The Ayodhya Temple-Mosque Dispute: Focus on Muslim Sources c24: Appendix VI. Shāh Jahān's Farmān

The Ayodhya Temple-Mosque Dispute: Focus on Muslim Sources c24

Language: English

Appendix VI. Shāh Jahān's Farmān

c24.2

(M.S. Commissariat, *Studies in the History of Gujarat*, Ahmedabad, 1987, pp. 55-59)

c24.3

Shantidas builds a great temple at Ahmedabad, 1621

The most important event in the early period of the career of Shantidas was no doubt the commencement in the year 1621 (Saṁvat 1678) of the magnificent Jain temple dedicated to Chintamani-Parshwanath in a suburb of Ahmadabad. The edifice must have been completed four years later in 1625, for in this year Shantidas is said to have formally installed therein the image of the Tirthankar. The temple is said to have been called Manatunga.¹ It was situated in the then flourishing suburb of Bibipur, which is now known as Saraspur, and the sacred monument was erected jointly by Shantidas and his elder brother Vardhaman. It is a matter for no small regret that while the great Muslim monuments of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries at Ahmadabad still remain in almost perfect condition, this great Jain temple, built in the seventeenth century, has practically disappeared owing to reasons which we shall describe later.

c24.5

¹ For the description of the temple given in the *Chintamani-prashasti* see Appendix B at the end of this chapter.

c24.6

Mandelslo's account of the temple, 1638

c24.7

Though Shantidas's temple at Saraspur is now no more, an elaborate account of the same has been, strangely enough, preserved in the work of a young German traveller in Gujarat, Albert de Mandelslo, who visited Ahmadabad in 1638, i.e., within twelve years of the completion of the famous temple. He informs us that it was without dispute one of the noblest structures that could be seen in this city and adds that it was at the time of his visit new, 'for the Founder, who was a rich Banya merchant named Shantidas, was living in my time'. According to his description, the temple stood in the centre of a large court which was enclosed by a high stone wall. At its entrance there stood two elephants¹ of black marble 'done to the life' and upon one of them was placed the effigy of the builder. The temple building was vaulted and its walls adorned with human and animal figures. About it were the usual cloisters with cells each containing a marble statue, in white or black, representing the Tirthankars of the Jain Pantheon, though our traveller, like many others, thought them to be images of women, naked, sitting cross-legged !²

c24.8

¹ Their names are given as Vaghaji and Kalyanmal in the *Chintamaniprashasti*, verse 44.

c24.9

² 'Mandelslo's Travels into the East Indies,' translated by J. Davies, London, 1662, p. 30; See also Commissariat, M.S., *Mandelslo's Travels in Western India* (1931), pp. 23-25. For the full text of Mandelslo's account of the temple see Appendix C to this chapter.

c24.10

Prince Aurangzeb converts the temple into a mosque, 1645

c24.11

In 1645, Prince Aurangzeb, then Viceory of Gujarat under his father Shah Jahan, ordered the beautiful temple built by Shantidas at the suburb of Saraspur to be desecrated and it was converted into a mosque under the name of Quvvat-ul-Islam (the Might of Islam).³ The meagre reference to this event in the Mirat-i-Ahmadi may be supplemented by a quotation from the French traveller M. de Thevenot, who visited Ahmadabad in 1666. He says :-

c24.12

³ *Mirat-i-Ahmadi*, Pers. Text, ed. by Syed Nawab Ali, Part 1.

c24.13

Thevenot's account of the desecration

c24.14

"Ahmedabad being inhabited also by a great numbers of heathens, there are Pagods or idol-temples in it. That which was called the Pagod of Santidas was the chief, before Aurangzeb converted it into a mosque. When he performed that ceremony he caused a cow to be killed in the place, knowing very well that, after such an action the gentiles according to their law, could worship no more therein. All round the temple there is a cloister furnished with lovely

c24.15

cells, beautified with figures of marble in relief, representing naked women sitting after the oriental fashion. The inside roof of the mosque is pretty enough and the walls are full of the figures of men and beasts; but Aurangzed, who hath always made a show of an affected devotion, which at length raised him to the throne, caused the noses of all these figures, which added a great deal of magnificence to that mosque, to be beat off."¹

c24.16

¹ *Travels of M. de Thevenot*, trans. by Lovell, London, 1687, Part III, p. 10.

c24.17

Tavernier's reference to the Temple

c24.18

The famous French jeweller and traveller, M. Tavernier, who paid many visits to Ahmadabad in the course of his travels, is evidently referring to the Jain temple built by Shantidas when he says :-

c24.19

"There was a Pagoda in this place which the Muhammadans took possession of in order to turn it into a mosque. Before entering it you traverse three great courts paved with marble, and surrounded by galleries, and you are not allowed to place foot in the third without removing your shoes. The exterior of the mosque is ornamented with mosaic, the greater part of which consists of agates of different colours, obtained from the mountains of Cambay, only two days' journey from thence."²

c24.20

² J.B. Tavernier, *Travels in India*, Ed. by Ball, I, 72.

c24.21

Shah Jahan restores the temple to Shantidas

c24.22

It is not probable that so powerful a citizen and so devout a Jain as Shantidas would allow this insult offered even by an Imperial Prince to a monument built at such immense cost and dedicated to one of the Supreme Souls of the Jain religion to pass witout making a represenation to the Emperor. This may be permised from the grant of an Imperial farman, dated July 3, 1648, about three years after the Prince's viceroyalty, directing Ghairat Khan and other officials in Gujarat to restore the building to Shantidas and to make him complete restitution for all damage done. This most valuable historical document was in 1888 submitted by the then Nagarsheth Premabhai Hemabhai to the Superintendent of the Revenue Survey at Ahmadabad for inspection.¹ But all traces of it were forgotten for about half a century until the author was able, after much labour, to locate it in the possession of Sheth Kasturbhai Manibhai, the grandson of Premabhai, at the end of 1932, in a long neglected bundle containing several other valuable farmans.

c24.23

¹ *Jain Aitihasic Rasmala*, Ed. by Mohanlal D. Desai, Part I, 30.

c24.24

Ghairat Khan as deputy for Dara in Gujarat

c24.25

This farman bears at its top the seal of Dara Shukoh and was granted on the 21st of Jumad-as-Sani of the Hijri year 1058 (July 3, 1648), being addressed to the officers of the Subah of Gujarat, and especially to Ghairat Khan, on whom special epithets of praise and regard are bestowed. The date is interesting, for we learn from the *Mirat-i-Ahmadi* that on this day the Emperor appointed his eldest son Dara as Viceory of Gujarat in succession to Shaistah Khan who had been transferred.² But Dara's appointment was a nominal one, for he was allowed to remain at court and to carry on the government of his province by sending this Ghairat Khan as his *naib* or deputy to Ahmadabad. It is possible, therefore, that the farman was delivered to the latter on this day. As the farman has never been published before, we give below a full translation of the same :

c24.26

² *Mirat-i-Ahmadi*, Persian text, Ed. by Nawab Ali, Part I, 224.

c24.27

*Toghra* (in golden ink) : Farman-i- Abul Muzaffar Shihab-ud-din Muhammad Sahib Kiran-i-Sani Shah Jahan Badshah-i-Ghazi.

*Nishan* : Nishan-i-Alishan Shahzada Buland Iqbal Muhammad Dara Shukoh.

*Seal* (in black) Muhammad Dara Shukoh *ibn* Shah Jahan Badshah Ghazi.

c24.28

Shah Jahan's farman for the restoration of the temple, 3 July, 1648

c24.29

'Be it known to the governors, subahdars and mutasaddis, present and future, of the province of Gujarat, especially the one who has been worthy of various favours (*here follow* *various honorific epithets)*, viz, Ghairat Khan, who has been reliant on and gladdened by royal favours, that formerly, in respect of the temple of the leading person of the time (*zubdat-al-akran*), Satidas Jawahari, an exalted and blessed order had been issued to Umdat-ul-Mulk Shaistah Khan to this effect : Shahzada Sultan Aurangzeb Bahadur had constructed in that place some mihrabs (prayer-arches) and had given it the name of a mosque ; and after that Mulla Abdul Hakim had represented to His Majesty that this building, by reason of its being the property of another person, could not be considered a mosque according to the inviolable Islamic law; a world-obeyed order, therefore, obtained the honour of being issued that this building is the property pf Satidas, and that because of the mihrab which the famous Prince had made in that place the above-mentioned person should not be harassed, and that the arch should be removed and the aforesaid building should be handed over to him.

c24.30

'Now, at this time, the world-obeyed and illustrious order has been issued that the mihrab which the victorious and exalted Prince has constructed may be retained and a wall be built near the same as a screen between the temple and the mihrab. Hence it is ordained that, since his exalted Majesty has, as an act of favour, granted the aforesaid temple to Satidas, he should be in possession of it as as before and he may worship there according to his creed in any way he likes, and no one should obstruct or trouble him; also that some of the Faqirs (beggars) who have made their abode in that place should be turned out, and Satidas should be relieved from the troubles and quarrels on their account.

c24.31

'And since it has been represented to His Majesty that some of the Bohras have removed and carried away the materials of that temple, in the event of this being so, those materials should be got back from them and should be restored to the person referred to above (Satidas), and if the aforesaid materials have been used up, their price should be recovered from them and should be paid to Satidas.

c24.32

'In this matter, this order should be considered extremely urgent and there should be no deviation from or disobedience to it. Written on the twenty-first of the month of Jumad-as-Sani in the year 1058 H. (July 3, 1648)'¹

c24.33

¹ The reverse of this Farman contains the following brief endorsement: 'through the humblest of servants, Biharimal.'

c24.34

The images of this temple again set up in 1743

c24.35

From a later reference to this temple in the *Mirat-i-Ahmadi* we learn that, at the time of its conversion into a mosque by Sultan Aurangzeb, two of the marble images, each weighing a hundred *man*, had been buried underground by Shantidas, though it was given out that these would be destroyed. In 1743, when the Emperor Mahammad Shah was on the throne of Delhi, and the *Subah* of Gujarat was given to Fakhrudin Khan, who governed through Jawanmard Khan as his deputy, these idols were again publicly set up at Ahmadabad. The historian says that 'marking the weakness of Islam and the decline of religious zeal' at this period, the descendants of Shantidas obtained, by means of a *douceur*, permission to bring these images on carts into the city where they were installed for public worship in an underground temple which had been in existence for a long time and where the Jains used in secret to carry on their worship owing to the fear of the Musalmans.²

c24.36

² *Mirat-i-Ahmadi*, Persian text, Ed. by Syed Nawab Ali, Part 2, p.322.

c24.37

Farman* of 1629 about Jain temples and *poshals

c24.38

We may now refer to an imperial Mughal *farman* granted to Shantidas by Shah Jahan in the early years of his reign in which the Emperor makes certain grants which are different in their nature from those Palitana grants which are the subject of several well-known *farmans* of a later date. This *farman*, now in the possession of the firm of Sheth Anandji Kalyanji, was written on the 21st May of the Ilahi month of Adar in the second year of the coronation, i.e., in 1629-30. The document states that it had been brought to the notice of His Majesty that the temples of 'Chintaman' and 'Satrunja' and ‘Sankhesara’¹ and ‘Kesari’² were in the existence long before the suspicious accession, and that there were three *poshals*³ at Ahmadabad, four at Khambayat, one at Surat and one at Radhanpur in the possession of Shantidas. The order was, therefore, now issued to the effect that no one should put up at those places and houses for they had been granted to the Jains.

c24.39

¹ Sankhesvar is situated near Panchasar in the district of Munipur, 24 miles south of Radhanpur in North Gujarat. It is still a famous place of Jain pilgrimage, but the present temples are modern and raised on the site of old buildings that have quite disappeared. (Bombay Gazetteer, V.347) The Mirat-i-Ahmadi described this temple as ‘Sankh Parasnath, situated in pargana Munipur, Sarkar Patan’. (Nawab Ali and Seddon, *Suppt.* 139).

c24.40

² The temple of Kesharianath, sacred to Adinath or Rishabhdev, is situated in the village of Dhuleva, about 36 miles from the city of Udaipur in the state of the same name.

c24.41

³ A *poshal* is a place where a Jain stays when keeping his *posha* vow, one of the four disciplinary vows of the Jains (*cf.* Sanskrit, *Uposhatha-Shala*).