Listen to this article:

A recent verdict from the Madhya Pradesh high court declared a 700-year-old mosque to be a temple of Hindu goddess Saraswati. The Kamal Maula Mosque, a 14th century hypostyle mosque, which was also the first Jama masjid (congregational mosque) of Dhar, was said to be built on a pre-existing temple in a court ordered Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) survey conducted by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). The history of the dispute surrounding the mosque, popular by the modern misnomer of Bhojshala (hall of Bhoja, an 11th century Paramara king), the ASI survey as well as the court verdict are problematic in its understanding of historical sources, the phenomenon of architectural reuse and the historical evolution of religions.

The verdict relies on the ASI survey to declare the Kamal Maula mosque as an 11th century temple. The brief findings of the ASI survey as recorded in the court order indicate a pre existing structure underneath the mosque which was “massive perhaps for public purpose”(p. 186). It further states that the pre-existing structure was “damaged and modified for reuse” (Ibid). Later, on page 189, the ASI contradicts itself when stating that the “art and architecture of these pillars and pilasters in colonnades suggest that they were originally part of temples.” 

Interestingly, the remains then do not come from a single structure but from multiple temples (p. 189). The identification of the underneath structure as a temple is done purely on the basis of the material reused in the mosque. According to the ASI, figures of four-armed deities as well as of other Puranic gods such as Ganesha can be found on the reused pillars, albeit defaced owing to Islamic iconoclasm. The ASI in its survey does not entertain the possibility that the structure underneath could be a palace and that the material reused to make the mosque could have also been sourced from a palace. Sculptural reliefs featuring deities were a common feature of palace pillars, cornices and doors. 

Felix Otter in his study (2010) on Residential Architecture in the Samranganasutradhara has argued how both sacred and profane sculptures were used to decorate residential spaces including palaces. The Sanskrit text Samranganasutradhara is incorrectly attributed to the 11th century Paramara king Bhoja, even though writing analysis done by Otter shows how multiple authors put together the text. 

The ASI also overlooks its own finding that the material reused in the mosque comes from multiple sources and not just one structure (p. 189). Furthermore, the survey provides no evidence for its assertion that the pre-existing structure was the one that was damaged and re-used in the mosque. The 2019 Ayodhya verdict, p 906-907 had proven how a full fledged excavation underneath the illegally........

© The Wire