Ajmer Dargah Dispute: Sacred Shrine or Ancient Shiva Temple?

The Ajmer Dargah, a revered shrine dedicated to the Sufi saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti, has recently become the focal point of a significant legal and communal controversy in India.

A petition filed by Vishnu Gupta, the president of the Hindu Sena, claims that the dargah was built over a Shiva temple, seeking to have it declared as the “Sankat Mochan Mahadev Temple.” This claim has prompted a local court in Ajmer to issue notices to the Dargah Committee, the Ministry of Minority Affairs, and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) for their responses, with the next hearing scheduled for December 20.

The controversy has intensified in the wake of similar disputes across the country, particularly following violent incidents in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, where a court-ordered survey of a mosque led to communal unrest and fatalities. Various political and religious leaders have expressed concerns that such legal actions threaten India’s secular fabric and communal harmony, invoking the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991, which aims to maintain the status quo of religious sites as they existed on August 15, 1947.

The dargah, which has been a symbol of interfaith unity for over 800 years, attracts millions of devotees from diverse backgrounds, and the ongoing legal proceedings have raised fears of escalating tensions between communities.

As the case unfolds, it highlights the broader implications of historical claims on contemporary religious sites in India, reflecting the complex interplay of faith, politics, and identity in the country.

Jargon

Ajmer Dargah: A revered Sufi shrine in Ajmer, Rajasthan, dedicated to Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti, attracting devotees from various faiths.
Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti: A 13th-century Sufi saint from Persia, known for his teachings of love and compassion, whose shrine is a significant pilgrimage site.
Hindu Sena: A right-wing Hindu nationalist organization led by Vishnu Gupta, known for advocating Hindu interests and filing petitions regarding religious sites.
Places of Worship Act, 1991: A law aimed at maintaining the status quo of religious sites in India as they existed on August 15, 1947, to prevent communal disputes.
Sufi: A mystical Islamic belief system emphasizing personal experience of God, often associated with poetry, music, and communal harmony.
Archaeological Survey of India (ASI): The Indian government agency responsible for archaeological research and the preservation of cultural heritage, often involved in surveys of disputed religious sites.
Status Quo: The existing state of affairs regarding the religious character of a site, particularly as it pertains to the Places of Worship Act.

Viewpoints 💭

‘Left’ Viewpoint

Ideological Differences

‘Right’ Viewpoint

The left emphasizes the importance of maintaining the Ajmer Dargah’s status as a symbol of interfaith unity and opposes any attempts to alter its religious character.
They argue that the Places of Worship Act, 1991, should be upheld to prevent communal tensions and maintain the secular fabric of India.
Left-leaning leaders criticize the petitions as politically motivated attempts to polarize society and divert attention from pressing issues like unemployment and economic inequality.
They highlight the historical significance of the dargah as a site of communal harmony and warn against the potential for increased religious tensions.
The left calls for Supreme Court intervention to dismiss such petitions and protect minority communities from targeted attacks.

The left views the Ajmer Dargah as a symbol of India’s secularism and pluralism, emphasizing the need to uphold the Places of Worship Act, 1991, to prevent communal tensions, while the right sees the legal proceedings as a legitimate means to address historical grievances and verify claims of a Hindu temple.
Left-leaning leaders criticize the petitions as politically motivated attempts to polarize society and divert attention from pressing issues, whereas the right argues that the survey is necessary to uncover the truth about the site’s origins and address historical injustices.
The left calls for Supreme Court intervention to dismiss such petitions and protect minority communities, highlighting the dargah’s historical significance as a site of communal harmony, while the right emphasizes the importance of respecting judicial processes and maintaining faith in the judiciary’s ability to resolve such disputes.
Left-leaning parties accuse the BJP and other right-wing groups of engaging in divisive politics and undermining India’s secular fabric, whereas the right criticizes the Congress and other left-leaning parties for engaging in appeasement politics and ignoring historical injustices against Hindu sites.
The left warns against the potential for increased religious tensions and calls for government action to uphold secularism, while the right views the controversy as part of a broader effort to reclaim Hindu heritage and correct perceived historical distortions.

The right supports the court’s decision to entertain the petition, viewing it as an opportunity to address historical grievances and uncover the truth about the site’s origins.
They argue that the survey is necessary to verify claims of a Shiva temple beneath the dargah, citing historical texts and architectural evidence.
Right-wing leaders emphasize the importance of respecting judicial processes and maintaining faith in the judiciary’s ability to resolve such disputes.
They criticize the Congress and other left-leaning parties for engaging in appeasement politics and ignoring historical injustices against Hindu sites.
The right views the controversy as part of a broader effort to reclaim Hindu heritage and correct perceived historical distortions.

Prominent Voices 📣

From the ‘Left’

From the ‘Right’

Syed Saadat Ali (Advocate and State President of the Association for Protection of Civil Rights): Criticized the court’s decision to entertain petitions challenging the status quo of religious sites, arguing it contradicts constitutional principles. ¹ ²
Syed Sarwar Chishti (Secretary of the Anjuman Syed Zadgan): Condemned the petition as an attempt to create communal divisions and emphasized the dargah’s role as a symbol of secularism. ³ ⁴
Muzaffar Bharti (President of the United Muslim Forum Rajasthan): Argued that the petition violates the Places of Worship Act, 1991, and highlighted the tradition of political leaders offering ‘chadar’ at the dargah. ³ ⁴
Asaduddin Owaisi (AIMIM Chief): Expressed concerns over the destabilizing effects of the petition and accused it of being politically motivated. ³ ⁴
Mehbooba Mufti (Former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir): Criticized the court ruling and its potential consequences, referencing the Supreme Court’s decision to maintain the status quo of religious sites. ³ ⁵

Syed Zainul Abidin Ali Khan (Sajjada Nasheen of Ajmer Dargah): Criticized the trend of filing petitions for personal gain and highlighted the tragic outcomes of such actions. ⁶ ⁷
Kapil Sibal (Rajya Sabha MP): Questioned the political motives behind the claims of a temple at Ajmer Dargah. ⁸ ⁹
Chandrashekhar Azad (Bhim Army Chief): Questioned the frequent filing of such petitions, suggesting they distract from real issues. ⁸
Ashok Gehlot (Former Chief Minister of Rajasthan): Criticized the BJP for using religion as a political tool and creating confusion through contradictory actions. ¹⁰ ¹¹
P Sandosh Kumar (CPI Rajya Sabha member): Accused the BJP of attempting to fuel religious sensitivity and undermine the 1991 Places of Worship Act. ¹⁰
Sanjay Singh (AAP MP): Urged Supreme Court intervention to uphold the 1991 Places of Worship Act, warning against setting a precedent that could lead to national unrest. ¹² ¹³
Diwan Zainul Abedin (Ajmer Sharif Dargah Diwan): Refuted the claims of the dargah being a former temple, citing historical and legal grounds for its preservation. ¹⁴
Imran Pratapgarhi (Congress MP): Expressed concern over the petition against the Ajmer Dargah and the Sambhal violence, emphasizing the need for social harmony and unity in India. ¹⁵ ¹⁶
Rafeek Khan (Senior Congress MLA): Condemned the petition as a threat to religious freedom and communal harmony. ¹¹ ¹⁷
Kavita Srivastava (PUCL National President): Emphasized the need to uphold peace and communal harmony in Ajmer and criticized demands for surveys as baseless and potentially harmful to communal harmony. ¹⁸ ¹⁹
Haji Syed Salman Chishty (Head Priest of Ajmer Sharif Dargah): Emphasized the importance of preserving the sanctity of the Dargah and called for action against divisive agendas that threaten India’s harmony. ²⁰
Najeeb Jung (Former Delhi Lieutenant Governor): Emphasizes the importance of preserving India’s syncretic traditions and warns against the ideological assault on the Ajmer dargah. ²¹
Shiv Mukherjee (Former High Commissioner of India to the UK): Highlights the need for the Prime Minister to intervene and halt activities that threaten India’s pluralistic heritage. ²¹
SY Quraishi (Former Chief Election Commissioner): Points out the unprecedented partisan role of state governments in recent communal incidents. ²¹

Show less

Vishnu Gupta (Activist and Hindu Sena Chief): Claims the Ajmer Dargah was originally a Shiva temple and calls for a survey and reinstatement of Hindu worship at the site. ²² ²³
Rajendra Rathore (Former Leader of Opposition and BJP leader): Emphasized the need to wait for the court’s decision on the Ajmer Dargah controversy and described recent BJP government decisions as historic. ²⁴ ²⁵
Madan Dilawar (Rajasthan Education Minister): Suggested that excavations at Ajmer dargah could reveal temple remnants, aligning with historical patterns of temple demolitions. ²⁶ ²⁷
Jawahar Singh Bedham (Minister of State for Home): Criticized Congress for divisive politics and affirmed the state government’s commitment to the court’s decision. ²⁶ ¹¹
Vasudev Devnani (Rajasthan Assembly Speaker): Urged against politicizing the issue and emphasized the importance of respecting the court’s pending decision. ²⁶

Giriraj Singh (Union Minister): Supported the survey, citing historical claims of temple destruction by Muslim invaders and criticized past political leaders for not addressing such issues. ³ ⁴
Madan Rathore (BJP State president): Emphasized decisions should be based on history to maintain societal goodwill and criticized Congress for appeasement politics. ⁴ ¹¹
Arun Govil (BJP MP): Acknowledged the court’s cognizance of the matter and suggested awaiting the court’s decision before further discussion. ²⁸
Sofi Yousuf (BJP leader): Encouraged Muslims to have faith in the judicial system to resolve the Ajmer Dargah issue. ²⁹