting him four havelis in lieu of one, are all part of history.
Yet there have been periodic attempts to question the monument’s origin. The first time the Taj Mahal faced a controversy was when many in the West claimed that the architect of the Taj was Geronimo Veroneo, a Venetian jeweler by profession. That was in the 17th century. Then came the claim by Mughal Beg in Tarikh-e-Taj Mahal that the Taj was designed by Muhammad Effendi, an architect supposedly sent by the Sultan of Turkey. Effendi, however, was only as much an architect as Oak was a historian.
Then in the mid-19th century, it was claimed that the monument was the result of the genius of Frenchman Austin de Bordeaux. However, Austin died in 1632, the year the work on the Taj began. With his death, all claims of Austin being the Taj’s architect were buried. And facts began to be raised.
The chief mason of the Taj was Mohammed Hanif from Baghdad, who earned 1,000 rupees a month for his efforts. The pinnacle was built by Qayam Khan of Lahore and its Quranic inscriptions were done by Amanat Khan Shirazi. The mosaic work was done by local Hindu workers. Above all, some 20,000 workmen toiled for 22 years to build the monument to love. Its white marble came from Jaipur, lapis lazuli from Sri Lanka, crystal from China and coral from Arabia. The monument uses the double dome technique, previously seen only in Humayun’s tomb in Delhi, and never seen in the country before the arrival of the Turks.
The Taj Mahal is both Islamic and Indian (two overlapping categories). Quranic verses on the façade visibly mark the monument as Muslim, and the structure incorporates minarets and a mosque. However, like at Fatehpur Sikri, the workers and artisans were largely Hindu. We know this because some workers left mason marks and names on the backs of bricks and stones. Among other things, one takeaway is that the Mughal Empire was built, quite literally, by Hindus and Muslims working together.
What roles have the courts and the Archaeological Survey of India played in the issue?
Beginning in 2000, various courts have dismissed all attempts to question the Mughal origin of the Taj. The Allahabad High Court notice, however, tends to ignore such verdicts in the past, including that of the Supreme Court. In 2000, the Supreme Court rejected Oak’s claims, calling them “a bee in his bonnet.” Half a decade later, another attempt to appropriate the Taj, this time as allegedly built by a Chandela ruler, was dismissed by the Allahabad High Court. The petition was moved on behalf of Amarnath Mishra, now a member of Ayodhya Sadbhavna Samiti. It claimed that the Taj was a temple built by the Chandela rulers in 1189.
There was, however, no let-up in petitions questioning the veracity of the Taj. In 2015, a civil suit filed at the Agra trial court sought to declare the Taj Mahal a Hindu temple. The court, however, didn’t agree with this claim either. After it refused to order a survey of the Taj premises, like the one ordered in Gyanvapi and Bhojshala places of worship, the petitioners went to the Allahabad High Court. The court then sought a response from the central government and the ASI.
Incidentally, back in 2017, the ASI had stated that the Taj was a 17th-century tomb. It stated that the technology used in its construction and design, including pietra dura, did not exist in pre-medieval days. It should have ended any vestiges of controversy. However, a public interest litigation was filed in the Supreme Court by a Bharatiya Janata Party leader in 2022.
What are the implications of the Allahabad High Court’s recent notices to the central government and the ASI?
The Allahabad High Court has sought responses from the ASI as well as the central government. The ASI has already made its point clear in 2017. One expects that the body will maintain its stand and not succumb to political pressure from right-wing bodies. As for the central government, I do not foresee it going against the ASI report. Of all the protected monuments in India, the Taj earns the highest revenue for the exchequer. Any unseemly controversy could keep the tourists away. It is something the government would not like to lose.
Hindu groups have laid claim to other Muslim places of worship or tombs, such as the Babri masjid, the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Eidgah mosque in Mathura. Are there similarities in the Hindu claims and disputes?
There are plenty of similarities, but also crucial differences. While the demand to open the tahkhana (basement) at the Taj is similar to the contention at Varanasi and Dhar (Bhojshala), as indeed the petition to order a survey of its premises, there are stark differences. Unlike Varanasi, Ayodhya and Mathura, the Taj is not a dispute between the places of worship of two religions. It is a case of a monument of love, widely regarded among the Top Ten monuments in the world versus dubious claims based on a book by a person who was not a historian, nor did he provide any evidence to substantiate his claims. Much the same has been the case with subsequent petitions. They seem to be high on prejudice and assumptions, low on evidence.
Hindus have called for Muslims to be forbidden from praying at the Taj Mahal. Do you foresee the Taj suffering the fate of the Babri Masjid in the future?
I am hopeful of history not being repeated. The hope stems from the judiciary foiling repeated attempts by Hindu groups to conduct pooja [Hindu worship rituals] at the Taj. Having said that, the history of Ayodhya, where Hindutva groups destroyed a 16th-century mosque in 1993 and built a Ram temple at that site in 2024, fills one with fear and trepidation. The specter of a Ram idol being smuggled into the Babri masjid at night in connivance with the local administration in 1949 has not been erased from our collective memory. Also not forgotten are the repeated court cases, and the final denouement when the apex court ultimately based its decision on faith rather than hard evidence. One hopes that a similar fate does not befall the Taj. The muted confidence comes from the monument’s international stature as opposed to an obscure mosque in a small town, Ayodhya, in Uttar Pradesh. The stakes are too high to ignore the facts of history in Agra.
