As per his will, Babur was ultimately laid to rest in the garden of his choice at Kabul. Many of his descendants visited his burial place subsequently. Shah Jahan built a beautiful mosque, which stands even today. Jahangir took initiative in installing a beautiful inscription that stands at the grave head. The following glowing tribute is inscribed there:
“A ruler from whose brow shone the Light of God was that Back-bone of the Faith (zahiru’d-dîn) Muhammad Babur Padshah. Together with majesty, dominion, fortune, rectitude, the open-hand and the firm Faith, he had share in prosperity, abundance and the triumph of victorious arms. He won the material world and became a moving light; for his every conquest he looked, as for Light, towards the world of souls. When Paradise became his dwelling and Ruzwãn asked me the date, I gave him for answer, “Paradise is forever Babur Padshah’s abode.”
Ruzwān is the door-keeper of Paradise.
(18) Babur remains immortal in history
Babur was a cultured person. He was a poet and an accomplished writer. His autobiography is considered the second best prose piece in the Turkish language. His liberal literary attitude was so embedded in his heart that it embellished his unique personality and did not allow him the mingling of religious bigotry with governance.
On 26th December, 1530 Babur passed away in his garden place at Agra at a comparatively young age of forty-eight years. He remained king for 36 years and only for four years in India. During this period he stayed mostly in army camps and his life was crowded with inciting events, unexpected hardships, tumultuous upheavals and decisive victories. Though Babur is dead in physical form, yet he remains immortal in history.
Death makes no conquest of this Conqueror,
For now he lives in Fame.
Chapter Four
Babur had no role either in the demolition of any
temple at Ayodhyā or in the construction of the mosque
[(1) Babur’s Memoirs (2) Humayun-nama of Gul-Badan Begum (3) Account of Abul Fazl’s Ain-i-Akbari (4) Sarva-desa-vrittãnta-sanagraha of Mahesa Thakura (5) “Muntakhab-ut-Tawarikh” of Badauni (6) The Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri (7) Rãmacharita Mãnasa of Gosvami Tulasi Das (8) Travel accounts of William Finch (9) Joseph Tieffenthaler’s description of Ayodhya (10) Francis Buchanan’s survey report (11) Conclusion]
It is a historical travesty that Babur, the founder of the Mughal dynasty in India, who had no role either in the demolition of any temple at Ayodhyā or in the construction of the so-called Baburi mosque, has been facing fire and ire for the last 200 years for the commission of an act with which he was not associated at all. Although it is very difficult to convince a generation which has been fed on hatred for him, a very sincere and convincing effort needs to be made on the basis of historical documents to clear him from the ‘crime’ of converting a temple into a mosque.
For 240 years after its supposed construction in 1528 A.D. Baburi mosque does not figure in any text written by any indigenous or foreign authorities until the travel account of Jesuit priest Tieffenthelar in 1768 A.D. If it was really built in the year 1528 A.D. by Mir Baqi at the command of Babur, as is generally claimed by historians on the sole evidence of some fake inscriptions, it could have certainly found a mention in any of the following texts:
(1) Babur’s Memoirs
Babur’s Memoirs, variously called Babur-nama (History of Babur) or Waqiat-i-Baburi (Babur’s Acts) is one of the most detailed and frank diaries ever maintained by any monarch. In the Babur-nama he mentions the construction of only two mosques at Dholpur (Dulpur) and Agra. About the Dholpur he writes:
“On the east of this lake is a garden; I ordered a seat and four-pillared platform (talar) be cut out in the solid rock on that same side, and a mosque built on the western one.”( Baburnama, p. 606, folio 339b, dated 21st Sept. 1528 A.D.)
Babur depicts the Agra mosque in the following words:
“A stone building (tashdin Imarat) stands at the mouth of the well and there is an outer (?) mosque 3 outside (tashqari) the enclosure in which the well is. The mosque is not well done; it is in the Hindustani fashion.” (Baburnama, p. 533)
Beveridge explains it in the footnote on the same page:
3. Tash masjid; this, unless some adjectival affix (e.g. din) has been omitted by the scribe, I incline to read as meaning extra, supplementary, or outer, not as “mosque of stone.”
This account was written after 28th August, 1526. The construction of a mosque at Agra is corroborated by Jahangir’s following testimony in his Memoirs:
“When God Almighty bestowed the rule of India on this illustrious family, the late king, Babar, after the defeat of Ibrahim, the son of Sikandar Lodi, and his being killed, and after his victory over Rana Sanga, who was the chief of the Rajas of Hindustan, established on the east side of the Jumna, on improved land, a garden (charbagh) which few places equal in beauty. He gave it the name of Gul-afshan (Flower-scatterer), and erected in it a small building of cut red stone, and having completed a mosque on one side of it he intended to make a lofty building, but time failed him and his design was never carried into execution.” (The Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri; or, Memoirs of Jahangir, pp. 4-5)
In addition, Babur has meticulously mentioned the number of masions and stone-cutters employed by him for the construction of various buildings in his Memoirs. He writes:
“But 680 men worked daily on my buildings in Agra and of Agra stone-cutters only; while 1491 stone-cutters worked daily on my buildings in Agra, Sikri, Biana, Dulpur, Gualiar and Kuil. In the same way there are numberless artisans and workmen of every sort in Hindustan.” (p. 520, folio 292)
Thus, Babur mentions his building activities at many places like Agra, Sikri, Biana, Dulpur, Gwalior and Kuil but not at Ayodhyā. One may argue that since this account was written in the year 932 A.H., i.e. from 18th October 1525 to 8th October, 1526, it is not a very conclusive evidence to disprove that he built a mosque at Ayodhyā in 935 A.D. which began on 15th September, 1528 and ended on 5th September 1529 A.D. However, on 1st February, 1529 Babur wrote in his diary:
“On Tuesday, after writing letters to be taken by those going to Kabul, the buildings in hand at Agra and Dulpur were recalled to mind, and entrusted to the charge of Mulla Qasim, Ustad Shah Muhammad the stone-cutter, Mirak, Mîr Ghias, Mir Sang-tarash (stone-cutter) and Shah Baba the spadesman. Their leave was given them.”
From this accout it is clear that Babur had no memory of any building activity going on at Ayodhyā in February, 1529.
Historians have so far been claiming that Babur, while settling affairs at Ayodhyā, had directed Mir Baqi in April 1528 to construct a mosque at Ayodhyā. Had he really given any such direction, he must have recalled it in his diary in February,1529 A.D. But since there was no such direction on his behalf, it is not mentioned in his diary. In fact, Mir Baqi and other nobles were on the pursuit mission against Bāyazīd and Biban in Eastern U.P. and Western Bihar. Thus there was no time for Mir Baqi to construct a mosque at Ayodhyā. Babur-nama almost confirms indirectly that Babur had no occasion to demolish any temple or build any mosque at Ayodhyā.
In addition, the following mention on 20th June, 1529 by Babur in his diary would confirm that the mosque was not built in 935 A.H.
“As the Rains had set in and as after 5 or 6 months of active service, horses and cattle in army were worn out, the sultans and begs were ordered to remain where they were till they received fresh supplies from Agra and those parts. At the Other Prayer of the same day leave was given to Baqi and for the army of Aud (Ajodhya).”
When I cross-checked this translation with that of Leyden and Erskine (published in 1826), I found the following translation:
“The same day (i.e. 21st June, 1529), about afternoon prayers, I gave Baqi Shaghawal and his party leave to go home.” (p. 423)
If this translation is correct, the leave granted to Baqi Shaghawal was for going home and if he went home as per the leave granted, he had no occasion at all to build
a mosque at Ayodhyā. Baqi Shaghawal is never heard of thereafter. There is a discrepancy of one day between two translations.
Now these dates are analysed to arrive at a correct conclusion. The so-called Baburi mosque is said to have been built in 935 A.H. i.e. between 15th September, 1528 and 5th September, 1529 A.D. There is a misconception that since pages of Babur’s Diary from 3rd April to 17th September, 1528 are missing, the construction of mosque finds no mention in his Diary. But it is not correct because the mosque was built in 935 A.H. and only 3 days’ accounts for the year 935 A.H. are missing in his Diary. It is seen that on 21st September, 1528, i.e. only on the 6th day of the new 935 A.H. year Babur mentions the building of a mosque at Dholpur, far away from Ayodhyā. Thereafter, the movements of Babur and Baqi are known until 20th June, 1529, when Baqi was either dismissed or sent on leave. Thus, it was impossible to build a mosque at Ayodhyā by Babur or Baqi during the tumultuous period.
Baqi Tashkindi was an important army commander of the expedition against Bāyazīd and Biban. Babur had taken personal interest and participated in the expedition against them after Chanderi war. Since 15th March, 1528 when he had crossed the Ganga river making a bridge of boats till 20th June, 1529, this expedition continued except brief spells and the rainy season. In the expedition against Bāyazīd and Biban Babur himself had marched to several places from Chanderi to Chausa. Thus, where was the time for Baqi or Babur to demolish the temple and construct a mosque? Certainly it could not have been accomplished during those hectic days when an intensive expedition had been undertaken far from Ayodhyā against a mighty Muslim Afghan noble who defied Babur till the emperor’s death. Thus, Babur had no role to play in the Ayodhyā controversy.
(2) Humayun-nama of Gul-Badan Begum
Humayun-nama of Gul-Badan Begum is an authentic account of many events of Babur, Humayun, Sher Shah and Akbar’s times. She was the daughter of Babur and wrote the history of Humayun in a very faithful manner on the request of Akbar. She has mentioned the building activities of Babur in this book which was written in Turkish language. The book was translated into English by A.S. Beveridge. On page 98 of this book she writes:
“He commanded buildings to be put up in Agra on the other side of the river, and a stone palace to be built for himself between the haram and the garden. He also had one built in the audience court, with a reservoir in the middle and four chambers in the four towers. On the river’s bank he had a chaukandî built.
He ordered a tank made in Dholpûr, ten by ten, out of a single mass of rock, and used to say, ‘When it is finished, I will fill it with wine.’ But as he had given up wine before the fight with Rana Sanga. he filled it with lemonade.”
Again on page 102 she writes:
“When we had been in Agra three months, the Emperor went to Dholpûr; her Highness Maham Begam and this lowly person also went. A tank had been made there, ten (gaz) by ten, out of one piece (of rock). From Dholpûr his Majesty went on to Sîkrî. He ordered a great platform made in the middle of the tank, and when it was ready, he used to go and sit on it, or to row about. This platform still exists.
They also made a chaukandî in the Sîkrî garden, and my royal father put up in it a tûr-khana, where he used to sit and write
his book.”
Gul Badan Begum has mentioned Oudh in many contexts. She informs that six months after the death of Babur Biban and Bāyazīd advanced from the direction of Gaur and on hearing this news Humayun at once left Agra and, after defeating them returned to Chunar and thereafter to Agra.
On page 115 Gul-Badan Begum refers to Oudh in the following context:
“When his Majesty returned from the campaign against Bìban and Bãyazìd, he was in Agra for about a year. He said to my lady: ‘I am sad at heart in these days. If you approve, I would go with you to Gualiar’. Her Highness my lady, and my mother (ajam?) and my sisters Ma’suma Sultan Begam, whom we used to call Elder sister Moon, and Gul-rang Begam, whom we used to call Elder sister Rose, we all were in Gualiar in attendance on the beneficent ladies.
As Gul-chihra Begam was in Oude, and her husband, Tukhta-bugha Sultan, went to the mercy of God, her attendants wrote to his Majesty from Oude and said: ‘Tukhta-bugha Sultan is dead. (236) What is the order about the begam?’ His Majesty said to Mir Zaycha: “Go and bring the begam to Agra. We also are going there.”
On page 135 she informs that Baba Beg from Jaunpur, Mīrak Beg from Chunar and Mughal Beg from Oude had joined the Emperor Humayun but all they could not prevent the defeat inflicted upon by Sher Shah.
“Just now Baba Beg (Jalaw) came from Jaunpur and Mirak Beg from Chanada (Chunar), and Mughal Beg from Oude. (330) As these three amirs joined the Emperor, corn became dear.”
Thus, it is clear from the accounts of Gul-Badan Begum that Babur had not built any mosque at Ayodhyā, because had it been done, it would not have escaped her notice, as it was an accomplishment of her dear father, which she could have proclaimed proudly. Moreover, it appears from her account that after Bayazid, the Governor of Oudh, rebelled and ran away from Ayodhyā, Tukhta-bugha Sultan and Mughal Beg were the Governors of Oude during the reign of Babur and Humayun.
(3) Account of Abul Fazl’s Ain-i-Akbari
Just within 75 years of the said construction of the mosque in 1528, Ain-i-Akbari had been completed. Many persons do not know the difference between Akbarnama and Ain-i-Akbari and their subject arrangements. Therefore they get confused. Here the clarification is made. Akbarnama i.e. the Book on Akbar is a detailed official history written by Abul Fazl. It is in three parts. The first part is the history of the dynasty from Timur to the first seventeen years of Akbar’s reign. The second part is the history of Akbar from the eighteenth year of Akbar (1574 A.D.) to the forty-sixth year of the reign (1602) when Abul Fazl was assassinated on August 12, 1602 by the assassins of Bir Singh Dev Bundela at the behest of Prince Salim, later Jahangir. The third part is Ain-i-Akbari i.e. the Institutes of Akbar. Ain means the ‘mode of the government’. It is a very useful book, which contains Hindu philosophy, science, social customs and literature too. This part was written by him around 1590 A.D.
Abul Fazl is one of the greatest official writers India has ever produced. He was one of Akbar’s closest friends and a member of his Nava-ratna. He and his brother Faizi were two liberal persons who had influenced Akbar’s religious policies. He tried his best to bridge the gap between the Hindus and the Muslims. On the goal of his writing, Abul Fazl stated:
“It has long been the ambitious desire of my heart to pass in review to some extent, the general conditions of this vast country, and to record the opinions professed by the majority of the learned among the Hindus. I know not whether the love of my native land has been the attracting influence or exactness of historical research and genuine truthfulness of narrative...” (Ain-i-Akbari, translated by Helen Blochmann, Volume III, p. 7).
From the pen of such a great personality Ayodhyā and Rāma have been mentioned thrice. In Ain-i-Akbari he writes thus on Ayodhyā:
“Awadh is one of the largest cities of India. It is situated in longitude 118°, 6’, and latitude 27°, 22’. In ancient times its populous site covered an extent of 148 kos in length and 36 in breadth, and it is esteemed one of the holiest places of antiquity. Around the environs of the city, they sift the earth and gold is obtained. It was the residence of Rãmachandra who in the Treta age combined in his own person both the spiritual supremacy and the kingly office.
At the distance of one kos from the city, the Gogra, after its junction with the Sai, flows belows the fort. Near the city stand two considerable tombs of six and seven yards in length respectively. The vulgar believe them to be the resting-places of Seth and the prophet Job, and extraordinary tales are related of them. Some say that at Rattanpur is the tomb of Kabir the assertor of the unity of God. The portals of spiritual discernment were partly opened to him and he discarded the effete doctrines of his own time. Numerous verses in the Hindi language are still ext
ant of him containing important theological truths.” (Ain-i-Akbari, Vol. II. pp. 171-172)
While describing Rāmāvatāra Abul Fazl writes as follows:
“He was accordingly born during the Tretã Yuga on the ninth of the light half of the month of Chaitra (March-April) in the city of Ayodhya, of Kausalya, wife of Rãjã Daśaratha. At the first dawn of intelligence, he acquired much learning and withdrawing from all worldly pursuits, set out journeying through wilds and gave a fresh beauty to his life by visiting holy shrines. He became lord of the earth and slew Rãvana. He ruled for eleven thousand years and introduced just laws of administration.” (Rãma-Incarnation, Vol- III, p. 291)
Abul Fazl further gives the following description of Ayodhyā:
“Ayodhyã, commonly called Awadh. The distance of forty kos to the east, and twenty to the north is regarded as sacred ground. On the ninth of the light half of the month of Chaitra a great religious festival is held.” (Sacred Places of Pilgrimage.)
Thus, Abul Fazl mentions Ayodhyā and Rāma at three places, While describing Oude i.e. Ayodhyā he writes that it was the residence (ālaya) of Rāmachandra who combined in his own person both the spiritual supremacy and the kingly office.
It is the supreme salute to the personality of Maryādā Purushottama Rāma. Abul Fazl says it is the residence of Rāma i.e. Rāmālaya. In Sanskrit Devālaya means temple, as it is the residence of gods. Thus, Ramālaya means the temple of Rāma. In fact, this Ramālaya is used in the Badarikā-Māhātmya of the Skanda-purāna in the following verse:
स्वर्गद्वारे नरः स्नात्वा दृष्ट्वा रामालयं शुचिः।
न तस्य कृत्यं पश्यामि कृतकृत्यो भवेद्यतः।।।।
(स्कन्दपुराण : वैष्णव खण्ड : बदरिकाश्रम-माहात्म्य : अध्याय १)
Ayodhya Revisited Page 22