The Taj Mahal, one of the seven wonders of the world, finds itself again at the centre of a controversy. Built by Mughal Emperor Shahjehan in the memory of his wife Mumtaz Mahal, it stands alone in its attraction for tourists, particularly foreigners. Located in Agra city of Uttar Pradesh, it has attracted the attention of functionaries of the right wing ruling Bharatiya Janata Party but not for some positivity. Last year, when the BJP government in Uttar Pradesh led by Hindu priest Yogi Adityanath removed it from the list of tourist attractions, there was a reaction from the opposition. The government came on the defensive but the intent was clear as the Yogi had said that it was not part of “Bharatiya Sanskriti” or Indian culture.
Last week one of the members of the UP legislature, Sangeet Som, again raked up the issue in the similar vein, saying, “Shahjehan’s beautiful memento of love to his wife is a blot on Indian culture because it was built by traitors who killed many Hindus.” Som comes from western UP and came through the Muzaffarpur violence just before the 2014 elections to the Indian parliament. There has been rage over his statement and that obviously comes from Muslims, left liberals and centre-left Congress. Though the BJP has tried to maintain some distance from Som’s statement that does not put an end to the pattern as no action has been taken against him and there seems to be no qualms among those who have taken the path of denigrating even lifeless monuments simply because they were built by Muslims. BJP spokesperson Nalin Kohli did make an attempt to strike a difference with this statement: “The Taj Mahal is an important part of our history. It's part of Incredible India. What happened in history cannot be erased but at least it can be well-written history.” That in any case does not hold a promise that such a recourse is discouraged.
In the past three years of the BJP government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi the policy of discrediting anything that is related to Muslims and even targeting them in the name of beef etc. has become evident. Cow vigilantes take on anyone even seen with an animal has been made to give its life. Though Modi once denounced these actions, on the ground not much has changed. The divide that is being pushed between Hindus and the largest minority, Muslims, seems to be gaining strength with official sanction that comes from rulers such as Yogi Adityanath. Showing India as a Hindu Rashtra is a project that has a map in which Muslims are put in the category of the Another. This is something that has been vigorously pursued in the last three years.
The BJP’s policy vis-a-vis Muslims is clear. In a way, the BJP has made it clear that Muslims have nearly no place in its rank and file save a few “showpieces” or token figures in the party. Today there are only two faces in the BJP’s national executive. Despite 15 percent of India being Muslim, there was not a single Muslim candidate for the BJP in the elections in the largest state of Uttar Pradesh. A little-known face was inducted as minister.
So, hitting out at the Taj in a way does not come as a surprise since an atmosphere of hate has been built up. However, the silver lining is that the reaction from many people was hard-hitting. Going by social media, Sangeet Som’s assertions were compared with demolishing Buddha’s statues in Bamiyan and likening him with the Taliban. What is currently hitting the otherwise secular and diverse identity of India is this mental set-up. The BJP and its cohorts may have succeeded in making the majority of Indians believe that they recovered a “Hindu India” from secularists who were appeasing Muslims but it has come at a cost. India’s image in the outside world is now of an intolerant nation and not of one that was accommodating of all religions and views, thus making it a compact of diversity.
Of late, Mughal emperors have been the target of this frenzy and the narrative built around them is of persecutors of Hindus. However, in contrast it comes out that they have played an important role in building temples. Besides adding grandeur to Indian culture by building monuments like the Taj they have donated land and money for Hindu religious places. Interestingly, the Gorakhnath in Ayodhaya of which Yogi Adityanath is a Mahant was given by Nawab Asif-ud-Daula. “In Yogi Adityanath’s case, the Gorakhnath land of which he is the Mahant, was donated by Nawab Asif-ud-Daula who visited Gorakhpur around 1790. Since Asif-ud-Daula was a Shia, he wanted to meet Roshan Ali, the pir of an Imambara in the region. Roshan Ali asked Asif-ud-Daula to donate land to Gorakhnath. In the 19th century, it was said that half of Gorakhpur belonged to Roshan Ali’s Imambara and the other half to the Gorakhnath,” wrote the Indian Express on October 17.
Similarly, the “most condemned” Mughal ruler is Aurangzeb whose name was erased by the BJP government from a road in Lutyens Delhi and replaced with the “more acceptable” APJ Abdul Kalam, a former president of India. However, Audrey Truschke, a historian at Rutgers University in the US in her latest book, “Aurangzeb: The Man and the Myth” dispelled the notion about the ruler. She did intense research and argued that Aurangzeb was a tolerant emperor who argued for religious freedom, and to an extent even advocated secular policy in matters of governance. Certainly, he did a few extreme things during his long rule. In her own words, Aurangzeb was man of his time. To single him out as a despot and label him a bigot is a gross misrepresentation. We can only do justice to his life if things are viewed in context. Her book was critically reviewed but the underlying acceptance was that he was not a despotic ruler.
An increasing schism that is seen developing between the two communities has gained momentum in the past three years. And targeting even a UNESCO-designated heritage site such as the Taj also comes from an inherent intolerance developed by Som and his ilk. Since the UP government has shown indifference towards the monument, the number of visitors has also started declining. According to a report in the Economic Times, in 2016, a total of 6,200,000 tourists went to see the Taj Mahal and 2,200,000 to the adjoining Agra Fort, down from 6,513,000 and 2,344,000 respectively in 2015, as per the latest figures of the UP government.
Fighting against a monument can be symbolic given the strong disenchantment seen of late against the BJP government at the center. In the run-up to the 2019 parliament elections an atmosphere of polarization might help it salvage its position. Grandstanding of discovering a “new India” is falling apart and the BJP will surely look towards something that makes it relevant in its vote bank. So, these triggers could help it though they bring a bad name to India as a country. But that does not matter to them as they intend to conquer India at all costs.
The writer is a senior journalist based in Srinagar (Kashmir) and can be reached at shujaat7867@gmail.com
Last week one of the members of the UP legislature, Sangeet Som, again raked up the issue in the similar vein, saying, “Shahjehan’s beautiful memento of love to his wife is a blot on Indian culture because it was built by traitors who killed many Hindus.” Som comes from western UP and came through the Muzaffarpur violence just before the 2014 elections to the Indian parliament. There has been rage over his statement and that obviously comes from Muslims, left liberals and centre-left Congress. Though the BJP has tried to maintain some distance from Som’s statement that does not put an end to the pattern as no action has been taken against him and there seems to be no qualms among those who have taken the path of denigrating even lifeless monuments simply because they were built by Muslims. BJP spokesperson Nalin Kohli did make an attempt to strike a difference with this statement: “The Taj Mahal is an important part of our history. It's part of Incredible India. What happened in history cannot be erased but at least it can be well-written history.” That in any case does not hold a promise that such a recourse is discouraged.
Of late, Mughal emperors have been the target of this frenzy and the narrative built around them is of persecutors of Hindus
In the past three years of the BJP government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi the policy of discrediting anything that is related to Muslims and even targeting them in the name of beef etc. has become evident. Cow vigilantes take on anyone even seen with an animal has been made to give its life. Though Modi once denounced these actions, on the ground not much has changed. The divide that is being pushed between Hindus and the largest minority, Muslims, seems to be gaining strength with official sanction that comes from rulers such as Yogi Adityanath. Showing India as a Hindu Rashtra is a project that has a map in which Muslims are put in the category of the Another. This is something that has been vigorously pursued in the last three years.
The BJP’s policy vis-a-vis Muslims is clear. In a way, the BJP has made it clear that Muslims have nearly no place in its rank and file save a few “showpieces” or token figures in the party. Today there are only two faces in the BJP’s national executive. Despite 15 percent of India being Muslim, there was not a single Muslim candidate for the BJP in the elections in the largest state of Uttar Pradesh. A little-known face was inducted as minister.
So, hitting out at the Taj in a way does not come as a surprise since an atmosphere of hate has been built up. However, the silver lining is that the reaction from many people was hard-hitting. Going by social media, Sangeet Som’s assertions were compared with demolishing Buddha’s statues in Bamiyan and likening him with the Taliban. What is currently hitting the otherwise secular and diverse identity of India is this mental set-up. The BJP and its cohorts may have succeeded in making the majority of Indians believe that they recovered a “Hindu India” from secularists who were appeasing Muslims but it has come at a cost. India’s image in the outside world is now of an intolerant nation and not of one that was accommodating of all religions and views, thus making it a compact of diversity.
Of late, Mughal emperors have been the target of this frenzy and the narrative built around them is of persecutors of Hindus. However, in contrast it comes out that they have played an important role in building temples. Besides adding grandeur to Indian culture by building monuments like the Taj they have donated land and money for Hindu religious places. Interestingly, the Gorakhnath in Ayodhaya of which Yogi Adityanath is a Mahant was given by Nawab Asif-ud-Daula. “In Yogi Adityanath’s case, the Gorakhnath land of which he is the Mahant, was donated by Nawab Asif-ud-Daula who visited Gorakhpur around 1790. Since Asif-ud-Daula was a Shia, he wanted to meet Roshan Ali, the pir of an Imambara in the region. Roshan Ali asked Asif-ud-Daula to donate land to Gorakhnath. In the 19th century, it was said that half of Gorakhpur belonged to Roshan Ali’s Imambara and the other half to the Gorakhnath,” wrote the Indian Express on October 17.
Similarly, the “most condemned” Mughal ruler is Aurangzeb whose name was erased by the BJP government from a road in Lutyens Delhi and replaced with the “more acceptable” APJ Abdul Kalam, a former president of India. However, Audrey Truschke, a historian at Rutgers University in the US in her latest book, “Aurangzeb: The Man and the Myth” dispelled the notion about the ruler. She did intense research and argued that Aurangzeb was a tolerant emperor who argued for religious freedom, and to an extent even advocated secular policy in matters of governance. Certainly, he did a few extreme things during his long rule. In her own words, Aurangzeb was man of his time. To single him out as a despot and label him a bigot is a gross misrepresentation. We can only do justice to his life if things are viewed in context. Her book was critically reviewed but the underlying acceptance was that he was not a despotic ruler.
An increasing schism that is seen developing between the two communities has gained momentum in the past three years. And targeting even a UNESCO-designated heritage site such as the Taj also comes from an inherent intolerance developed by Som and his ilk. Since the UP government has shown indifference towards the monument, the number of visitors has also started declining. According to a report in the Economic Times, in 2016, a total of 6,200,000 tourists went to see the Taj Mahal and 2,200,000 to the adjoining Agra Fort, down from 6,513,000 and 2,344,000 respectively in 2015, as per the latest figures of the UP government.
Fighting against a monument can be symbolic given the strong disenchantment seen of late against the BJP government at the center. In the run-up to the 2019 parliament elections an atmosphere of polarization might help it salvage its position. Grandstanding of discovering a “new India” is falling apart and the BJP will surely look towards something that makes it relevant in its vote bank. So, these triggers could help it though they bring a bad name to India as a country. But that does not matter to them as they intend to conquer India at all costs.
The writer is a senior journalist based in Srinagar (Kashmir) and can be reached at shujaat7867@gmail.com