Lucknow: Days after he found himself at the centre of a controversy for refusing to attend the ‘pran pratishtha’ in Ayodhya, Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati, Shankaracharya of the Jyotish Peeth in Uttarakhand, was stopped Monday by police from performing a parikrama (circumambulation) around the Gyanvapi complex in Varanasi, which the pontiff in his various statements referred to as a “temple”.
The Shri Vidya Mutt in Kashi became the epicentre of frantic activity Monday when police stopped the Shankaracharya and his followers at the eastern gate of the ashram while they were proceeding towards the Gyanvapi complex, barely 5 km away. What followed was a heated exchange between the police and the Shankaracharya and his followers.
While the police informed them that what they intended to do was prohibited on account of the imposition of Section 144 of the CrPC in the district, the Shankaracharya maintained this was not the first time an attempt was being made to circumambulate the complex.
“You were informed yesterday that you don’t have permission to go there. No new tradition can be started,” Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), Bhelupur, is heard telling the Shankaracharya in a video in possession with ThePrint. The Shankaracharya is then heard telling officers that performing a parikrama around the complex is an ongoing tradition.
His aides can then be seen handing over a letter to the police seeking formal permission for them to circumambulate the complex. In the letter, a copy of which is with ThePrint, the pontiff said that his plan was to carry out a parikrama around the “Gyanvapi temple” and that he did not intend to enter the disputed site (Gyanvapi complex).
Urging authorities to cooperate, the letter alleged that the police was obstructing the Shankaracharya from carrying out his duties. It added that it is up to the court to decide the “character” of the disputed site and the police and local administration by preventing people from carrying out a parikrama are “considering its character as that of a masjid”.
While police remained deployed outside the Shri Vidya Mutt in large numbers, no such permission was granted to the pontiff or his followers till late Monday evening.
In a statement to the media, DSP Atul Anjaan Tripathi — currently posted as ACP, Cantt (Varanasi) — said section 144 was in place in the district and the matter pertaining to the Gyanvapi complex is pending before the court.
The pontiff, said Tripathi who was present at the Shri Vidya Mutt earlier, had not sought prior permission from the police or local administration. He added that a “decision will be taken” on the pontiff’s formal request to carry out a parikrama “according to the rules”.
Situated alongside the Kashi Vishwanath temple, the Gyanvapi complex has been the subject of extensive debate with Hindu groups claiming that a temple stood in the complex where a mosque is now located. The matter is pending before a Varanasi court.
Also Read: Legal ambiguity in Places of Worship Act & ASI report to boost Hindu side, ball now in SC’s court
‘No Section 144 for Muslims?’
Sanjay Pandey, who oversees the Shankaracharya’s press interactions, confirmed in a statement that a letter had been sent to the Varanasi police and administration informing them in advance about the plan to circumambulate the “main Vishwanath temple located in Gyanvapi”.
“After getting a letter from the Shankaracharya’s office, some senior police officers reached the Mutt (Shri Vidya Mutt) on 28 January and mentioned about section 144 being in place…At that time too, Shankaracharya Maharaj had offered that in such a case, he would carry out a parikrama with one of his followers. Then too, officers had left the Mutt without clearly saying anything,” the statement added.
It also reiterated the Shankaracharya’s support for the findings of the Archeological Survey of India (ASI). The government body in a scientific survey report made public last week said that “there existed a Hindu temple prior to the construction of the existing structure” at the site where the mosque is now located.
Shankaracharya, the statement asserted, “has said that the ASI report has made it clear that the main Vishwanath (deity) was residing in the Gyanvapi premises; as the highest representative of Sanatan Dharmis and as a Sanatan Dharmi himself, he wants to offer respect to him by taking a parikrama of the Vishwanath temple. We want to take this parikrama outside the restricted area where common people have been moving.”
It added that the local administration stopped the Shankaracharya citing section 144 but did not offer any explanation as to why scores of Muslims were being allowed to offer namaz at the site regularly. “There is no section 144 for them but when we are trying to take a parikrama of our main deity Vishwanath, we are being denied permission,” it read.
Drawing comparisons between the Ram Janmabhoomi title dispute and the Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi case, the statement said that while the matter has been sub judice for the past year-and-a-half, the deity is being denied “pooja and raag-bhog” (rituals and offerings to a Hindu deity). “The situation was the same in Ayodhya. There too, a case was going on but pooja and raag-bhog of Ram Lalla was ensured regularly,” it said.
‘Why are we being stopped’
Later in the day, the Shankaracharya through the media appealed to the local administration not to obstruct his plan. “The ASI report has said it and specialists have investigated, taken photographs and recorded its description and given a report. That report which contains about 1,000 pages has been presented (in the court). The decision will be taken in the court. If the idol found belongs to tenants, it will be decided in court and if it belongs to our tradition, that too will be decided. What is the problem,” he said.
This was a reference to “Hindu idols” which the ASI claims to have found in the Gyanvapi complex, as mentioned in its report. The Muslim side has claimed that these “idols” were dumped by sculptor-tenants staying in the North Gate of the Gyanvapi complex.
“The issue on hand is that we have been circumambulating the Gyanvapi temple as a tradition. To keep with this tradition, we are going and we want to say that this will be my first time as a Shankaracharya but before this too, I have gone there multiple times and taken parikrama…this has been happening for the past 40 years. When there used to be no security, no barricading, children would play cricket in the courtyard behind (the complex); we would recite paath (devotional recitation) there,” he said.
Referring to the Ram Janmabhoomi case, he added that even in that case, “it has clearly been mentioned that even if any idol is removed from the spot where it has been established or it is defiled or damaged, the divinity of the area remains and a devotee gets the fruit of that worship. That is acceptable in view of the court and the shastras.”
“If we want to fulfil our devotion without hindering administration and law and order, then why are we being stopped? We should be apprised of the reason,” he said.
The Shankaracharya made a similar attempt to perform a parikrama around the Gyanvapi complex in June 2022 but was stopped. He also filed a petition in the Varanasi district court seeking permission to offer prayers to the “shivling” which the Hindu side claims to have found in the wuzukhana of the complex during a court-mandated survey in May.
The Muslim side maintains that the structure in question is a fountain.
(Edited by Amrtansh Arora)
Also Read: Gyanvapi site should be handed over to Hindus, shift mosque to another place — VHP after ASI report