Deceptive dispute: On the Taj Mahal

In 2015, a civil suit sought to declare the Taj Mahal a Hindu temple. This April, after an Agra trial court refused the petitioners’ request to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to survey the monument, the Allahabad High Court — hearing the petitioners’ challenge — has sought responses from the Centre and the ASI before deciding whether the lower court’s refusal should stand. The legal position aside, the matter is both frivolous and vexatious. The idea today that the Taj Mahal was ‘originally’ a Hindu temple is associated with the late 20th century writings of Purushottam Nagesh Oak. Professional historians and archaeologists have repeatedly rejected his claims because they bank on speculative linguistic arguments and unsupported historical assertions. On the other hand, evidence that Shah Jahan built the Taj Mahal is rooted in contemporary chronicles, administrative records, European travellers’ accounts, architectural histories, and archaeology. No archaeological study has produced evidence of a medieval Hindu temple beneath the Taj. Even though the ASI has previously submitted in affidavits that some rooms are locked because they are structurally vulnerable, supporters of the temple idea have alleged that they conceal Hindu idols. A Bharatiya Janata Party leader also unsuccessfully filed a PIL in 2022 and activists tried to offer ‘gangajal’ in 2024. Given the right historical, political, economic, and social conditions, an idea can persist long after its origins from pseudohistory.