(1) Dara Shukoh’s introduction to Tarjuma-i-Joga-Vaśishta
Aurangzeb had a very special reason to demolish all temples related to Rāma. His bete noire Dara Shukoh had written in 1656 A.D. an interesting introduction to the Persian translation of the famous Sanskrit work ‘Yoga-Vaśishtha’ Rāmāyana under the title ‘Tarjuma-i-Joga-Vashishta’. In this introduction Dara mentions that he had a dream wherein Rāma had embraced him warmly and affectionately, and given some sweets which he ate from Rāma’s hand. To a religious bigot like Aurangzeb it must have looked a confirmed case of apostasy, as Rāma appeared assisting Dara in his endeavour to occupy the throne by blessing him and feeding him sweets – a sign of celebration in victory.
The following excerpt is quoted from Dara Shukoh’s introduction to the Persian translation of the ‘Yoga-Vāśishtha’ called ‘Tarjuma-i-Joga-Vashishta’:
“When I had gone through the Persian translation of this book (the Joga-Vashishta), which is attributed to Shaikh Sufi, I saw in a dream two dignified figures of calm appearance, one of them standing on a higher level than the other. I was drawn involuntarily to their presence… and Vashishta with great affection and graciousness placed his hand on my back, and said: ‘Rama, here is an earnest seeker of knowledge, and a comrade (lit. brother) of yours in true search of the Reality; embrace him’. Ramchandra held me in his embrace with great warmth and love. Then Vashishta gave to Ramchandra some sweets which I ate out of his hand. After having seen this in dream my desire to have this book translated became greater than ever; and one man from among my servants was appointed to translate this work. This translation was completed under the supervision of the Pandits of Hindustan.” (pp. 116-17, Dr. K.R. Qanungo’s book ‘Dara Shukoh’.)
Therefore, after the brutal murder of Dara Shukoh in 1659 A.D. and ultimate success in the succession war, Aurangzeb might have diverted his attention to Ayodhyā, the birthplace and capital of the ideal king Lord Rāma. Fedai Khan, who was Aurangzeb’s foster brother and favourite on account of Fedai’s unflinching support to him in the war against Dara and his worthy son Sulaiman Shukoh, was made Governor of Ayodhyā in August 1658 and it was Fedai Khan who demolished all the three temples at Ayodhyā, viz. Svargadvārī, Tretā Kā Thākura and Rāma-janma-bhūmi temples and built mosques at all the three places. Svargadvari temple’s demolition by Aurangzeb has been mentioned by Joseph Tieffenthaler, C. Mentelle, Mirza Jan and many subsequent Muslim authors. The demolition of Rāma-janma-bhūmi temple by Aurangzeb has been mentioned by Tieffenthaler (1670 A.D.), Mentelle (1800 A.D.) and J.R. M’culloch (1842 A.D.). The perception that Aurangzeb demolished Rāma-janma-bhūmi temple was prevalent during the visit of Buchanan also.
(2) ‘Storia do Mogor’ of Niccolo Manucci
A contemporary independent literary source, which indicates the demolition of Ayodhyā shrines, is the account of Niccolo Manucci. Manucci was an Italian, who came to India in the year 1656 A.D. He fought in the succession war at Samugarh in favour of Dara Sukoh. After the defeat of Dara he was in the service at Jaswant Singh’s court for many years. Thereafter he joined the court of the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb. After a few years he took to the profession of a Vaidya. He had very intimate knowledge of Mughal court happenings. He died in India in 1710. He wrote his diary meticulously and it was first published under the name of ‘Storia-do-Mogor’ (The Story of the Mughals) in the year 1837, by the Government of Ceylon.
The following two excerpts from his book are very valuable in the Ayodhyā context:
(1) “In this realm of India, although King Aurangzeb destroyed numerous temples, there does not thereby fail to be many left at different places, both in his empire and in the territories subject to the tributary Princes. All of them are thronged with worshippers; even those that are destroyed are still venerated by the Hindus and visited for the offering of alms. (Vol. 3, p. 244, London, John Murray, published for the Government of India, 1907)
(2) “The chief temples destroyed by King Aurangzeb within his kingdom were the following:
Maisa (? Mayapur),
Matura (Mathura),
Caxis (Kashi),
Hajudia (Ajudhya),
and an infinite number of others ; but, not to tire the reader, I do not append their names.” (ibid, p. 245)
From the account of Manucci it is clear that Aurgangzeb had demolished temples at Ayodhyā. In fact, Manucci is the contemporary historian who confirms that temples of Ayodhyā were demolished by Aurangzeb. Since Manucci had very intimate knowledge of the developments in the empire, his account confirms that temples at Ayodhyā were demolished by Aurengzeb’s order. Manucci has named only four places where chief temples were demolished and Ayodhyā is one of them. Therefore, it is a certainty.
In Manucci’s account another very significant point is that despite the demolition of temples, the Hindus were thronging the demolished sites which they were worshipping reverentially and where they were giving alms in charity. Thus, the Hindu tradition that even after the demolition of temples the sites retain their sanctities and therefore they are always objects of worship is confirmed by the testimony of an independent witness.
(3) Jesuit Father Joseph Tieffenthaler
The strongest evidence in support of the fact that the mosque was built by Aurangzeb after demolishing a temple at the birthplace of Lord Rāma comes from a book of geography written by an impartial observer, a Jesuit Father, Joseph Tieffenthaler, who visited Ayodhyā in circa 1770 A.D. The following detailed account of Joseph Tieffenthaler quoted in the book ‘The Modern Traveller’ published in 1828 from London is the clinching evidence in favour of this fact:
“The modern town extends a considerable way along the banks of the Goggrah, adjoining the new city of Fyzabad, which, during the government of Sujah-ud-Dowlah, was the seat of the Court. “Its appearance, in 1770, is thus described by Tieffenthaler: “Avad, called Adjudea by the learned Hindoos, is a city of the highest antiquity. Its houses are, for the most part, only of mud, covered with straw or with tiles; many, however, are of brick. The principal street, running from S. to N., is about a league (mille) in length; and the breadth of the city is somewhat less. Its western part, as well as the northern, is situated on a hill; the north-eastern quarter rests upon eminences; but, towards Bangla, it is level. This town has now but a scanty population, since the foundation of Bangla or Fesabad; a new town where the Governor has established his residence, and to which a great number of the inhabitants of Oude have removed.’ On the southern bank of the Deva (or Goggrah), are found various buildings erected by the Gentoos in memory of Ram, extending from east to west. The most remarkable place is that which is called Sorgodoari, that is to say, the heavenly temple; because they say, that Ram carried away from thence to heaven all the inhabitants of the city. The deserted town was repeopled and restored to its former condition by Bikramajit, the famous king of Oojein. There was a temple here on the high bank of the river but Aurungzebe, ever attentive to the propagation of the faith of Mohammed, and holding the heathen in abhorrence, caused it to be demolished, and replaced it with a mosque with minarets, in order to abolish the very memory of the Hindoo superstition. Another mosque has been built by the Moors, to the east of this. Near the Sorgodoari is an edifice erected by Nabalroy, a former Hindoo governor.
But a place more particularly famous is that which is called Sitha Rassoee, the table of Sitha (Seeta), wife of Ram ; situated on an eminence to the south of the city. The emperor Aurungzebe demolished the fortress called Ramcote, and erected on the site, a Mohammedan temple with a triple dome. According to others, it was erected by Baber. There are to be seen fourteen columns of black stone, five spans in height, which occupied the site of the fortress. Twelve of these columns now support the interior arcades of the mosque: the two others form part of the tomb of a certain Moor. They tell us, that these columns, or rather these remains of skilfully wrought columns, were brought from the Isle of Lanca or Selendip (Ceylon) by Hanuman king of the monkeys.
On the left is seen a square chest, raised five inches from the ground, covered with lime, about five ells in length by not more than four in breadth. The Hindoos call it Bedi, the cradle; and the reason is, that there formerly stood here the house in which Beshan (Vishnoo) was born in the form of Ram, and where also, they say, his three brothers were born. Afterwards, Aurungzebe, or, according to others, Baber, caused the place to be destroyed, in order to deprive the heathen of the opportunity of practising there their superstitions. Nevertheless, they still pay a superstitious reverence to both these places; namely, to that on which the natal dwelling of Ram stood, by going three times round it, prostrate on the earth. The two places are surrounded with a low wall adorned with battlements. Not far from this is a place where they dig up grains of black rice changed into little stones, which are affirmed to have been hidden underground ever since the time of Ram. On the 24th of the month Tshet (Choitru), a large concourse of people celebrate here the birth-day of Ram, so famous throughout India. This vast city is only a mile distant from Bangla (Fyzabad) towards the E.N.E. On the high bank of the river is a quadrangular fortress with low round towers. The walls are out of repair, and it is unfurnished with inhabitants. Formerly, the governors of the province resided here. Saadut Khan, frightened by an evil augury, transferred the government to Bangla. It is now completely destroyed.
From the place where the guns are planted to Oude, a distance of two miles, the Goggrah flows in an easterly direction, making a double elbow; one near the western part of the city, the other at a short distance westward: turning then towards the N.E. by E., it washes the city of Oude; after which it returns to an easterly course, near the northern part. But it changes its course almost every year. Its channel is equal in breadth to that of the Danube, near the citadel of Ingolstadt in Bavaria, but the volume of its waters is not so great. During the rainy season, it extends to a great width, so that, in some places, it is above a league and a half across.
“Bangla or Fesabad was founded by Saadut Khan, after he had abandoned the city of Oude. A Persian by origin, he was for more than forty years governor of this province. He built a palace, planted an excellent garden in the Persian taste, and fixed his residence here. By degrees, this place became a large town. The present governor, his grandson, (Sujah-ud-Dowlah,) adorned it with numerous buildings, after the English had restored it to him in 1765, with the whole province. He also enlarged the market place, which was before confined, and strengthened the fortress with a fosse, round towers, and a rampart.”
Between three and four miles from Fyzabad, on the southern bank of the Goggrah, there was a remarkable place planted with bushy trees, of which Tieffenthaler gives the following account:
“It is seated upon a hill somewhat steep, and fortified with little towers of earth at the four corners (of the enclosure). In the middle is seen a subterranean hole, covered with a dome of moderate dimensions. Close by is a lofty and very old tamarind-tree. A piazza runs round it. It is said that Ram, after having vanquished the giant Ravan, and returned from Lanka, descended into this pit, and there disappeared: hence, they have given to this place the name of Gouptar (or Gouptargath), You have here, then, a descent into hell, as you had at Oude an ascension to heaven.” As the scene of many of the leading events in the great epic poem of the Ramaynna, Oude might be expected to abound with spots of traditional sanctity.
In view of the detailed analysis on Tieffenthaler’s account in Chapter XI only relevant points for this chapter are being discussed below:
(i) Aurangzeb demolished the fortress of Ram Kot which covered vast area.
(ii) Aurangzeb constructed a masjid with three domes at the same place, although some believed that it was done by ‘Baber’.
(iii) Fourteen black stone pillars were in the building; twelve supported the interior arcade and two others formed part of the tomb of a certain Moor (Muslim).
(iv) These pillars were reportedly brought by Hanuman from Lanakā.
(v) There was a cradle (Bedi) which was a square box 5 inches above the ground measuring 5 ell in length i.e. 5×45 inches 225 inches which comes to 18 ft. 9 inches and 4 ells, i.e. 15ft. in width. Some translations erroneously mention 5”×5”×4.”
(vi) At this Bedi Lord Vishnu was born as Rāma, along with his three brothers.
(vii) Devotees go around (make pradakshinā) the birthplace of Rāma three times and prostrate on the floor.
(viii) On the Rāma Navamī festival there is a big mela to celebrate the birth day of Rāma, which is famous in the whole of India.Tieffenthaler was an eyewitness to the then prevailing situation at the disputed site at Ayodhyā. He was an impartial witness. He has written that Aurangzeb demolished Ram Kot within which was situated the Rāma-Janma-bhūmi, and built a mosque on the same site. This account of Tieffenthaler is a clinching evidence that the mosque was built by Aurangzeb after demolishing Ram-Kot. It is a historical fact which he was aware of. However, some people were under the impression that it was the work of Babur and he honestly mentioned it. How Babur’s name was associated with this mosque has been separately discussed in Chapter IX.
The first mention of the demolition of Ram Kot castle and construction of a mosque thereon is made by Joseph Tieffenthaler who visited Oudh during 1766-71 and significantly he mentions that it was Aurangzeb who constructed the disputed mosque.
(4) Accounts of the French scholar C. Mentelle published in 1801 A.D.
The fact that during the reign of Aurangzeb many temples of Ayodhyā including the Svargadvar temple were demolished by the order of Aurangzeb is confirmed by an unexpected corner i.e. the writing of a French scholar published in 1801 A.D.
The following French text has been taken from “Courses of Cosmography (Cosmology), on Geography, on Chronology and on Ancient and Modern History” divided in 125 lessons. It was prepared by C. Mentelle, Member of the National Institute, and delivered by him at the Central School of Four Nations. Volume III contains Geography and History of Asia, Africa and America. It was published by Chez Bernard, Bookshop of the Engineering School, 31 quai des Augustins, Paris, in1801.
“9°. Province d’Aoud, ou Avad.
Cette province, située au N. de la précédente, est de forme très-irrégulière. Elle a environ 64 lieues de PO. à l’E.; et 56, du N. au S. Les rivières principales sont le Gange et le Gagra , qui coule dans le même sens que le Gange, et y porte ses eaux.L’air y est généralement très - bon; les chaleurs et les froids y sont à-peu-près de la même durée. Les blés, toutes sortes de grains, le riz, le gibier, en sont très-estimés. Les montagnes qui la bornent au N., sont couvertes de forêts ou se trouvent beaucoup de tigres d’une grosseur extraordinaire, des bufles sauvages, des rhinocéros, des éléphans, etc.
AVAD , appelée aussi chez nous Aoude et Oude, et que les Indiens lettrés nomment Adjudea, sur le Gagra, es* une ville de la plus haute antiquité; aussi est-ce dans cette ville que l’on place les dix incarnations de Vischnou , dans la personne de Ramgi , dont le père étoit souverain d’Avad. Les Indiens y viennent de très-loin en grand pélerinage. Il n’y a que quelques maisons en brique ; les autres ne sont que de limon couvert de paille.
Encore Avad est-elle bien tombée depuis la fondation de Faisabad, tout près au N.O., ou se tient le gouvernement de la province.
Il y avoit autrefois à Aoud un édifice appelé le Temple Céleste , d’ou l’on disoit que Ram ou Ramgi avoit enlevé au ciel tous les habitans de la ville. Cet édifice et plusieurs autres ont été détruits par ordre d’Aureng-Zeb, comme servant à maintenir un culte superstitieux.”
The English translation of the relevant portion of this text made available to us by Satyan Jha of Sorbonne University, Paris IV, Paris is produced here:
“Province Aoud, or Avad
This province, located to the north the previous shape is very irregular. It has about 64 miles S.W. to E., and 56 N. S. The main rivers are the Ganges and the Gagra, which flows in the same direction as the Ganges and its
water. The air is usually very good, the heat and cold are at nearly of the same duration. The wheat, all kinds of grains, rice, gram, are much esteemed. The mountains that bound it to the north, are covered with forests where many tigers of extraordinary size, wild buffaloes, rhinos, elephants, etc.
Avad, also known as Aoude and Oude in our country (France), and the learned Indians name it Adjudea (अयोध्या)is one of the most ancient cities, situated on the bank of the river Ghaghra (घाघरा) and we consider that the ten incarnations of Lord Vishnu happened in this city, in the form of Ramji, whose father was the King of Avadh. The Indians come here from far off places on a big pilgrimage.
In those days at Ayodhya there was an edifice called the Celestial Temple, from where it is said that Ram or Ramji had taken to the heaven all the inhabitants of the city. This temple and several others were destroyed by the order of Aurangzeb as he considered that these used to serve the purposes of a superstitious religion (cult).
Mentelle refers to the Svargdvāra temple at Ayodhyā and adds that this temple and several others were destroyed by the order of Aurangzeb as he considered that these used to serve the purposes of a superstitious religion (cult).”
Here it is important to note that Svargadvar and Treta Ka Thakur temples were built during the regime of the Gadhawal Kings in the 11th and 12th centuries. An inscription of King Jayachandra of this dynasty relating to the Treta Ka Thakur temple was found and mentioned by Anton Fuhrer in his report. It is accepted by almost all scholars including Hans Bakker that these two temples were demolished by Aurangzeb’s order. Now the riddle remains why would the Muslim marauders who demolished Janma-sthāna temple at Ayodhyā in 1528 A.D. leave these two temples unmolested, when they were standing just at a very short distance from it? The simple answer is that all the three temples were demolished by the same set of iconoclasts and they were none other than the marauders of Aurangzeb.
Ayodhya Revisited Page 35