Rites Resume at Vyas Ka Tehkhana

The Varanasi High Court recently permitted the restart of pooja and other procedures at the 'Vyas ka Tehkhana' temple in Kashi, Uttar Pradesh. Vyas ka Tehkhana is one of four basement cellars beneath the Gyanvapi Mosque in Kashi, situated directly in front of the Nandi in the Vishwanath mandir complex. It was alleged in court that the Vyas family had historically performed this pooja in the mosque's basement until 1993, when the mosque was blocked and the pooja was forced to halt.This judgment marks a watershed moment in the legal battle for the complete restoration of the Kashi Vishwanath temple, now adjoined by the Gyanvapi Mosque. Although this issue has been in the forefront since 1991, led by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), and gained momentum among the Hindu community after the Ayodhya verdict was delivered, the legal battle was reignited by the most recent petition by five women, seeking permission to do pooja and perform rites for the deities within the mosque's premises..The Mughal ruler, Aurangzeb, had destroyed the old Vishweshwar temple in the 17th century, and built a mosque over its remains. The Shiva temple was destroyed at least twice before, once in the 12th century by Qutub-ud-din Aibak and again during Razia's reign. While briefly reconstructed during Akbar's rule, it was ultimately destroyed by Aurangzeb. The account of Aurangzeb's destruction of the temple is hardly a revelation. It was a well-known fact, and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report relied on information from the Persian literature Maasir-i-Alamgiri, which was written after Aurangzeb died. It specifically recounts Aurangzeb's command to destroy several temples, including Kashi Vishweshwar. It was only later that Rani Ahilyabai Holkar built the existing Kashi Vishwanath temple in the 18th century.The attempt to reclaim the temple, however, began in 1991, when local priests filed a petition to pray in the mosque, saying that it was built at the site of the Kashi Vishwanath temple. This petition, however, was denied in 1998. In 2019, another petition was submitted requesting an archaeological examination of the site to legitimise the claim, which was challenged by the Waqf Board, which governs over Muslim religious properties..Following the petition filed by five women in 2022, the Varanasi High Court in 2023 directed the ASI to conduct a ‘scientific investigation’ of the disputed location. The ASI report concluded: ‘Based on scientific studies/survey carried out, study of architectural remains, exposed features and artefacts, inscriptions, art and sculptures, it can be said that there existed a Hindu temple prior to the construction of the existing structure’. With a visit to Varanasi and a quick peek at the Gyanvapi Mosque, which is close to the Kashi Vishwanath temple, one can immediately recognise the elements of the mosque that were once a part of the magnificent temple.The ASI investigation also revealed architectural and sculptural remnants at the disputed site. The investigation also showed inscriptions on the temple's undamaged components written in Devanagari, Sanskrit and other Indic languages. These writings contained the names Rudra and Umeshwari, among others, proving the temple's existence. The study also used various sections of the existing temple structure to depict pictures of Hindu gods and goddesses that had been mutilated before being reused to construct the current edifice. In addition, 55 statues of Hindu gods and goddesses were discovered on the mosque grounds.The High Court's recent ruling (later refused on appeal by the Supreme Court) to allow the pooja at the Vyas ka Tehkhana is a watershed moment in the legal dispute. But why?When considering the legal matter of the Gyanvapi dispute, one must first comprehend a key statute that alters the dynamics of reclaiming Hindu temples. Following the Ayodhya controversy in 1991, the then-ruling government enacted the Places of Worship Act of 1991. This regulation prevents the conversion of a place of worship's religious character from its current status as of 15th August 1947. In other words, where there was a mosque, temple or church as of 15th August 1947, the religious nature of the location cannot be changed. It should be noted that, after much debate from the opposition, the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi was granted an exception from this statute. The Gyanvapi, on the other hand, is not an express exception and is therefore protected by this rule. Thus, and as asserted by the Muslims in this case, the Gyanvapi is protected by this law, and so a civil complaint cannot be initiated to recapture the temple. However, the Hindu side stated that the fact that Hindu rites were conducted on the grounds until 1993 qualifies them to submit the current petition.It should be mentioned that there are currently two petitions ongoing in the Supreme Court challenging the legality of this Act. However, there is little doubt that the Hindu community cannot seek atonement until it faces the various challenges posed by the Places of Worship Act.