Mathura’s mosque and temple story follows a different script
“Ayodhya toh bas jhanki hai, Kashi Mathura baaki hai (Ayodhya is but a glimpse, Kashi and Mathura remain).”
A court case in Mathura harked back to this battle cry from the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, just as the Babri Masjid case reached a hollow denouement at the end of last month.
In the case pertaining to Ayodhya, a court exonerated the architects of a campaign that culminated in the Babri Masjid being demolited in December 1992 and foreshadowed the rise of Hindutva and India’s turn towards majoritarian politics.
In Mathura, however, a court dismissed a civil suit seeking the removal of a Mughal-era mosque that shares a wall with a temple complex believed to be situated in the birthplace of Krishna. A Lucknow-based advocate and six other plaintiffs had filed the suit on behalf of the child deity.
This is not the first time the matter over the temple and mosque had gone to court. Half a century ago, at the Krishna Janmabhoomi (birthplace) in Mathura, the Hindu and Muslim custodians of the temple and eidgah sharing a common wall had reached a court settlement.
In the recent case, it was not the governing body of the temple complex that had filed the suit. Kapil Sharma, secretary of the Shri Krishna Janmashtami Seva Sansthan, which oversees the affairs of the temple, says that a civilian is free to question the settlement but the court has to decide. “We haven’t filed the case nor do we think that a single institution can decide on an issue that affects millions of people.”
He adds that the trust believes in the wisdom of religious leaders and organisations that were central to the Ram Janmabhoomi movement. In the same vein, he feels that building unanimity on an issue such as Krishna’s birthplace is well-nigh impossible because “differing views are a speciality as well as an irony of Hindu faith”.
“They are two places of worship, praying to the same almighty. If azaan (call to prayer) rises from one, there is the music of bhajan and kirtan from the other. There must be peace, which should not be disturbed, in the holy city of Krishna and Radha,” says Zaheer Hasan, chairman of the Shahi Masjid Eidgah Committee, which governs the mosque. Even though there was litigation over the site earlier, he adds, good sense has prevailed for decades.
Braj, the region covering the holy twin cities of Mathura and Vrindavan, has a rich syncretic culture. A politically loaded dispute and its socio-economic impact is something the residents of Mathura can ill afford. Locals point out that it could lay waste to a business like silver anklets, in which both Hindu and Muslim communities work together.
Apart from silver trade, the heritage city is also famous for its sweet shops and religious material. But like elsewhere, the Covid-19 pandemic has broken the back of a local economy driven by religious tourism.
The temple complex was reopened on June 8 after the lockdown. The trust is dipping into its savings to meet the expenses of the priests and religious guides. “There are 70odd shops around the complex, but they are unable to pay their bills. There is no sale, as we are not even seeing five per cent of the footfall that is expected at this time of the year,” says Sharma.
Vinay Kumar, who owns a store of idol dress and other religious essentials, says since the past fortnight, there has been less than 10 per cent of the daily business as compared to pre-pandemic times. Even after the lockdown ended and shops reopened, there was almost zero business for nearly three months.
At his factory, on average 40-60 karigars (artisans), many of whom are Muslim, used to work. Now the number is reduced to less than half. “I had to take loans during the lockdown, as I ran out of savings,” he says, adding that any dispute over the temple and mosque would not benefit anyone.
The Krishna Janmasthan includes the Keshavdeva temple, Garbha Griha shrine, Bhagavata Bhavan and a water tank. The Garbha Griha (a term for sanctum sanctorum) shrine is believed to be the site of the underground prison cell where Krishna was born. The mosque is said to have been built on the assembly hall of the original temple during Mughal emperor Aurangzeb’s reign in the 1600s, while the sanctum sanctorum was left intact.
In the 19th century, the East India Company auctioned the land, which was bought by one Raja Patnimal of Banaras (as Varanasi was then called). The ownership of 13.37 acres was challenged later, but the courts ruled in favour of Patnimal’s descendants. Freedom fighter Madan Mohan Malaviya, with the help of industrialist Jugal Kishore Birla, bought the land in 1944. After Malaviya’s death, Birla formed the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Trust in 1951.
The civil suit that was filed last month said that the Shri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan, established in 1958, overpowered the public trust set up by Birla. The petition added that in 1968, the Sansthan entered into a compromise with the committee managing the eidgah trust and conceded a sizeable chunk of property belonging to the deity. The petitioners are likely to move a higher court after the dismissal of the suit.
In a recent interview with News18, Shridhar Damle — coauthor of The RSS: A View to the Inside — recalled a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh leader telling him that they picked Ayodhya ahead of Mathura or Kashi because of Ram’s wider reach than that of Krishna or Shiv.
Sucheta Mahajan, a professor at the Centre of Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, points out that the right-wing focus on Ayodhya — although for the average Hindu, its location was relatively unknown, particularly in comparison to Kashi — was expedient, one that would resonate with the Hindi heartland and yield political dividends.
However, she adds, the idea of “righting historical wrongs” with actions such as Babri demolition only reflects religious assertion where no one community or section wins as it sets off an endless cycle.