![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Indian news channels and headlines meticulously cover ongoing legal suits seeking the ‘restitution’ of the Gyanvapi mosque in Banaras (Varanasi) to Hindus, with the site dubbed ‘Ayodhya 2.0’ by several commentators. The recent construction of the monumental Kashi Vishvanath Corridor next to the contested Gyanvapi mosque and the 2019 Supreme Court verdict in favour of a grand Ram temple in Ayodhya seem to be the main developments prompting an escalation towards Ayodhya 2.0. This article, however, complicates the above reading by showing that the current ‘unmaking’ of Gyanvapi as mosque does not result straightforwardly and solely from these recent judicial and spatial developments. By combining analysis of legal proceedings with a longitudinal ethnography of the site, I unpack the longstanding cross-fertilisation of judicial discourses and rituals of place in representations of the site and point to the progressive co-option of both spheres in the pursuit of Hindu majoritarian claims. The article expands scholarship on the subtle but relentless entrenchment of Hindu majoritarianism by illuminating ways in which petty disputes, situated understandings of place and religious practices not necessarily related to, or aligned with, the majoritarian ideology may be co-opted by and finish up nurturing it.
Acknowledgements
I am deeply grateful to the Vyas family and leaders of the Anjuman Intazamia Masajid for having shared and discussed with me legal proceedings around Gyanvapi. Sections of this article were discussed during the Research Colloquium at the Department of Cultural and Religious History at the South Asia Institute in Heidelberg, in a webinar of the Anthropology of Religion Network at the Centre for Research in Anthropology in Lisbon and during the online ‘Decolonisation Seminar Series’ of the project ‘Heritage as Placemaking: The Politics of Solidarity and Erasure in South Asia’: I sincerely thank the organisers and participants of these events for engaging with my work and providing important insights. Thanks to Knut A. Jacobsen, Hilal Ahmed, Ratna Kapur and the anonymous reviewers for important feedback on earlier versions of this article; and to Geoff Ainsworth, for editorial support and much more throughout this research. Any errors or omissions are my own.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 The Kashi Vishvanath Corridor was inaugurated in December 2021 with a lavish ceremony widely broadcast by media and available on the PM’s official website: https://www.narendramodi.in/hi/text-to-prime-minister-narendra-modi-s-speech-at-inauguration-of-kashi-vishwanath-dham-in-varanasi-uttar-pradesh-558897 (accessed 14 Jan. 2022).
2 The Times of India, 18 Dec. 2021 [https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/pm-tod-phod-no-way-to-meet-modern-needs/articleshow/88349183.cms, accessed 20 Jan 2022].
3 The majority of demolitions took place between 2017 and 2019 and included residential buildings, shops in a lively bazar, the historic Carmichael Library, religious structures and shelters for ascetics and elders, as well as many wayside shrines. For more on the Corridor see Lazzaretti (Citation2021a, Citation2021d).
4 India’s most populous state, in which Banaras is located, has emerged in the last decade as the main laboratory for the normalisation of violence against Muslims and other minorities under the rule of Hindutva champion Yogi Adityanath (Pai and Kumar Citation2018; Bouillier Citation2020; Jaffrelot Citation2021).
5 As far as I know, the first to use the expression Ayodhya 2.0 was Abhishek Srivastava in "Is BJP planning an Ayodhya 2.0 in Varanasi?", National Herald, 24 Mar. 2018 [https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/news/is-the-bjp-planning-an-ayodha-2-in-varanasi-gyanvapi-masjid-stands-in-way-of-connecting-kashi-vishwanath-with-ganga-ghats, accessed 11 Jan. 2022].
6 The judgement was pronounced on 9 November 2019 by Justice Ranjan Gogol, Sa Bobde, Ashok Bhushan, Dy Chandrachud, Sa Nazeer and is known as M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs v. Mahant Suresh Das & Ors.
7 For an example of recent 'liberation' campaigns see Hindustan, 21 Feb 2020 [https://www.livehindustan.com/uttar-pradesh/varanasi/story-declaration-of-kashi-vishwanath-gyan-vapi-liberation-movement-in-varanasi-from-assi-ghat-3040736.html, accessed 8 Feb 2022].
8 See, for instance, Scroll.in, 26 May 2022 [https://scroll.in/article/1024769/behind-gyanvapis-women-petitioners-a-network-of-men-who-have-long-fought-for-hindutva-causes, accessed 30 May 2022].
9 For a recapitulation of the events see The Wire, 24 May 2022 [https://thewire.in/law/gyanvapi-case-varanasi-district-court-to-hear-mosque-committees-plea-on-may-26, accessed 11 Jan. 2022]; a report of the recent decision is found in The Hindu, 12 September 2022 [https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/gyanvapi-case-varanasi-court-mosque-plea-maintainability-hearing-continue/article65882098.ece, accessed 22 September 2022].
10 See, for instance, Boom, 26 May 2022 [https://www.boomlive.in/decode/impact/gyanvapi-mosque-alt-right-trads-edgelords-troll-meme-violence-extreme-18016?fbclid=IwAR0YHM5CQOqPvymffAxOLzZZ3VNje5xQ86Po9_UhDTheJ6H8tsFsGW1FtaQ, accessed 30 May 2022].
11 Research with human participants was conducted in accordance with international ethics guidelines.
12 I first met Kedarnath Vyas (whose name I had already encountered in publications and talks by other scholars) in 2012 during my PhD research, when he was already in his eighties. In the following years we had many assiduous encounters during my research stays and we became close. Until his death in January 2020 I was often included in family occasions and consulted during difficult times. I recall some of our encounters and conversations and detail the ritual role and social positioning of the family in Lazzaretti (Citation2019, Citation2021a). Because the Vyas are public figures in Banaras and their names appear in the proceedings discussed below I do not anonymise them or use pseudonyms.
13 A famous Gramscian expression that describes how a society could be subverted without recourse to arms. It has been applied widely to Hindutva, most notably in the work of Aijaz Ahmad. See for example this essay: [https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/3144-india-liberal-democracy-and-the-extreme-right, accessed 6 June 2022].
14 See Srikantan (Citation2017) for an in depth discussion of the shifts in the legal history of the Ayodhya dispute preceding the 2019 verdict and particularly for identifying the convergence of religious rights/worship/access with claims to property.
15 As is well known, Hindutva activists explicitly nominated the site in Banaras as a next target for 'liberation', together with the Keshavdev temple and Shahi Idgah complex in Mathura (also in UP). On the latter, see Tackes in this issue. On the mobilisation of discourses of historical injury and the politics of fear that project the Hindu majority and nation as continuously under attack see the work of Udayakumar (Citation2005) and Anand (Citation2011).
16 The lithograph is part of Prinsep’s famous collection of drawings of Banaras (Prinsep Citation1831).
17 On the early history of Banaras and hypotheses about an early Vishvanath temple see Bakker and Isaacson (Citation2004); and for a different hypothesis see Smith (Citation2007).
18 On the Mughal Vishvanath temple see Motichandra (Citation1962, 168), Asher (Citation1992, 254); and Desai (Citation2017, 31–7, and 31–44). The dismantling of a Vishvanath temple in 1669 by Aurangzeb is one of the few (but still very poorly) documented demolitions perpetrated by him: the record of an order by the emperor to destroy the Vishvanath temple is found in a sentence in the Maasir-i-Alamgiri (Khan Citation1947, 55).
19 For instance, a 1911 guidebook of the city describes the mosque as such: “Higher up in the raised platform, we shall observe a large mosque, presenting in glaring characters, the extent of mis-chief wantonly committed by that most bigoted hater of Hinduism, the despotic Aurangazeb” (Muthiah Citation1911, 105–6).
20 A general search on the main social media of #Gyanvapi #Gyanvapimosque gives a clear idea about how normalised the mainstream narrative is and how visuals are selectively deployed to sustain it.
21 For an in-depth discussion of the 1809 riots and its colonial and scholarly interpretations see Pinch (Citation2012). The author, however, does not discuss the report in Nevill’s gazetteer and the supposed connections with disputes around the temple-mosque compound.
22 Din Mohammad and Others vs. the Secretary of State for India Council through the District Magistrate and Collector Benares, CWP no. 62 of 1936 in the Court of Additional Civil Judge of Benares, and appeal no. 466 of 1937 in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, p. 156–158.
23 Din Mohammad, p. 158.
24 More on the background and initial phases of the implementation of the Corridor and protest against it by residents can be found in Lazzaretti (Citation2021a).
25 As Trigger, Forsey, and Meurk (Citation2012) show, these moments during fieldwork have been treated by much anthropology (à la Geertz, for instance) as exemplary events that foreground crucial discoveries and lead the researcher to a deep understanding of the specific issue, or society, she is dealing with (Cf. Kapferer Citation2010). However, as the discipline of anthropology evolved and became more reflective about its methods and forms of knowledge production (Lumsen Citation2019), debates about surprise and revelatory moments became more nuanced, taking into account, for instance, the discomfort in those moments, and the ways in which their narrations in a post-fieldwork situation act upon them and shape them retroactively as memorable, or exemplary, and producers of knowledge.
26 For instance in Din Mohammad, p. 159, 161–162, 189 and 197.
27 Exhibit Z. No. 113-C in Din Mohammad, p. 209.
28 Exhibit CC. No. 113 in Din Mohammad, p. 211.
29 Ibid.
30 ‘Muslim trouble in Benares’, The Times of India, 20 Dec. 1935.
31 A.I.R. (29) 1942 Allahabad 353.
32 Din Mohammad, p. 143–175.
33 Din Mohammad, p. 174, my emphasis.
34 Ancient Idol of Swambhu [sic.] Lord Vishweshwar & others versus Anjuman Instezamia Masjid & another, Suit No. 610 of 1991, In the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.8/Fast Track, 2019).
35 Ancient Idol, p. 3.
36 Ibid., p. 10.
37 Jitendra Nath Vyas and Another vs Union of India and Others, CWP no. 1365 of 2018, p. 22.
38 The Act was passed in 1991 under then Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao at the peak of the Ramjanmabhoomi movement and, perhaps ironically, just before the destruction of the Babri mosque. The text is available here: https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1991-42.pdf [accessed 31 may 2022].
39 The Wire, 18 May 2022 [https://thewire.in/communalism/places-of-worship-act-does-not-apply-says-vhp-claims-gyanvapi-mosque-has-always-been-temple, accessed 31 May 2022]; and Outlook, 29 Apr. 2022 [https://www.outlookindia.com/national/gyanvapi-mosque-near-kashi-vishwanath-temple-not-a-waqf-property-counsel-for-temple-news-193896, accessed 31 May 2022].
40 Hindu deities are considered juristic persons under the law of Hindu endowments and they can sue and be sued. They are interpreted as perpetual minors who need to be represented by what in colonial proceedings was often referred to as shebait, or “next friend”.
41 The deed of will is found as an appendix in Jitendra Nath Vyas, p. 25–30.
42 A comparison of the 1991 map with the one annexed to the 1936–1937 suit reveals that the more recent depiction aimed to fix an augmented Hindu landscape, with a considerably increased number of deities. In addition, the Islamic graves depicted in the 1936–1937 map at the back of the mosque (and mentioned often in those proceedings) have disappeared.
43 On Banaras’ urban pilgrimages see also Desai (Citation2012, Citation2017) and Gengnagel (Citation2011).
44 On the Kāśīkhaṇḍa and its contemporary uses see Gengnagel (Citation2005) and Lazzaretti (Citation2019).
45 The full text of the annotation: “The Untr-Grihee Jatra or “Sacred Tour of the Temples within the limits of the abode of Vishweshwur” passes seven times round Gyan Bapee well: a line thus … … … .. represents the first & exterior Circuit starting from the well to Manikarnika, thence South &c, and ending at Shunkuta Ghat; the Second thus _._._._. continues up Lahoree tola, Shukur kund gulee; round again to Kalika gulee; the Third passes through Unn Poorna Visweshwur gulee &c to the Well; and the remaining Four circles are performed round the Well itself.” For a detailed description of Prinsep's map see Gutschow (Citation2006, 297).
46 It is not entirely clear whether the walk, or parikramā mentioned in legal proceedings, refers to the entire antargṛhayātrā or, more likely, to the worship of the several spots located in corners and walls around the mosque where lupt deities are believed to dwell, either as part of the final sequences of the antargṛhayātrā, or as an independent practice.
47 Letter, the Officiating Commissioner, Benares Division to the Secretary to Government, dated 20th December 1853, Exhibit S No. 307-C in Din Mohammed, p. 205.
48 Din Mohammed, p. 223–226 and 229-232, Exhibits 4, 41, E, I.
49 Instances of resistance by the Vyas and other residents of the neighbourhood and potential reasons for their failure have been discussed in Lazzaretti (Citation2021a, Citation2021b); the Vyas family moved to a rented house not far from the Corridor.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Vera Lazzaretti
Vera Lazzaretti is Researcher at the Centre for Research in Anthropology (CRIA) in Lisbon, currently working on inter-religious relationships and the politics of heritage and security in urban South Asia. Vera studied Philosophy and Cultural Anthropology in Italy and holds a Ph.D. in Indian and Tibetan Studies from the University of Turin (2013). Before joining CRIA, she worked at the University of Milan, the University of Oslo and the South Asia Institute at Heidelberg University. Vera’s main field site is urban north India, and her research interests include the anthropology of space and place; religion and politics; contested heritage; securitisation and policing; inter-religious violence; religious offence; pilgrimage; Hindu nationalism; and ethnography.