Analisa Journal of Social Science and Religion

Website Journal : http://blasemarang.kemenag.go.id/journal/index.php/analisa

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18784/analisa.v3i1.595

TEMPLE DESTRUCTION AND THE GREAT

MUGHALS’ RELIGIOUS POLICY IN NORTH INDIA:
A Case Study of Banaras Region, 1526-1707

Parvez Alam

Department of History, ABSTRACT

Banaras Hindu University,
Banaras also known as Varanasi (at present a district of Uttar Pradesh state, India)
Varanasi, India, 221005
parvezprince33@gmail.com was a sarkar (district) under Allahabad Subah (province) during the great Mughals
period (1526-1707). The great Mughals have immortal position for their contribu-
Paper received: 07 February 2018 tions to Indian economic, society and culture, most important in the development of
Paper revised: 15 – 23 May 2018 Ganga-Jamuni Tehzeeb (Hindustani culture). With the establishment of their state in
Paper approved: 11 July 2018
Northern India, Mughal emperors had efected changes by their policies. One of them
was their religious policy which is a very controversial topic though is very impor-
tant to the history of medieval India. There are debates among the historians about it.
According to one group, Mughals’ religious policy was very intolerance towards non-
Muslims and their holy places, while the opposite group does not agree with it, and
say that Mughlas adopted a liberal religious policy which was in favour of non-Mus-
lims and their deities. In the context of Banaras we see the second view. As far as the
destruction of temples is concerned was not the result of Mughals’ bigotry, but due to
the contemporary political and social circumstances. Mostly temples were destroyed
during the war time and under political reasons. This study is based on primary
Persian sources and travelogues, perusal study of Faramin (decrees), and modern
works done on the theme. Besides this, I have tried to derive accurate historical infor-
mation from folklore, and have adopted an analytical approach. This article showed
that Mughals’ religious policy was in favour of Pundits (priests), Hindu scholars and
temples of Banaras; many ghats and temples were built in Banaras with the full sup-
port of Mughals. Aurangzeb made many grants both cashes and lands to priests and
scholars of Banaras.

Keywords: Religious policy, farman, pundit, temples, Kashi Vishvanath and Au-
rangzeb

Introduction seven sacred cities of Hinduism and Jainism, and

Banaras also known as Kashi and Varanasi, also played a remarkable role in the development
at present is a district of Uttar Pradesh state. It of Buddhism. Banaras as one of the veritable
is a semi moon shaped city situated on the left cities of India, its society, culture and economic
bank of the river Ganges. In the Ancient time it development continues to attract a great deal of
was called Kashi and the capital of this region attention of historians cutting across its time
was Varanasi. During the medieval period Kashi framework since it enjoys a mythological cosmic
became popular by the name of Banaras which popularity for religious and pilgrimage presence.
is derived from Varanasi (Banarasidas, 1981: The history of this city can be traced as early as in
101), actually it is the Sanskrit form of Banaras the beginning of the Janpada time (1200 BC- 600
(Cunningham, 1871: 437). Since time immemorial BC) to till today as the city has a vibrant culture,
Banaras has been the holiest city among the society and living tradition.

1
 Analisa Journal of Social Science and Religion Volume 03 Number 01 July 2018
pages 1-18

According to Irfan Habib, “Religion has been general school of the Gentiles. It is the Athens
an undoubted component of human civilization of India; whither resort the Brahmens and other
in its various stages of evolution.” (Habib, 2007: devotees” (Bernier, 1916: 334). Here studying
142). It played its signiicant role in acting on the controversial region Banaras, witnessed of
behalf of the ruling classes; however, every vicissitude in religious life due to the Mughal
dynasty had ruled according to the contemporary religious policy, the destruction of Vishvanath
tradition. If we observe closely all phenomena, temple and the construction of Gyanvapi mosque,
religion has been a means to get political power is look into how was the religious situation of
through alluring the notions of the people even Banaras during the Mughal period; Were Hindu
now. After their victory in Northern India, and Muslim inhabited peacefully together in the
Mughal emperors had efected changes by their city; How many ghats, temples and monasteries
policies. One of them was their religious policy were constructed; How slightly changed Mughal
which is a very controversial topic although it is religious policy in Aurangzeb’s reign; What were
very important to the history of medieval India. the causes of temple destruction of Banaras,
There are debates among the historians about it. and to ind out the causes of the demolition of
One view is that being a Muslim ruler, the Islamic Vishvanath temple? In this paper an attempt is
law was dominant in the shaping of religious made to answer these questions. In spite of this,
policy and there was no room for other religions’ an endeavour is made to show that Mughals were
law. Except Akbar all rulers were intolerants to not intolerant; they run the state with the support
non-Muslims, and their holy places. Aurangzeb and corporate of the people of India belonging to
was more bigot ruler than others; due to his diferent castes and religions; they maintained
partial religious policy Hindus, Jats, Satnamis, the state policy similar to everyone without any
Marathas and others raised rebellious lag against discrimination of caste and creed; they ruled
the Mughal empire that eventually caused the according to contemporary situations whichever
decline of the Mughal empire (Sarkar, 1912-1924; were in the favour of the state. Whatsoever works
Lane-Poole, 1924; Sharma, 1940; Nehru, 1946; have been done on Banaras mentioned below
Husain, 2002; Sharma, 2017). On the contrary does not reasonably shed light on these aspects.
the opposite view is that the entire ield of the The irst scholarly work on Banaras was done
personal law of their subjects were covered by by M. A. Sherring (1826-80) who wrote Benares,
the Hindu and Muslim laws over which they had the Sacred City of the Hindus in Ancient and
no authority to change. The emperors, however, Modern times in 1868. His study mainly focused
called themselves agents of Islam; even this left on religious and cultural life of Banaras during the
a very wide margin of freedom to the citizens in nineteenth century with occasional accounts of
theory and in practices. The Mughals ruled over ancient history. Sherring’s next book on Banaras
India according to Indian tradition, and did not was Hindu Tribes and Castes as Represented in
try to impose Islamic law on their subjects which Benares published in three volumes during 1872-
were mostly non-Muslims (Faruki, 1935; Ali, 1881. In this book he has tried to describe castes
1966 and 2006; Chandra, 1969; Truschke, 2017). and tribes of Hindu inhabited in the nineteenth
Banaras was the most sacred place of century of Banaras. E. B. Havell’s Benares,
Hinduism, abode of Brahmans and Vedantic the Sacred City (1905) described religious and
learning during the medieval period as French learning aspects of Hindus, Jains and Buddhists
traveller Francois Bernier (1620-1688) who of ancient Banaras. Besides this, Havell also
visited to Banaras in 1665 says, “The town of presented a vivid picture of temples, ghats, and
Benares, seated on the Ganges, in a beautiful rites and rituals of nineteenth century Banaras.
situation, and in the midst of an extremely He has totally overlooked medieval Banaras.
ine and rich country, may be considered the Motichandra (1985) wrote Kashi Ka Itihas in 1962

2
 Temple Destruction and The Great Mughals’ Religious Policy In North India: A Case Study Of Banaras Region, 1526-1707
Parves Alam

which delineated political history of medieval by whom? How and for what purpose? In those
Banaras. He presents the military conquest of days temples were patronized by the ruler and
Banaras by the Muslims and in this process how associated with the ruler, and deity placed in the
the temples of Banaras were destroyed. However, royal temple was considered as a co-sovereign. So,
he is not substantiating his argument with the if a ruler defeated another ruler, it was necessary
appropriate contemporary primary sources. work for the victorious king that he had to
He only mentioned temple destruction but not destroy not only the enemy king and his army but
analysed the reasons. For a historian it is very also the deity located in the royal temple. If the
diicult to accept his version because of paucity victorious king did not desecrate or destroy the
of relevant sources in his writings. Kubernath royal temple of enemy, there would be chances of
Sukul’s Varanasi Vaibhav (1977) and Diana L. uprising because the locals by assembling around
Eck’s Banaras: City of Light (1982) proposed the old deity could stand against the conquering
that there were many troubles and conlicts in ruler. This was a process of sweeping away of all
Banaras during the Mu slim rule were not good previous political sovereignty. Eaton says,
for Hindu institutions. K. Chandramouli (2006) “When such authority was vested in a ruler whose
wrote Luminous Kashi to Vibrant Varanasi in own legitimacy was associated with a royal tem-
2006. He focussed on Banaras trade in brief, ple-typically one that housed an image of a ruling
dynasty’s state-deity, or rashtra-devata (usually
silk, arts and crafts, painting and music. We ind
Vishnu or Shiva) - that temple was normally loot-
some glimpses of economic condition of Banaras ed, redeined, or destroyed, any of which would
in the writing entitled Subah of Allahabad under have had the efect of detaching a defeated raja
the great Mughals, written by S. N. Sinha in from the most prominent manifestation of his
former legitimacy. Temples that were not so
1974. Tarannum Fatma Lari’s book Textiles of
identiied or temples formerly so identiied but
Banaras: Yesterday and Today (2010) sought abandoned their royal patrons and thereby ren-
the historical development and technical aspects dered politically irrelevant, were normally left un-
of Banarasi saris. Jaya Jaitlya’s book Woven harmed. Such was the case, for example, with the
famous temples at Khajuraho south of the middle
Textiles of Varanasi (2014) shed light on textiles.
Gangetic Plain, which appear to have been aban-
Madhuri Desai’s work on Banaras Reconstructed: doned by their Chandella royal patrons before
Architecture and Sacred Space in a Hindu Holy Turkish armies reached the area in the early thir-
City published in 2017; it presents the history, teenth century” (Eaton, 2004: 31).
building and its architectural features of Banaras Such act in fact started in India seven
from 1590 to 1930. The iconic Hindu centre centuries before the invasion of Turks. Eaton
in Northern India Banaras was reconstructed lists the Hindu kings from various dynasties
materially and imaginatively, and embellished as the Pallavas, the Chalukyas, the Cholas, the
with temples, monasteries, palaces and ghats. Pandyas, and the Rashtrakutas were indulge in
She argued that many temples, monasteries and this practice. Hence this established pattern was
ghats were constructed during the Mughal period. followed and continued by the Turk invaders,
Temple desecration and destruction has Delhi Sultans and later on by the great Mughals
been a controversial and hot topic among the (Eaton, 2004: 35-46).
historians after the destruction of Baburi mosque The act of temple demolition also occurred
of Ayodhya in 1992. Following this shameful in Indo-Muslim state if any Hindu oicer showed
happening, Richard M. Eaton wrote a monograph sign of uprising and disloyalty, the state without
entitled Temple Desecration and Muslim States any delay attacked on the territory of that oicer
in Medieval India in 2000. In this book he raises defeated him and destroyed the royal temple
some questions regarding to temple destruction: associated with him. Contrary to temples lying
In fact what temples were desecrated or destructed within the kingdom were considered as state
during the period of medieval India? When and property and it was the duty of state to protect

3
 Analisa Journal of Social Science and Religion Volume 03 Number 01 July 2018
pages 1-18

these temples, they did so. This practice was in accounts and the local sources, and used archive
vogue in India before the coming of Mughals where faramin issued by Mughal emperors are
who followed the same pattern. When Jahangir kept, in the preparation of this article. Giving the
marched against his arch enemy Rana Amar limitation of language, I have tried to make use of
Singh of Mewar in 1613, he ordered for the various materials translated from original sources
desecration of Varah statue that had been housed to develop my argument. This study is analytical,
in a temple at Pushkar (Ajmer) associated with comparative and corroborative in nature aiming
Rana Amar. Similarly Shah Jahan demolished to interrogate diferent sources with a view to
the grand temple at Orchha in 1635 when the raja establish the veracity of the facts by scrutinizing
revolt against the emperor (Eaton, 2004: 59, 60). diferent sets of documents. I have also conducted
Not only temples were desecrated and ield study in the course of this to verify the
demolished but mosques were also face the existing structures, monuments, archives and
same fate by Hindus. When rulers or rebellions libraries to substantiate my argument with
succeeded in subduing their Muslim counterpart, reliable evidences.
we see the Hindu parallel of Muslim iconoclasm.
Sui literature of Lahore mentioned that when Result and discussion
Mahi Pal sacked Lahore, many Muslims were Banaras before the Coming of the
killed and mosques were demolished, and Mughals
Hindu temples were built in its place (Ahmad,
Here it would be pertinent to know the
2002: 89). According to Abbas Khan Sarwani,
entry of Muslims in Banaras. It is said that
the Hindu landlords in Malwa and the regions
Mahmud Ghaznavi invaded Banaras twice in
around Delhi destroyed mosques and set up
1019 and 1022 (Nevill, 1909: 189). But we ind
temples by the debris of mosques in the ifteenth
the authentic history of Muslims’ entry from the
century (Elliot and Dowson, 1872: 403-404). It is
time of Muhammad Ghori who came along with
said about Rana Kumbha that he captured many
his commander Qutub-ud Din Aibak (1206-1210)
Muslim women and had destroyed a mosque
who later on laid the foundation of Delhi Sultanate
(Ahmad, 2002: 89). Rai Sen, a confederate of
(1206-1526) in 1206. They conquered Banaras
Rana Sanga, converted mosques into stables and
which was denominated as a second capital by
plastered with cow-dung at Chanderi, Sarangpur
the Gahadavala rulers who usually gave grants
and Ranthambore. Shaikh Ahmad Sarhindi
to Brahmins of Banaras, and projected for the
lamented on the desecration of mosques in the
construction of temples, after defeating Gahadvala
early seventeenth century (Ahmad, 2002: 89).
king Jai Chand in the battle of Chandawar in
The same practice was practised by the Sikhs
1194. In the conquering process, there about one
and the Jats in the eighteenth century. Jadunath
thousand temples were destroyed in Banaras
Sarkar says,
region (Elliot and Dowson, 1869: 223). Certainly
“Under Badan Singh the Jats roamed freely over
the number of destroyed temples is exaggerated
the (Agra) province demolishing houses, gardens
and mosques, disiguring them for the sake of a because when Chinese traveller Hiouen Thsang
knob of copper, a piece of marble or a bit of iron” or Xuanzang (602-664) visited Banaras in
(Sarkar, 1938: 315). seventh century, he mentioned that there were
from twenty to more than a hundred temples
Research method within the city or the whole region (Desai, 2017:
This study is largely based on the literary 17, 18). Therefore, when Banaras was kept under
texts, and other interrelated documents available a governor after 1194, the settlement of Muslim
in the Persian, Arabic and other local languages. I initiated in this region, while some non-Muslims
have consulted the primary Persian sources, travel converted to Islam. After this victory Banaras

4
 Temple Destruction and The Great Mughals’ Religious Policy In North India: A Case Study Of Banaras Region, 1526-1707
Parves Alam

remained under the control of Delhi Sultanate and Hindu Beg converted a temple into mosque
later on the Mughals. During the Delhi Sultanate at Sambhal (Uttar Pradesh). During the time
on the one hand many temples of Banaras were of occupation Chanderi his sadr Shaikh Zain
destroyed during the war time, on the other hand demolished many temples there. Similarly Mir
we have references that show some temples were Baqi destroyed the Ayodhya or Saketa (Faizabad,
built also in Banaras by Delhi sultans such as the Uttar Pradesh) temple, the birth place of Lord
rebuilding of the Vishvanath temple in Iltutmish’s Rama, and constructed a grand mosque in its
reign (1211-36) (Motichandra, 1985: 150) and place in 1528-29 by the order of Babur. Babur
Padmesvara temple during the reign of Alauddin was also responsible for the destruction of Jain
Khilji (1296-1316) (Fuhrer, 1971: 51). idols at Urva near Gwalior (Sharma, 1940: 9).
During this time the Bhakti movement was However, Sharma’s argument related to temple
most popular in Banaras. The champions of it destructions were not supported by the pertinent
like Ramanand (1299-1411), Kabir (1398-1518), primary sources. If these examples are true
Vallabhacharya (1477-1530), Tulsidas (1532- then also it is obvious that all the act of temple
1623) and their disciples who either visited destruction occurred only during the war times
or lived in Banaras inluenced the society and not in times of peace.
culture through their works. They always tried Since Babur was entangled in wars, he did not
to promote fraternity among the people without determine any speciic religious policy of his own.
any discrimination of caste and creed. But, by After the victory of Awadh in 1529, he appointed
and large, Hinduism was most popular religion Jalal-ud Din Khan Sharqi as the governor of
in Banaras, and Pundits (priests) had dominant Banaras (Babur, 2014: 652). Suddenly, in a chaotic
inluence over the Hindus. Ralf Fitch, an English
situation, Babur died. So, his successor Humayun
traveller who visited India between 1583- 1591,
had to face many problems. After conquering the
mentioned that Banaras city was full of the
fort of Chunar, Humayun laid siege to Banaras
population of “Gentiles” who were the greatest
in 1531; it appears that during this time, he went
idolaters. “Gentiles” come to this town on
pilgrimage from far countries (Ryley, 1899: 103). to see the Chaukhandi stupa of Sarnath. To
remember this event Govardhan, son of Todar
Banaras and Mughal Religious Policy Mal, built an octagonal ediice (Athapahala
This was the situation in Banaras on the eve Mahal) at Sarnath in 1589 (Motichandra, 1985:
of Babur’s entry into India. After the victorious 160). Showing a tolerant policy, Humayun made
battle of Panipat (at present it is in Haryana a grant of 300 acres of land to the Jangambadi
district) in 1526, Babur started to conquer and
Math (a monastery of the Jangam sect of the
to consolidate his newly established empire. In
Shaiva of South India) of Banaras through a
this process, he had to ight against the Rajputs
farman. The land grant was situated in Mirzapur
of Rajasthan. Before the battle of Khanwa
district. This original farman of Humayun is still
(presently in Bharatpur, Rajasthan) in 1527, he
used the term jihad1 for his soldiers who were preserved in the Jangambadi Math of Banaras.
not willing to ight with Rajputs because of two It is obvious that Humayun could not avail of
reasons; one, they were homesick and another opportunities to get the support of Rajputs. Due
they had heard of the bravery of the Rajputs. to ups and downs of situation, he had to leave
However, in the battle of Panipat, he did not use India in 1540 for some years. When he came
the term jihad. So it seems that his proclamation back and succeeded to capture Delhi in 1555,
of jihad was only to encourage his soldiers. S. R. he suddenly died in 1556. So, like his father, he
Sharma pointed out that in Babur’s time some also could not get time to determine any speciic
temples were destroyed. His one oicer named religious policy. But both knew very well how to

5
 Analisa Journal of Social Science and Religion Volume 03 Number 01 July 2018
pages 1-18

handle the situation in a multi-religious country. temples during Akbar’s time. The reconstruction
Learning from the past and the experience of of Vishvanath or Vishveshwar temple was
his predecessors and the demand of the present a signiicant event; Todar Mal rendered in
situation, Akbar the great (1556-1605) introduced available support through Narain Bhatta to the
a proliic type of tolerant religious policy of his reconstruction of Vishwanath temple in 1585.
own which helped to establish the Mughal state in He was also responsible in the construction of
India irmly. His religious policy was intimately Draupadikund at Shivapur in 1589 (Motichandra,
connected with his own religious views. He 1985: 162). Man Singh built many ghats (ford)
realized that truth was an inhabitant of every and temples. Manmandir ghat is one of the most
place. He abolished the pilgrimage tax (It has famous ghats, which was constructed by him in
been the custom of every Muslim ruler of India to ca. 1600 (Sherring, 1975: 42, 43). Ralf Fitch has
realise pilgrimage tax from the every pilgrimage mentioned that many buildings were built on the
place of non-Muslims) in 1563; behind it his view bank of the river Ganges; diferent types of idols
was as Mountstuart Elphinstone says, made of diferent kind of materials housed in
“Although the tax fell on a vain superstition, yet, those buildings which charges were in the hands
as all modes of worship are designed for one great of Brahmin priest who performed religious rituals
Being, it was wrong to cut the devout of from (Ryley, 1899: 103-108).
their mode of intercourse with their Maker” (El-
phinstone, 1841: 326). In 1582, Akbar realized the uniication of
all religions, and introduced a new order that is
In 1564 jizyah (religious tax levied on non- called in history as Tauhid-i Ilahi (the assertion
Muslim) was also abolished by Akbar. These of the unity of God).2 We see the inluence of
acts of Akbar were very revolutionary in those this order at Banaras also. A Muslim of Banaras
days. It indicates how Akbar was conscious of named Gosala Khan who accepted Tauhid-i
religious equality among his subjects. Because of Ilahi. By the courtesy of Abul Fazl (1551-1602),
his liberal religious policy, a notion of national a court historian of Akbar, Gosala Khan got a
uniication and fraternity between Muslims and chance to enter into imperial army (Badauni,
non-Muslims developed. Till 1567, Akbar could 1990 : 418, 419). The birth of Tulsidas in Banaras
not give proper attention to Banaras because of was a signiicant event in the history of Banaras
his early diiculties. In the same year it is heard during the reign of Akbar and Jahangir. It was
that a dilapidated temple was converted into a the Mughals whose empire ‘the freedom of
madrasah (college) by the shiqdar (governor) speech’ and ‘the freedom of writing’ existed. The
of Banaras named Bayazid Bayat. When Akbar best example is Tulsidas who not only composed
came to know about this happening, he dismissed Ramchartimanas and Vinaya Patrika but also
Bayazid, and gave two villages for the allowances to some extent criticised the Mughal emperors,
of the teachers of this temple (Bayazid Bayat, and put the concept of Ram Rajya (the realm
1941: 263, 264). Thereafter, Akbar properly gave of Lord Rama). We ind a vivid picture of the
attention to Banaras. Like his father, he also made contemporary rites, rituals, beliefs and temples of
a grant of 100 bighas of land to the Jangambadi Banaras through Vinaya Patrika (Tulsidas, 1956:
Math of Banaras and conirmed an earlier grant 31-34). On the basis of the above, we can say that
made by Humayun (Ansari, 1973: 251, Document Banaras had reached at the peak of syncretism in
I and III). the early 17th century.
In fact, Akbar not only permitted the At the death of Akbar, the Mughal Empire had
rebuilding of temples, but also sponsored them. spread over almost the whole north India, and
Some of the Hindu Rajputs of Rajasthan, who some parts of south India. Due to Akbar’s policies,
were the allies of the emperor, participated the Indians started to conceive the Mughals as
actively in the construction of Banaras ghats and Indians, not foreigners. So it was necessary for

6
 Temple Destruction and The Great Mughals’ Religious Policy In North India: A Case Study Of Banaras Region, 1526-1707
Parves Alam

the next Mughal emperor Jahangir (1605-27) also mentioned that the people of Hindustan
to maintain this notion. Indeed, Jahangir did live mix together and peacefully in the reign of
according to the contemporary condition. He Jahangir who provided equal opportunities to
continued Akbar’s tolerant religious policy. There them in civil and military services (Pietro Della
was no any discrimination between Muslims and Valle, 1891: 30).
non-Muslims in his empire. After his accession, From the beginning of Shah Jahan’s reign
he issued twelve edicts; one of them was an (1627-58), the orthodox ulama (scholars) had
admonition to high nobles especially in border tried to get high position in shaping of the state
areas against forcing Islam on any of the subjects policies, but had not succeeded except for a few.
of the empire (Mukhia, 2004: 30). Like his father The textbooks often present the picture of Shah
he gave permission to Hindus for the donation, Jahan as an orthodox Muslim king, and indeed
and construction of temples. Jahangir’s close he did take some pride in calling himself a king
friend and vassal Vir Singh Deo Bundela, the ruler of Islam. But he continued the tolerant policy of
of Orchha (1605-1626), donated a gold casing for his grandfather Akbar and father Jahangir. In the
the pinnacle of the Vishvanath temple of Banaras thirty years of his reign, he continued to appoint
(Desai, 2017: 43). He also built temples at Muttra and promote Rajputs to high ranks. It is clear
or Mathura (birth place of Lord Krishna, Uttar that Shah Jahan followed the traditional policy
Pradesh), and Bundelkhand (Madhya Pradesh). in employing Rajputs in state services (Ali, 2006:
Reciprocally whenever Jahangir fought against 201, 202). But as far as the matter of the Hindu
Hindu kings, naturally temples were desecrated temples is concerned, his policy was something
and destroyed (Ahmad, 2002: 88). diferent from his grandfather and father. He
Jahangir experimented in the simultaneous ordered not to demolish old temples but did
maintenance of several religions by the state. not allow the construction of new temples. He
The construction of more than seventy temples embarked on a campaign of complete destruction
was started in Banaras alone towards the end of of the newly constructed Hindu temples. As a
his reign; however, all these temples could not result, seventy six temples were destroyed in
be completed when Jahangir died in 1627 (Elliot Banaras (Elliot and Dowson, 1877: 36). This
and Dowson, 1877: 36). At this time, a Central incident is also mentioned by Peter Mundy (1608-
Asian traveller, Mahmud bin Amir Ali Balkhi 67) who had travelled to India during this period
visited Banaras and was horriied to see a group (Mundy, 1914: 178).
of twenty three Muslims (former Hindus) who Shah Jahan did not impose jizyah, but he tried
had deserted their religion and turned Hindu, to re-impose the pilgrimage tax on non-Muslims.
after having fallen in love with Hindu women. For But owing to the persuasion of a Hindu scholar of
some time, he held their company and questioned Banaras named Kavindracharya Sarasvati (1627-
them about their mistaken ways. They pointed 70) who wrote a commentary on the Rigveda
towards the sky and put their ingers on their led a deputation to the emperor to request not
foreheads. By this gesture, he understood that to re-impose the pilgrimage tax. Accepting his
they attributed it to Providence (Mukhia, 2004: request, Shah Jahan revoked pilgrimage tax on
39). So, this fascinating story indicates that Banaras and Allahabad, and gave his non-Muslim
everybody was free to follow his religion without subjects religious liberty (Hasrat, 1953: 112, 115;
any fear in Banaras during Jahangir’s reign. The Motichandra, 1985: 174; Truschke, 2016: 37,
English traveller Edward Terry (1590-1660) also 191). This shows that how much Shah Jahan was
described the freedom of religion in Jahangir’s under the inluence of Kavindracharya. Audrey
reign. According to him, every man had liberty to Truschke who investigated the literary, social
profess his own religion freely (Foster, 1921: 315). and political roles of Sanskrit at the Mughal
The Italian traveller Pietro Della Valle (1586-1652) courts in her famous book Culture of Encounters

7
 Analisa Journal of Social Science and Religion Volume 03 Number 01 July 2018
pages 1-18

(2016), argues that Kavindracharya, Brahmendra also translated a Sanskrit text named Shatbhumik
and Purnendra Sarasvati belonging to Brahmin (Motichandra, 1985: 173). Such activities denote
community were famous Sanskrit scholars and that how collaboration was between Hindus and
leaders of Banaras of Shah Jahan period; they Muslims in Banaras.
much inluenced contemporary literature, social
Aurangzeb and Banaras
and politics. When Kavindracharya succeeded
in the abolishing of pilgrimage tax convincing It was appearing that Dara Shikoh would
to Shah Jahan, in the praise of him, there were be the next Mughal emperor but in the war of
about seventy scholars composed a book entitled succession, Aurangzeb getting the support of the
Kavindrachandrodaya (Moonrise of Kavindra). Rajputs-notably Rana Raj Singh of Mewar and
Shah Jahan and his son Dara Shikoh learned to some extent Jai Singh Kachhwaha of Amber-
from him philosophy, poetry and Yogavasistha defeated Dara Shikoh and acceded to the throne
in Sanskrit language (Truschke, 2016: 50, 191). in 1658 (Ratan Singh, 1886: 415-431). There
Most probably because of Kavindracharya the are debates among historians with reference
love for Sanskrit literature arose in Dara Shikos’ to Aurangzeb’s religious policy. S. R. Sharma
heart, Shah Jahan also made grants to the pundits presented statistics of the Hindu mansabdars
of Banaras. During his visit to Banaras in 1665 (grandees) to demonstrate the view that Aurangzeb
Francois Bernier writes, deliberately worsened the position of Hindus in
the administration (Sharma, 1940: 118-128). In
“I passed through Benares, and called upon the
chief of the Pendets, who resides in that celebrat- response to this view, Athar Ali shows by statistics
ed seat of learning. He is a Fakire or Devotee so that the percentage of Hindu mansabdars
eminent for knowledge that Chah Jehan (Shah was 22.5% in Akbar’s reign, but it increased to
Jahan), partly for that consideration, and partly
to gratify the Rajas, granted him a pension of two 31.6% during Aurangzeb’s reign (Ali, 1992: 31).
thousand roupies, which is about one thousand According to Satish Chandra, it increased up to
crowns” (Bernier, 1916: 341). 33% in 1689 (Chandra, 2004: 64). About the re-
imposition of jizyah in 1679 and the demolition
The latter period of Shah Jahan is remarkable
of temples, J. N. Sarkar said that it was the result
because of his elder son Dara Shikoh (1615-59)
of Aurangzeb’s religious bigotry (Sarkar, vol.
who was a supporter of secular law for everyone.
III, 1972: 176-185). In response to jizyah Satish
Like Akbar the great he was a tolerant and
Chandra says that it marked a deepening political
syncretic person. Sui Saint Mulla Shah Badkhshi
crisis due primarily to the deterioration of the
(d. 1661) called him sahib-i qiran-i dil (the ruler
of the realm of heart) (Tara Chand, 1943, cited situation in the Deccan. The Rathor war further
in Ahmad, 2002: 191). Dara Shikoh’s study led accentuated it. Another factor in the re-imposition
him to the conclusion that the diference between of jizyah was the growing unemployment among
Islam and Hinduism was merely verbal and the clerical members (Chandra, 1969: 336, 337).
to prove this he wrote a tract called Majmu-ul As far as the matter of the temples demolition was
Bahrain (meeting of two oceans). In this book concerned, Zahiruddin Faruqi justiied it in the
he gave an exposition of the Vedantic view context of political circumstances and necessities.
of universe and truth. It is clear that he must As regards to temples of Banaras, he shows
have derived considerable help from pundits in through the diferences in dates related to their
preparing that book (Ali, 2006, 203). When Dara demolition and the construction of mosques, that
Shikoh was in Banaras in 1656, he translated ifty all circumstances point to one conclusion that the
two Upanishads into Persian with the help of a temples were not demolished due to any general
large staf of Banaras Pundits. This translation order (Faruki, 1935: 127).
is called Sirr-i Asrar or Sirr-i Akbar (the great Here, it may be pertinent to know the ideas
secret) (Bernier, 1916: 323; Ali, 2006: 203). He of Aurangzeb about religion. We can better

8
 Temple Destruction and The Great Mughals’ Religious Policy In North India: A Case Study Of Banaras Region, 1526-1707
Parves Alam

understand his view when in reply to a petition to that community), therefore, our Royal Com-
requesting the dismissal of non-Muslims from mand is that, after the arrival of our lustrous or-
der, you should direct that in future, no person
certain posts, he pointed out that religion has no shall in unlawful ways interfere or disturb Brah-
concern with secular business and in matters of mins and other Hindus resident in these places,
this kind bigotry should ind no place. Further so that they may as before, remain in their occu-
quoting an aayat (verse) of the Quran, he says, pation and continue with peace of mind to ofer
up prayers for the continuance of our God given
“You have your religion and I have mine” (Al- Empire, that is destined to last for all that time.
Kairun: 6). Moreover, there is also another Consider this is an urgent matter.” (Dated the
aayat in the Quran which tells us that you have 15th of Jumda-s-saniya AH 1069, AD 1658-59)
no authority to compel someone for accepting (Jnan Chandra, 1957: 247, 248).3
Islam. The aayat runs as, “There shall be no This farman shows three points; irst, the
compulsion in religion” (Al-Baqarah: 256). Islamic law about temples; second, it repudiates
According to Audrey Truschke, Islamic teachings the charge brought against Aurangzeb; third,
and the Mughal tradition admonished Aurangzeb Aurangzeb was very eager for the protection of
to guard Hindu temples, pilgrimage destinations Hindus and Brahmins, the keepers of temples,
and the holy men (Truschke, 2017: 102). The and maintaining peace among his subjects.
matter regarding to temples he followed the
According to popular tradition, Aurangzeb
statement of shari’at (Islamic law) - Neither
gave order for the dismantling of Bindu-Madhav
ancient temples should be torn down nor should
(Vaishnava deity) and Vishvanath or Vishveswara
new temples be built. As the sources show this
(Shaiva deity) temples in 1669, and built Dharhara
order had been applied only to Banaras. We see
or Alamgiri mosque to replace the former while
after having grants and permission many new
built Gyanvapi mosque to replace the latter. He
temples were constructed in the other parts of
also renamed the city as “Muhammadabad”
India under his rule (Eaton, 2004: 56, 57; Eaton,
which, however, did not become popular (Eck,
2014: 184-85, 263; Truschke, 2017: 103-106).
1993: 83). Here, we should look into the basic
Soon, after his accession to the throne, Aurangzeb
reasons to come across the reality behind issuing
issued a farman, probably in connection with
such an order by the emperor. Ultimately what
the dispute over the right of holding charges of
happened that Aurangzeb had to go against the
the ancient temples of Banaras, on February 28,
farman of 1659? There are some following views
1659. The farman runs as:
about the demolition of Vishvanath and other
“Let Abul Hassan worthy of favour and coun- temples of Banaras:
tenance trust to our royal bounty, and let him
know that since in accordance with our innate First view is that it was reported to the
kindness of disposition and natural benevolence, emperor on 9th April, 1669 that the Brahmins
the whole of our untiring energy and all our up- of Sindh, Multan and especially of Banaras were
right intentions are engaged in promoting the
engaged in teaching unholy books in their temples
public welfare and bettering the conditions of
all classes, high and low. In accordance with our and schools, where not only the Hindus but also
holy law, we have decided that the ancient tem- Muslims used to lock to learn knowledge and
ples shall not be overthrown; but that new one teaching. After knowing this fact, orders were
shall not be built. In these days of our justice, in- issued to all governors to destroy the temples
formation has reached our noble and most holy
court that certain persons, actuated by rancour lying within the empire (Khan, 1947: 51, 52).
and spite, have harassed the Hindu resident in De Graaf heard of this order for at that time he
the town of Banaras and a few other places in was in Hugli, Calcutta (Orme, 1805: 250). J. N.
that neighbourhood and also certain Brahmins, Sarkar perceived the above meaning of Maasir-i
keepers of the temples, in whose charge these
ancient temples are, and that they further desire Alamgiri with which Richard M. Eaton is not
to remove these Brahmins from their ancient of- agreed. Actually, J. N. Sarkar misinterpreted the
ice (and this intention of theirs causes distress above passage. Eaton’s translation runs as:

9
 Analisa Journal of Social Science and Religion Volume 03 Number 01 July 2018
pages 1-18

“Orders respecting Islamic afairs were issued to Chittor patronised by Rana Raj Singh were
the governors of all provinces that the schools and pulled down (Eaton, 2004: 61).
places of worship of the irreligious be subject to
demolition and that with the utmost urgency the Another view is that in those days the
manner of teaching and the public practices of the practice of Kashi karvat system was in vogue
sects of these misbelievers be suppressed” (Khan, in Banaras. There was a sacred and renowned
text, 81; Eaton, 2004: 62, 65).
well situated just to the east of the Vishvanath
Eaton argues that no general order was issue temple. In addition to the vertical opening, there
to the demolition of schools or places of worship was a passage leading down to the water (the
but the point is that they should be subject to river Ganges) that was used by scores of devout
dismantling. Before taking the action of temple Hindus. In medieval Banaras, at the instigation
dismantling governors were required to go of Pandas, pilgrims desirous of getting instant
through exploration (Sinha, 1974: 65-68; Eaton, salvation jumped into the well to meet death by
2004: 62). falling on a blade positioned there. It was misused
Further Eaton tells us that not due to by some immoral priests for material and sexual
the above reason Vishvanath temple was desires. This made Aurangzeb take action against
destroyed, but in fact the cause behind it was the Brahmin community and Hindu temples in
diferent. It has been mentioned earlier that Banaras. This story is mentioned by Alexander
whoever revolt or show the sign of rebellion or Hamilton (1688-1723) (Hamilton, 1930: 13). M.
disloyalty to the state, it was cogent work of the A. Sherring also referred to one such incident in
state to suppress him and destroyed the royal which a fanatic ofered himself in sacriices to
temple belonging to him. A revolt arose among Shiva, the God of the well (Sherring, 1975: 65, 66).
landholders in Banaras in 1669; some of them There is a third version. According to
it is said to have helped to Maratha ruler Shivaji Bishama Narain Pandey, when Aurangzeb was
who lately escaped from royal imprisonment. It passing through Banaras on his way to Bengal,
was suspected and assumed that in this work the Hindu Rajas requested him to stay here to
Raja Jai Singh, the great grandson of Raja Man visit Vishvanath temple. Accepting the request
Singh who rebuilt Vishvanath temple of Banaras Aurangzeb ordered army pickets to stay at
during the reign of Akbar the great, assisted Mughalsarai. The Ranis (queens) made a journey
Shivaji. Aurangzeb had to order for temple to take their dip in the Ganges and went to pay
demolition under this circumstance (Eaton, their homage to Vishvanath temple. After ofering
2004: 61). In a similar way we see that when Jat puja (prayer), except the maharani of Kutch, all
raised the lag of rebellion against the Mughal in the Ranis returned. When Aurangzeb came to
Mathura and its neighbouring areas, and killed know, he sent his senior oicers to investigate
the patron 0f the mosque, Aurangzeb gave the issue. Ultimately, they found that the statue
permission for the destruction of the Keshav of Lord Ganesha, which was ixed in the wall, was
Deva temple, and construction of an Eid-gah movable one. When the statue was moved, they
in Mathura (Khan, 1947: 57-61: Eaton, 2004: saw a light of stairs that led to the basement. They
61). Likewise in 1679 at the time Aurangzeb was found missing Rani dishonoured and crying, and
entangled in war with the Rothores of Marwar deprived of all her ornaments. The basement
(Jodhapur), he gave an order to the wrecking was just beneath Lord Shiva’s seat. Demanding
of various temples of Rajasthan of those justice by Rajas (kings), Aurangzeb ordered to
Rajaput Rajas who were united to the enemies demolish the temple and arresting the pandas
of Aurangzeb. Temples of Khadela patronised (Pandey, 1987: 44, 45). B. N. Pandey mentioned
by obstinate chieftains, temples of Marwar this point based on documentary evidence which
patronised by a Raja who was strong partisan he got through Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya’s famous
of prince Dara Shikoh, temples of Udaipur and book The Feathers and the Stones. Koenraad

10
 Temple Destruction and The Great Mughals’ Religious Policy In North India: A Case Study Of Banaras Region, 1526-1707
Parves Alam

Elest sought some holes in this story. There is ordered the destruction of the temples (Elest,
no reference to show that Aurangzeb made any 2002).
journey to Bengal or nearby Banaras; it was not Ganj-i Arshadi gives a diferent view about
the way of Aurangzeb to march with Rajput the demolition of the temples. According to it, a
Ranis; by which way the Rani disappeared in the communal riot that occurred in 1669 in Banaras
presence of guards (Elest, 2002). caused the demolition of Banaras’ temples
We see a forth account that is something (Faruki, 1935: 127-28).4 Similar example of riot
similar to above story. In 1987, Abdul Bismillah between Hindus and Muslims we ind from
wrote a novel named Jhini-Jhini Bini Chadariya the District Gazetteer of Banaras occurred in
dealt with the condition of Banaras’ weavers. In 1809; the Hindus destroyed about 50 mosques
this novel a character named Rauf uncle said a including that of Gyanvapi mosque (Nevill, 1909:
story which seems to have been told to him by his 207, 208). So, it can be surmised that communal
ancestors. This story is related to the construction riot would have been one of the causes of temple
of Gyan Vapi mosque. He narrates: dismantling.
There was a great moneylender in Kashi whose It is a matter of great surprise that a Hindu
name was Gyan Chandra. He had a beautiful and writer named Sujan Rai who wrote the famous
young daughter named Vapi. One day, she went to book Khulasat-ut Tawarikh in 1695, writing about
Vishvanath temple to ofer prayer; but there she
Banaras he did not mention the demolition of any
was raped and killed by the Pandas (priests). On
this happening, Gyan Chand wrote a letter to the temple in Banaras, though giving an account of
emperor Aurangzeb and requested him to demol- Mathura he said that the shrine of Keshav Rai
ish the Vishvanath temple because inside of this was destroyed by the order of Aurangzeb.
temple there is a basement and tunnel which is
connected to the river Ganges; there Pandas not So, on account of the above noted aspects, it
only raped women but killed and threw them can be said that it is very diicult to ind out one
through tunnel into the Ganges. After hearing reason that was responsible for the demolition of
this appeal, Aurangzeb at once sent his army to
Banaras that encamped nearby Lallapur, and a Vishvanath and other temples of Banaras. But it
colony was set up there which is called Aurang- can be surmised that the act of temple demolition
abad. This army destroyed the temple and built took place due to the contemporary socio and
a mosque on that spot, and named it Gyanvapi political circumstances, not the discriminatory
mosque because Gyan Chand and Vapi played a
key role in all happening. It is said when the tem-
religious policy of Aurangzeb. According to time
ple was demolished and Gyanvapi mosque was and situation his policy slightly changed. We see
built there, a Persian knowing Brahmin composed on one hand he grants to temples, on the other
this shair on this occasion: hand gave order for the demolition of temples.
The sources show that throughout his reign
‫ ﮔﺮﭼہ ﺧﺮﺍﺏ می‬، ‫ﺷﻮﺩﺑﺒﻴﻦ ﮐﺮﺍمﺖ ﺑﺘﺨﺎﻧہ مﻦ ﺍی ﺷﺎﻫ‬
Aurangzeb issued a number of grants and lands in
‫ﺧﺎﻧہ ﺧﺩﺍ ﮔﺮﺩﺩ‬
the favour of Hindu priests and temples. Here are
Babeen karamat-i Butkhanah-i man ye Shah-
some examples. When Shri Mangaldas Maharaj
Garcheh Kharab mi Shavad Khanah-i Khuda
gardad Bairagi impressed Aurangzeb with his knowledge,
the emperor ixed an annuity of Rs. 5 from the
O emperor! See the miracle of my Butkhanah qasbas and mauzaas in the country of Malawa and
(idol temple), if it is destroyed, turn into the house
Rajaputana, and in 1700 Aurangzeb bestowed to
of Khuda (God) (Bismillah, 1987: 76, 77).
Shri Mangaldas a khilat, a horse, a drum, a mace,
A ifth version supports the political motives a silver umbrella with 200 dirhams (Bhatt, 1975:
behind the order against the temples. K. N. 358, 359). In lieu of their old grant of 2 ½ biswa,
Panikkar argued that there was a nexus between Sudaman Brahman, the priest of Umanand temple
Sui rebels and pundits of the temple. That is why of Guwahati in Assam, and his son received a
to break the nexus between the two Aurangzeb cash grant of Rs. 20 and some cultivable waste

11
 Analisa Journal of Social Science and Religion Volume 03 Number 01 July 2018
pages 1-18

in 1667 (Jnan Chandra, 1957: 251). Aurangzeb “All the present and future Jagirdars and karo-
issued a farman on 12th March, 1660, which not ris in pargana haveli, Banaras, subah Allahabad,
are informed that according to the order of the
only conferred to Shanti Das the village, hill and Emperor, 178 bighas of land has been granted to
temples of Palitana, but it makes also a further the Jangams to help them in their maintenance.
grant of the hill and temples of Girnar under the The old oicials have also veriied this fact, before
this also. On the present occasion also they have
jurisdiction of Junagarh, and the hill and temples
produced evidence bearing the seal of the Malik
of Abuji under Sirohi as a special favour (ibid.: of the said pargana to the efect that they are, as
253, 254). He granted the land and other facilities before, in possession of the land and their title is
to the Brindaban temple at Mathura and Sikh clearly proved. Therefore, according to the order
of the Emperor, the same has been left to them as
Gurudwara of Deharadun (Chandra, 2004: 65). the sacriice (Nisar) for the head of the Emperor.
He gave support to the construction of temple The said land should be returned to them from
in Gopamau in Hardoi district, Uttar Pradesh the beginning of the Kharif crop as it was before
and they should not in any way be interfered with,
(Habib, 1999: 162). Writing about the temple
so that these Jangams may utilise the income of
of Someshwar Mahadev of Allahabad, Pradeep every crop and ear in their maintenance and pray
Kesharwani said that Aurangzeb not only visited for the existence of the kingdom of the emperor.
Someshwar Mahadev temple situated on the bank Herein they shall fail not and act otherwise” (Jnan
Chandra, 1957: 249-50).
of Sangam (conluence of the rivers- Ganges,
Jamuna and Saraswati) but also ofered grant In 1672 Nazir Beg captured ive havelis which
and land for its maintenance. There is a pillar were in the possession of Arjunmal and Jangams
containing 15 sentences in Sanskrit mentioning, when they complained about it to Aurangzeb; he
“the ruler of the country visited the temple in immediately issued a farman for restoring those
1674 and gave heavy grants to the temple, both in havelis:
the form of land and money” (The Times of India, “The oicials of haveli Muhammadabad – known
2015: 1). There are a lot of examples that denied as Banaras- subah Allahabad, are to be informed
the bigot image of Aurangzeb. that these days Arjunmal and the Jangams, resi-
dents of Pargana Banaras, have appeared before
Similarly Aurangzeb made many grants (the emperor) and had made complaint that Nazir
and lands to Banaras temples and Brahmins. In Beg, a resident of Banaras, has by force taken pos-
realty, Aurangzeb had tried to maintain order sessions of ive havelis, which they had in qasba
Banaras. It is, therefore, ordered that if their case
and law in Banaras, and was conscious for the is found true and the title of the complainants
safety of Brahmins. He always made eforts that proved, Nazir Beg should not be allowed to enter
they live peacefully, and no any oicer could the said havelis, so that in future the Jangams
may not appear as complainants before me to
disturb them without any proper reason. Here
seek their redress” (Jnan Chandra, 1957: 249).
I am representing some faramin (decrees) of
Aurangzeb issued in the favour of Brahmins and Another farman of Aurangzeb shows that how
temples of Banaras. These faramin were brought he was determined and concerned to maintain
into light by Jnan Chandra. He pointed out peace among his Hindu subjects for that he used
that in distributing lands, and making grants to to take immediate action. On 17th Rabi-ul Akhir,
Brahmins, Math and temples Aurangzeb was not 1091 A.H./ 17th May, 1680 he issued the following
bias. Through a farman (decree) issued on 1 Rabi- farman that runs as:
al awal, 1078 A.H. / 21 August, 1667 he conirmed “At this auspicious time an august farman was is-
the land of 178 bighas, which was earlier granted sued whereas Maharajdhiiraj Raja Ram Singh has
them by a farman dated 5th Ramadan, 1071 A. H./ represented to the most holy and exalted court
that a mansion was built by his father in Mohalla
4th May 1661, to Jangams, the followers of Jangam
Madho Rai, on the bank of Ganges at Banaras for
sect, a Saivite sect, of Banaras. The farman runs the residence of Bhagawant Gosain who is also his
as follows: religious preceptor, and as certain persons harass

12
 Temple Destruction and The Great Mughals’ Religious Policy In North India: A Case Study Of Banaras Region, 1526-1707
Parves Alam

the Gosain, therefore our royal command is that, Aurangzeb’s kingdom. These religious institutions
after the arrival of this lustrous order, the present were entitled to Mughal state protection, and
and future oicers should direct that in future,
no person shall in any way interfere or disturb
Aurangzeb generally endeavoured to ensure
the Gosain, so that he may continue with peace their well-being. By the same token, from a
of mind to ofer up prayers for the continuance Mughal perspective, that goodwill could be
of our God-given Empire, that is destined to last revoked when speciic temples or their associates
for all time. Consider this is as an urgent matter”
(Jnan Chandra, 1957: 248-449).
acted against imperial interests. Accordingly,
Emperor Aurangzeb authorized targeted temple
In 1687 Aurangzeb granted the land to a destructions and desecrations throughout his
Hindu religious teacher of Banaras issuing a rule” (Truschke, 2017: 99, 100).
farman that runs as On the basis of the above quotation and
“At this auspicious time an august farman was is- discussion on the religious policy of Mughal
sued that as two plots of land measuring 588 dira, emperors in context of Banaras, it can be said
situated on the bank of the Ganges at the Beni-
madho ghat, in Banaras (one plot is in front of that the Mughals to the great extent followed a
the house of Ramjivan Gosain and on the bank of liberal religious policy. Very often, they showed
the central mosque, and the other is higher up) their support and gave grants and lands to the
are lying vacant without any building and belong temples and Brahmins of Banaras according to
to Bait-ul-mal, we have, therefore granted the
same to Ramjivan Gosain and his son as inam, so which the politico-socio-economic needs of the
that after building dwelling houses for the pious contemporary period framed the basis of Mughal
Brahmins and holy fakirs on the above mentioned religious policy. Mughal rulers treated temples
plots, he should remain engaged in the contem- lying within their sovereign domain according
plation of God and continue to ofer prayers for
the continuance of our God-gifted Empire that to the situation. They undertook to protect
is destined to last for all time. It is, therefore, both the physical structures and their Brahman
incumbent on our illustrious sons, exalted min- functionaries. They gave importance to the
istries, noble umra, high oicials, daroghas and maintenance of peace, law and order among the
present and future kotwals, to exert themselves
for the continual and permanent observance of various communities. If temples were destroyed
this hallowed ordinance, and to permit the above especially in Aurangzeb’s reign, the causes
mentioned plots to remain in the possession of behind it must have been others not the bigotry of
the aforesaid person and his descendents from Aurangzeb as usually believed. A distorted view
generation to generation, and to consider him ex-
empt from all dues and taxes, and not to demand about the religious policy of Mughal emperors
from him a new sanad every year” (Jnan Chan- especially of Aurangzeb has been made by
dra, 1957: 250). imperialist and some nationalist historians; that
view is mostly rooted even now in the conception
Furthermore, in 1685 Aurangzeb gave support
of people which caused many communal riots
in the foundation of Kumaraswamy Math, and
in India. But, the view must be examined in the
the reconstruction of Kedar temple where the
south Indian pilgrims started to visit freely. It contemporary socio-political situation.
is said that Kumaraswamy reached Delhi from
Banaras riding on the back of a lion. Aurangzeb
Notes
1
Jihad is an Arabic word whose literal meaning is “striving for
was impressed by his intellectuality. Eventually
a worthy and ennobling cause”. It is of two types; one is jihad al-Ak-
he gave him permission for establishing of bar (the greater jihad) which means ighting against those low in-
Kumaraswamy Math and Kedar temple (Desai, ner forces which prevent man from becoming a good man; another
2017: 52, 53). is jihad al-Asghar (the lesser jihad) which means battling against
the kairs (inidels), if they humiliate you. (Jalal, 2008: 3, 9, 38, 69)

Conclusion 2
According to Badauni, the condition for initiation into this
silsilah (order) was through the acceptance of the four steps of al-
Very rightly Audrey Truschke has pointed out, legiance, which required sacriice of property, life, honour and re-
“Hindu and Jain temples dotted the landscape of ligion. Akbar termed its creed ‘Tauhid-i Ilahi’. Roychaudhury fol-

13
 Analisa Journal of Social Science and Religion Volume 03 Number 01 July 2018
pages 1-18

lowing H. Blochmann inaccurately called this ‘Din-i Ilahi’ (Divine 13 Julus.” Proceedings of Indian History
faith) but suggested that it was similar to a type of Sui order, not a Congress. Aligarh.
religion. (Badauni, 1865: 304-25)
3
This original Farman is kept in Bharat Kala Bhavan, Banaras
Bismillah, Abdul. 1987. Jhini-Jhini Bini
Hindu University, Varanasi, India. Chadariya. New Delhi: Rajkamal Prakasan.
4
Ganj-i Arshadi, an account of daily life and a collection of the Chandra, Jnan. 1957. “Aurangzeb and Hindu
sayings of Shah Tayyab of Banaras and of Shah Mohammad Rashid Temples”. Journal of Pakistan Historical
and Shah Mohammad of Jaunpur. This book was complied during Society, 5 (4): 247-256.
Aurangzeb’s time.
Chandra, Satish. Sep. 1969. “Jizyah and the State
in India during the 17th Century”. Journal
of the Economic and Social History of the
References Orient, 12 (3): 322-340.
Ahmad, Aziz. 2002. Studies in Islamic Culture in Chandra, Satish. 2004. “Aurangzeb
the India Environment. New Delhi: Oxford Ka Punarmulyankan.” In Itihas ki
University Press. Punarvyakhya: an Anthology of Articles
Ali, Athar. 1966, revised edition, 1997. The reinterpreting Indian History. Naresh
Mughal Nobility under Aurangzeb. New Nadeem (tr). New Delhi: Raj Kamal
Delhi: Oxford University Press. Prakashan.

Ali, Athar. 2006. Mughal India: Studies in Policy, Chandramouli, K. 2006. Luminous Kashi to
Ideas, Society and Culture. New Delhi: Vibrant Varanasi. Varanasi: Indica Books.
Oxford University Press. Cunningham, Alexander. 1871. The Ancient
Geography of India. London: Trubner and
Ansari, Muhammad Azhar. 1973. “A note on the
Company.
Six Jangambari Documents of Banaras”.
Proceedings of Indian History Congress. Desai, Madhuri. 2017. Banaras Reconstructed:
Chandigarh: 251, Appendix, Documents I Architecture and Sacred Space in a Hindu
and III. Holy City. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan.
Babur, Zahiruddin Muhammad. 2014. Babur- Eaton, Richard M. 2004. Temple Desecration and
Nama (Memoirs of Babur). Annette Muslim States in Medieval India. Gurgaon:
Susannah Beveridge (tr). Delhi: Low Price Hope India Publications.
Publication. Eaton, Richard M. 2014. The Rise of Islam and
Badauni, Abdul Qadir. 1990. Muntakhab-ut the Bengal Frontier, 1204-1760. New Delhi:
Tawarikh. George S. A. Ranking (tr) vol. Oxford University Press.
II. New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers and Eck, Diana L. 1993. Banaras: City of Light.
Distributers. Haryana: Penguin Books India.
Banarasidas. 1981. Ardhakathanak. Mukund Elest, Koenraad. 2002. “Why did Aurangzeb
Lath (tr). Jaipur: Rajasthan Prakrit Bharati demolish the Kashi Vishvanath?”, from:
Sanathan http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/books/
Bayat, Bayazid. 1941. Tazkira-i Humayun wa acat/ch7.htm
Akbar. Muhammad Hidayat Hosain (ed). Elliot, H. M. and John Dowson. 1869, 1872 1877.
Calcutta: The Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal. The History of India as Told by Its Own
Bernier, Francois. 1916. Travels in the Mogul Historians: The Muhammadan Period. Vols.
Empire, 1656-1668. Archibald Constable II, IV, VII. London: Trubner and Company,
(tr), revised by V. A. Smith. London: Oxford 57 and 59, Ludgate Hill.
University Press. Elphinstone, Mountstuart. 1841. The History of
India. Vol. II. London: John Murray
Bhatt, S. K. 1975. “Two Persian Documents
Relating to the Religious Policy of the Faruki, Zahiruddin. 1935. Aurangzeb and His
Mughals: A Parwanah of Aurangzeb, 1112 A. Times. Bombay: D. B. Taraporevala Sons
H., and A Parwanah of Muhammad Shah, and Company.

14
 Temple Destruction and The Great Mughals’ Religious Policy In North India: A Case Study Of Banaras Region, 1526-1707
Parves Alam

Foster, William, ed. 1921. Early travels in India, Mundy, Peter. 1914. The Travels of Peter Mundy
1583-1619. London: Oxford University Press. in Europe and Asia (1628-34), 1608-1667.
Richard C. Temple (ed.). London: The
Fuhrer, A. 1971. The Sharqi Architecture of
Hakluyt Society.
Jaunpur. Varanasi: Indological Book House.
Nehru, Jawaharlal. 1946, sixth impression, 1994.
Habib, Irfan, ed. 1999. Medieval India, vol. II.
The Discovery of India. New Delhi: Oxford
New Delhi: Raj Kamal Prakashan.
University Press.
Habib, Irfan, ed. 2007. “Kabir the Historical
Nevill, H. R. 1909. Benares Gazetteer, vol. XXVI.
Setting.” In Religion in Indian History. Irfan
Allahabad: F Luker, supdt, Govt. Press.
Habib (ed). New Delhi: Tulika Books.
Orme, Robert (1728-1801). 1805. Historical
Hamilton, Alexander. 1930. A New Account of
Fragments of the Mogul Empire, of the
the East Indies, William Foster (ed), vol. II.
Morattoes, and of the English Concerns in
London: The Argonaut press. Indostan from the year M, DC, LIX. London:
F. Wingrave.
Hasrat, Bikramajit. 1953. Dara Shikoh. Calcutta.
Pandey, B. N. 1987. Islam and Indian Culture.
Havell, E. B. 1905. Benares the Sacred City:
Patna: Khuda Baksh Oriental Public Library.
Sketches of Hindu Life and Religion.
Varanasi: Vishwavidyalaya Prakashan. Pietro Della Valle. 1892. The Travels of Pietro
Della Valle in India. Edward Grey (ed), vol.
Husain, S. M. Azizuddin. 2002. Structure of I. London: The Hakluyt Society.
Politics under Aurangzeb: 1658-1707. New
Ryley, J. Horton. 1899. Ralf Fitch, England’s
Delhi: Kanishka Publishers, Distributers.
Pioneer to India and Burma. London: T.
Jaitly, Jaya. 2014. Woven Textiles of Varanasi. Fisher Unwin.
New Delhi: Niyogi Books.
Sarkar, J. N. 1932-1938. The Fall of the Mughal
Jalal, Ayesha. 2008. Partisans of Allah: Jihad Empire, in 4 volumes. Calcutta.
in South Asia. London: Harvard University
Sarkar, J. N. 1972. History of Aurangzeb, vol. III.
Press.
New Delhi: Orient Longman.
Kesharwani, Pradeep. 2015. The Times of
Sharma, Sri Ram. 1940. The Religious Policy
India (News Paper), Varanasi, Friday, 11 of the Mughal Emperors. London: Oxford
September, 2015. University Press.
Khan, Saqi Musta’id. 1947. Maasir-i Alamgiri. J. Sharma, Vashi. 2017. The Naked Mughal:
N. Sarkar (tr). Calcutta: Royal Asiatic Society Forbidden Tales of Harem and Butchery.
of Bengal. Agniveer.
Khan, Maulana Wahiduddin (tr.). 2013. The Sherring, M. A. 1975. Banaras: The Sacred City
Quran. Farida Khanam (ed). New Delhi: of the Hindus: An Account of Benares in
Goodword Books. Ancient and Modern times. Delhi: B. R.
Lari, Tarannum Fatma. 2010. Textiles of Publication.
Banaras: Yesterday and Today. Varanasi: Sherring, M. A. 1872-1881. Hindu Tribes and
Indica Books. Castes as Represented in Benares, in III
Lane-Poole, Stanley. 1924. Rulers of India volumes. London: Thacker Spink.
Aurangzeb and the Decay of Mughal Singh, Ratan. 1886. Vir Vinod. Vol. II. Udaipur:
Empire. London: Oxford University Press. Rajyantralay
Motichandra. 1985. Kashi Ka Itihas. Varanasi: Sinha, S. N. 1974. Subah of Allahabad under the
Vishwavidyalaya Prakashan. Great Mughals (1580-1707). New Delhi:
Mukhia, Harbans. 2004. The Mughals of Jamia Millia Islamia.
India. Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell Sukul, Kubernath. 1977. Varanasi Vaibhav.
Publishing. Patna: Bihar Rashtrabhasha Parishad.

15
 Analisa Journal of Social Science and Religion Volume 03 Number 01 July 2018
pages 1-18

Tara Chand. 1943. “Dara Shikoh and the Jagirdar: The holder of an assignment of
Upanishads”. Islamic Culture, XVII: 397- revenues in Mughal India in lieu of payment
413. of salary
Tulsidas. 1956. Vinaya Patrika. Viyogi Hari Janpada: Literally state; The Janpada were
(annotated). Varanasi: Sahitya Seva Sadan. realm, republic and kingdom of the Vedic
Truschke, Audrey. 2016. Culture of Encounters: period on the Indian subcontinent, 1200 BC-
Sanskrit at the Mughal Court. Haryana: 600 BC.
Penguin Books. Jizyah: The poll tax levied on non-Muslims in a
Sherring, M. Audrey. 2017. Aurangzeb: The Man Muslim-ruled society.
and The Myth. Haryana: Penguin Viking. Kachhawaha: A Rajput clan belong to Amber
(Jaipur).

Glossary: Kharif: The autumn crop

Bairagi: Its literal meaning is one who is devoid Khilat: It means ‘robe of honour’, actually it is an
of passion, a Hindu ascetic, most correctly a Arabic term to refer to gifts in general, but in
Vaishnavite sect. particular to a robe of honour given by the
ruler to a subordinate.
Bait-ul maal: Literarily ‘House of treasury’ that is
Central Treasury where all money collected Kotawal: A title given to someone who had charge
and spent on the running of the state, and of internal defence, health, sanitation and all
spending on the poor and needy. other municipal functions of a district.
Bigha: Bigha is a traditional unit of measurement Karori: The popular designation of the collector
of land. Its size varied within every wide limit, of reserved revenue, known oicially as
both by place and by period. One bigha is Amalguzar.
equal to 0.25 hectare or 2500 square metres Mansabdar: The member of the imperial
or 3087.41 square yards. bureaucracy of Mughal India.
Biswa: One-twentieth of a bigha Mauzaas: Generally used in a wide sense as a
Daroghas: A minor oicer in charge of a local place or locality; later on denotes a village.
oice. Math: A residence of Hindu ascetic orders
Dira: length of a hand Mohalla: A section or part of a town; quarter of
Dirham: A silver coin. a city.
Eid Ghah: A place usually outside the city or Nisar: Its literal meaning is ‘sacriice’. It was a
village where mass prayers are ofered by the ritual of transferring one’s present or future
Muslims on the occasion of Eid-ul Fitr and pitfalls or ailments through sacriicing
Eid-ul Adha. money or anything precious.
Farman: Plural faramin; it was a royal order Pundit: Learned Hindu
bearing the seal of the emperor. It was an
Pargana: Administrative unit akin to tehsil.
order directly issued by the emperor.
Qasba: Country town.
Ghat: A light of steps leading down to a river.
Rajput: Great Hindu military and landholding
Gosain: Its literal meaning is master of passion, a
caste of north India.
title given to Hindu ascetics.
Ram Rajya: Ancient Hindu utopian concept of
Haveli: It is a traditional mansion with historical
and architectural signiicance. ideal state where everyone will remain true
to his/her moral obligations, and will live
Inam: A reward applied especially to gifts made peacefully and happily.
by the ruler whether in the form of a sum of
money or a stipend paid in cash or a grant of Sadr: The head of the religious department,
revenue. charities and grants.

16
 Temple Destruction and The Great Mughals’ Religious Policy In North India: A Case Study Of Banaras Region, 1526-1707
Parves Alam

Sanad: A charter or grant Shiqdar: Chief administrator of parganas.

Sari: It is an attire of Indian subcontinent, mostly Subah: Administrative unit akin to province or
wear by women. state.
Sarkar: Administrative unit akin to district. Umra: Plural of amir; nobles of high rank.

17
 Analisa Journal of Social Science and Religion Volume 03 Number 01 July 2018
pages 1-18

18