The latest salvo dealt by some advocates is a PLEA FOR CARBON DATING OF THE  WUZUKHANA SHIVALINGA. 

THE LIST OF MISCONCEPTIONS THAT IS AT THE ROOT OF THIS MESS:  I have carefully noted the flawed & misleading statements made by the petitioners/advocates, scholars, priests, and politicians in media & in petitions and prayers before the court in order to understand their fundamental misconceptions that are at the root of this mess in Kashi Vishwanath matter.  

THE LIST OF THEIR MAJOR MISCONCEPTIONS IS AS UNDER: 

1) That the Gyanvapi mosque is the first & original ancient site of Visvesvara jyotirlinga temple  [Kashi Vishwanath temple].

2) That Wuzukhana shivalinga is the original Visvesvara jyotirlinga [Kashi Vishwanath jyotirlinga].  

3) That Wuzukhana shivalinga [i.e the original Visvesvara jyotirlinga or Kashi Vishwanath jyotirlinga] is at that very site of wuzukhana since its inception and that a wuzukhana was built around it later on in 1669 AD. 

4) That Wuzukhana shivalinga [i.e the original Visvesvara jyotirlinga or Kashi Vishwanath jyotirlinga] is at that very site of wuzukhana “since time immemorial” since the Visvesvara jyotirlinga is “thousands of years old”! 

5) That demolition under the wuzukhana will yield important archaeological “evidence” for the courts and the expected evidence is: a) a “100 ft” high shivalinga because Hieun-Tsang had “seen the 100 ft high Visvesvara jyotirlinga” when he had visited Kashi in 7th century AD  b) the original ARGHA (seat) of the Visvesvara jyotirlinga, which will be found below the wuzukhana. 

6) That ‘Plan of the ancient temple of Vishveshvur’ drawn by James Prinsep in 1822 AD  (and published in 1832 AD) is the drawing of the original ancient temple of Visvesvara  [Kashi Vishwanath] that existed at the Gyanvapi site. 

7) THAT CARBON DATING OF THE WUZUKHANA SHIVALINGA WILL GIVE A DATING OF  “THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO” AS COURT-ADMISSIBLE LEGAL EVIDENCE AND THEREBY  PROVE POINT NO. 1-4 AS ABOVE AND THEREAFTER ALSO PAVE THE WAY FOR A COURT  ORDER FOR POINT NO. 5 ABOVE. 

THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT THE ABOVE-SAID LIST OF MISCONCEPTIONS IS AS UNDER:

1) Bibi Razia Mosque (NOT Gyanvapi Mosque) is the first original ancient site of Visvesvara  jyotirlinga [Kashi Vishwanath]. 

2) Gyanvapi Mosque Is the original Ancient site Of Avimuktesvara Linga [NOT Visvesvara  jyotirlinga. 

3) The original Visvesvara jyotirlinga [Kashi-Vishwanath] which was worshipped in the  Garbha Griha of Narayana Bhatta’s 1585 AD temple was thrown inside the Gyanvapi well  in 1669 AD to save it from destruction & desecration by Aurangzeb’s army and it still rests  there. 

4) The wuzukhana object is NOT a fountain and is definitely a shivalinga. But, it is not the  original Visvesvara jyotirlinga. The wuzukhana shivalinga is most probably the original  Avimuktesvara linga.

RESOLVING THE MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE ‘PLAN OF THE ANCIENT TEMPLE OF VISHVESHVUR’  DRAWN BY JAMES PRINSEP IN 1822 AD (AND PUBLISHED IN 1832 AD)  

1. On one hand, these advocates/petitioners claim that the Wuzukhana shivalinga  [which they wrongly assume to be the original Visvesvara jyotirlinga] is at that very site of wuzukhana “since time immemorial” and on the other hand, they refer to this ‘Plan of the ancient temple of Vishveshvur’ drawn by James Prinsep in 1822 AD (and published in 1832  AD) WHICH IS ACTUALLY A PLAN OF THE 1585 AD temple built by Narayana Bhatta on the Gyanvapi site! No wonder these advocates/petitioners are confused and talk about  “600 years old” or “since time immemorial” or refer to James Prinsep’s map at different times in their petitions or media briefings without any application of their mind.

2. The advocates/petitioners wrongly assume this drawing of James Prinsep to be the plan of the first original temple of Visvesvara jyotirlinga and think that it was located at the  Gyanvapi site. But, as said above [And discussed in MONOGRAPH NO. 1 IN ‘GYANVAPI / KASHI VISHWANATH MATTER: HIMALAYAN BLUNDERS’ SERIES, RESEARCHGATE] –  Bibi Razia Mosque (NOT Gyanvapi Mosque) is the first original ancient site of Visvesvara  Jyotirlinga [Kashi Vishwanath]. This drawing by James Prinsep is based on his 1822 AD  survey of the site and shows the plan of the temple of Visvesvara that was built by Narayana  Bhatta in 1585 AD with the help of financial assistance from Todarmal.

THE ADVOCATES/PETITIONERS NEED TO CLEARLY UNDERSTAND THAT THE TEMPLE BUILT  BY NARAYANA BHATTA AT THE GYANVAPI SITE IN 1585 AD WAS NOT THE FIRST TEMPLE  OF VISVESVARA AND THIS WAS NOT THE FIRST SITE EITHER. IT WAS THE FOURTH TEMPLE  OF VISVESVARA JYOTIRLINGA THAT WAS BUILT ON THIS THIRD SITE! 

AS PER PURANIC, HISTORICAL & ARCHAEOLOGICAL REFERENCES, IT IS CONFIRMED THAT: 

The first original temple of Visvesvara jyotirlinga i.e. the first original site: It was where the  Bibi Razia Mosque stands today. It existed from the date of the consecration of the Visvesvara jyotirlinga around the 10-11th century AD till its demolition by Aibak in 1194 AD. 

The second temple of Visvesvara on the second site: Kubernath Sukul confirms that post-Qutub-ud-din Aibak’s 1194 AD sacking of Kashi – Visvesvara jyotirlinga was hidden for some time near Kala-bhairava temple. [NOTE: After the situation was conducive –  Visvesvara jyotirlinga was again moved from its temporary abode near Kala bhairava temple and was established in a new temple in the Gyanvapi complex in 1230 AD because the uphill original site of Visvesvara was blocked by a mosque. Later on, the symbolic linga (not original linga) of Visvesvara was also worshipped at Rajmandir as ‘adi-visvesvara’  (as confirmed by Varadaraja’s Grivana Padamanjari (1600-1650 AD) and probably this is how the area eventually got named as ‘Visvesvaraganj’]. 

Third temple of Visvesvara on the third site: Because of the construction of a mosque on the original uphill site of Visvesvara temple [where Bibi Razia Mosque stands today] –  Hindus were compelled to move the Visvesvara jyotirlinga downhill to the Avimuktesvara complex in the vicinity of Gyanvapi well and a new temple was constructed here in 1230 AD  by a Gujarati merchant (Vastupala?). The Visvesvara jyotirlinga now occupied the place of  Avimuktesvara linga and Avimuktesvara linga was pushed probably to the north-western corner of the complex. 

Fourth temple of Visvesvara on the third site: After the initial demolition of the 1230 AD  Gujarati merchant temple by Mahmud Shah Sharqi in 1447 AD (and later the complete demolition of the remnants of the temple by Sikandar Lodi in 1494 AD) – Narayan Bhatta again constructed a new temple of Visvesvara with the help of financial assistance from  Todarmal in 1585 AD. This temple was raised in the Gyanvapi complex on the very site where the previous 1230 AD temple stood. Here the (original) Visvesvara jyotirlinga again occupied the central place in the Garbha-griha (Nirvana Mandapa) as in the previous  1230 AD temple and the (original) Avimuktesvara linga was placed in a smaller shrine  probably in the north-western corner of the complex (where 3 Muslim graves exist today – Ref. Sukul, Eck, etc.). THUS, JAMES PRINSEP’S 1822 AD SURVEY DRAWING SHOWS THIS  1585 AD VISVESVARA TEMPLE WHICH WAS THE FOURTH TEMPLE OF VISVESVARA ON THE THIRD SITE!  

This 1585 AD Narayana Bhatta’s temple was again demolished by Aurangzeb in 1669 AD and a mosque was built over it. The central dome of the present Gyanvapi mosque was constructed over the Garbha-griha of Narayan Bhatta’s 1585 AD temple and therefore the original spot of Avimuktesvara (from 4-5th century AD till 1194 AD) which was later occupied by  Visvesvara (from 1230 AD till 1447 AD & from 1585 AD till 1669 AD) lies exactly below the central dome of the Gyanvapi Mosque. 

3. Some advocates/petitioners/priests are confused about the North-South-West-East orientation of this James Prinsep’s drawing and make mistakes about the location of the mandapas/corner shrines or try to re-draw it just to prove their ‘knowledge’ but, end up making many mistakes! Also, some advocates/petitioners/priests think that the remaining western wall of the mosque is the western wall of the 1585 AD temple and that the walled-up gate therein is the MAIN GATE of the 1585 AD temple! 

Kubernath Sukul confirms that Shringar Gauri was originally worshipped in the western  mandapa (Shringar Mandapa) of Narayan Bhatta’s temple in the Gyanvapi compound.  This mandapa was demolished in 1669 AD and a mosque was constructed over the  demolished temple. Post-1669 AD – devotees used to worship the original site of the Mother  Goddess Shringar Gauri near the walled-up gate of the western wall of the Gyanvapi  mosque.  

Note 1: The western wall of the Gyanvapi mosque is actually a wall of the erstwhile temple  which was left intact to demoralize Hindus and keep reminding the Hindus about their  inferior status before Islamic might. This western wall and the walled-up gate in this wall is  NOT the main gate of the temple as some advocates wrongly proclaim in media but, is  actually the wall of the central Grabha-griha or Nirvana Mandapa of the erstwhile temple  and the blocked gate was the entry gate to the Garbha-griha (central shrine). The main gate  (Singha-dvar) of the temple was to the west of the western mandapa (Shringar mandapa)  and both, the main gate & Shringar Mandapa have been completely demolished.  Shringar Gauri was originally worshipped in this Shringar Mandapa.

Note 2: The original idol of Shringar Gauri is now at the Adi-visvesvara temple adjacent to  Bibi Razia Mosque [Kindly refer to my Monograph No. 2 in the Kashi-Vishwanath Himalayan  Blunder series at Researchgate] 

The correct way to look at the James Prinsep’s above-discussed 1822 AD survey-based drawing of the 1585 AD temple is by keeping the western wall in the west and is as below: 

                                                                                       NORTH 

THE PLEA FOR CARBON DATING OF THE WUZUKHANA SHIVALINGA IS  TOTALLY ABSURD, INAPPLICABLE, WITHOUT ANY APPLICATION OF MIND, AND A HIMALAYAN BLUNDER  

BACKGROUND: Although the entire management of the Kashi-Vishwanath matter is riddled with endless factual flaws & legal blunders – the recent PLEA FOR CARBON DATING OF THE  WUZUKHANA SHIVALINGA deserves to get the ignoble tag of being the second greatest blunder & act of total mindlessness – the first of course, is totally ignoring the first original site of Visvesvara jyotirlinga (where the Bibi Razia mosque stands at present).  

SUMMARY OF THE ENTIRE HISTORICAL DISCUSSION IN THIS MONOGRAPH:  

Contrary to what the advocates/petitioners who have moved this plea for the carbon  dating of the wuzukhana shivalinga believe – it is proved that they are TOTALLY WRONG  and that the true facts are as under: 

A) The wuzukhana shivalinga is NOT the original Visvesvara jyotirlinga. Most probably it is the original Avimuktesvara linga.

B) The wuzukhana shivalinga is NOT in-situ (not at its original place) and it was brought at the site of wuzukhana from its previous site, which most probably, was at the north-western corner of the Gyanvapi complex (where there are 3 Muslim graves today).

C) The Wuzukhana shivalinga [i.e the original Avimuktesvara linga] is NOT at that very site of wuzukhana “since time immemorial” and the wuzukhana is NOT “thousands of years old”! The wuzukhana site & wuzukhana construction is dated 1669 AD.

D) Any “demolition’ under the wuzukhana will NOT yield the evidence these ignorant  advocates/petitioners et al are looking for since:

i) There was NO Visvesvara jyotirlinga in 635 AD when Hieun-Tsang had visited Kashi. 

ii) Although the Avimuktesvara linga was there at that point in time – as discussed above,  Hieun-Tsang’s vague account is NOT credible legal evidence for either Visvesvara or  Avimuktesvara linga or its site or its size. Moreover, even the Avimuktesvara linga was not at the wuzukhana site in 635 AD! 

iii) The original ARGHA (seat) of the Visvesvara jyotirlinga will NOT be found below the wuzukhana. It is already there at the Adi-Visvesvara temple and deserves to be noted in court records as legal evidence in this matter. 

E) The Gyanvapi site is NOT the site of the first original temple of Visvesvara jyotirlinga.  The first original temple of Visvesvara jyotirlinga was located where the Bibi Razia mosque stands today.

THE PLEA FOR CARBON DATING OF THE WUZUKHANA SHIVALINGA IS TOTALLY ABSURD,  INAPPLICABLE, WITHOUT ANY APPLICATION OF MIND, AND A HIMALAYAN BLUNDER FOR  THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 

1. VERY IMPORTANT: It appears that the advocates/petitioners who have moved this plea for the carbon dating of the wuzukhana shivalinga do not have even a faint idea about the science of carbon dating. Rocks & stones cannot be carbon-dated. Carbon dating needs organic carbonaceous material. The wuzukhana shivalinga is made of stone. It is not carbonaceous organic material. Therefore, it cannot be carbon-dated to confirm its date of consecration. 
2. Do the advocates want to do carbon dating of the wuzukhana shivalinga to know the age of the stone itself or do they want to know when that shivalinga was consecrated? Do they even know the difference?  

VERY IMPORTANT: Theoretically, carbon dating can be used to confirm the time period of consecration/establishment of a stone or a shivalinga only if that particular stone gets entrapped in organic carbonaceous strata (soil/vegetable/plant matter) soon after its establishment and this particular stone is discovered in-situ in its strata. In that case,  carbon-dating of the organic carbonaceous material of the strata in which this stone was discovered will yield the time period of consecration/establishment of that stone or shivalinga. But, this is a theoretical textbook situation. It is NOT applicable in the case of the  wuzukhana shivalinga at all! Therefore, the wuzukhana shivalinga cannot be carbon-dated.  

3. VERY IMPORTANT & A DANGEROUS POSSIBILITY: There is a possibility that if the  wuzukhana shivalinga is uprooted – carbon dating can be attempted if some carbonaceous organic material is found at its base. But, this is a very dangerous possibility because,  the accurate carbon-dating of this material will yield the dating of 17th century AD because this wuzukhana & the Avimuktesvara linga therein was established only in 1669 AD after the demolition of the temple. So, if a date of 17th century comes up – the Muslim side will use it to prove their otherwise false statement that the wuzukhana object is not a  shivalinga but, is a fountain and they will claim that the fountain was established by  Aurangzeb at the time of construction of the Gyanvapi mosque in 1669 AD. In this situation, it will be very difficult or impossible for the Hindu side to prove that it is a  shivalinga and most probably the original Avimuktesvara linga which was consecrated in the 4-5th century AD. And in case, the ASI gives a vague or ambiguous report it will also be used by the Muslim side from the lower court up to the supreme court to buttress their argument that the Hindu claim is baseless and without any evidence. And in this scenario  – even if the Hon’ble courts rule in favor of the Hindus – the anti-national elements will use the various flaws & lacunae in the Kashi-Vishwanath matter to spread rumors that grave injustice has been done to Muslims in India and that there is no scientific evidence proving that the wuzukhana object is actually a shivalinga dating back to ancient times. Is this what the advocates, who have moved this plea for the carbon dating of the wuzukhana shivalinga, desire? What is the intention of these advocates?  

PS: A GPR (Ground Penetrating Radar Survey) followed by a meticulous un-biased archaeological excavation [preferably by European archaeologists in order to avoid interference by Indian leftist pseudo-historians] on strategic spots will confirm the history of Avimuktesvara linga & the Gyanvapi site and provide irrefutable legal evidence in this matter. 

COLLECTION OF LEGALLY ADMISSIBLE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE IN KASHI  VISHWANATH MATTER: 

1. The shivalinga in the wuzukhana area is not like a fountain. It is a shivalinga. The shivalinga appears to be deliberately damaged. The upper top part of shivalinga looks like a cement add-on. A DIGITAL X-RAY SCAN (from a portable digital x-ray unit) may confirm the deliberate damage done to shivalinga and what they are trying to camouflage by the cement topping. 
2. Unscientific demolition at the wuzukhana or anywhere at the Gyanvapi site, as suggested by an advocate, may damage vital archaeological evidence. Non-destructive surveys should be done first and thereafter scientific excavation may be done by experts. The opposite side will not be able to object to non-destructive surveys & the survey reports will be immediately available. Deeper & wider areas can be covered through such non-destructive scanning & a lot of legally admissible evidence can be collected. 
3. I strongly recommend a GPR (GROUND PENETRATING RADAR) survey of the entire  “Visweshvara Hill” (atop which sits the Bibi Razia Mosque) and also the entire Gyanvapi mosque complex. This will reveal HUGE Hindu structures below THAT WILL SURPRISE  EVERYONE. This GPR survey can be followed up by a COSMIC RAY MUON survey of specific areas/structures if required and the results will silence the opposite side because the  Hindu structures that will be found will predate Islam itself.

It is important to scan both sites of Bibi Razia Mosque & Gyanvapi Mosque & intervening /  adjoining areas including Adi-Visvesvara temple, the road in between Bibi Razia Mosque &  Gyanvapi mosque, and also the erstwhile site of Carmichael Library because the evidences are interlinked and the entire area is part of the VISVESVARA-KHANDA and covered under the purview of the Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple ACT, 1983 – both in letter and spirit! 

[NOTE: During the Kashi-Vishwanath corridor demolitions – a Lakshmi-Ganesha idol was  found at the site of Carmichael Library (near gate no. 4) on Thursday, 19 Septemeber, 2019.  The Bibi Razia mosque is just opposite the Carmichael Library/Gate No. 4 of the Kashi  Vishwanath corridor. The finding of this Lakshmi-Ganesha idol is significant because it  proves that both the sites of the Bibi Razia mosque & Gyanvapi mosque are interconnected and part of the same ancient area of Visvesvara-khanda. This Lakshmi Ganesh idol may be  the downhill dvara-vinayaka of the uphill original shrine of Visvesvara jyotirlinga (at the present site of Bibi Razia Mosque) or may be another standalone temple]. 

Thereafter, VERY DEEP SCIENTIFIC EXCAVATION OF BOTH SITES by unbiased archaeologists (no leftist ‘distortionists’ please!) may confirm that both the sites of Bibi Razia Mosque & Gyanvapi Mosque have a very ancient Shaivite history. This will be a historic occasion & will uphold the timeless glory of Bharatiya Sanatana dharma sanskriti. 

I STRONGLY RECOMMEND GPR (GROUND PENETRATING RADAR) SURVEY OF THE ENTIRE  AREA INCLUDING ALL SITES NAMED ABOVE AND NOT REMAINING LIMITED TO THE  GYANVAPI SITE – AS THE BEST SINGLE TECHNOLOGICAL SOLUTION TO GATHER LEGALLY  ADMISSIBLE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE BY NON-DESTRUCTIVE MEANS. 

4. Scientific evidence collected by GPR (ground penetrating radar) survey has past precedent in Ram-Janmabhoomi matter & Cosmic Ray Muon Technology has been used in Khufu pyramid (Egypt). Such scientific exploration followed by unbiased excavation by expert  European archaeologists will silence opposition politicians, leftist Indian & biased foreign media lobby and no one will be able to blame the Indian govt. or Indian courts that they are acting with a so-called right-wing fascist Hindu bias. 
5. Re: surfaces deliberately coated with lime wash or white plaster – LASER SURFACE  CLEANING TECHNOLOGY can be used to quickly clear-off the upper layer with minimal or no damage to what is below. I am not aware whether this technology has been used for archaeological purposes to date but, surely this technology can be used to gather crucial archaeological evidence in cases like Kashi & Mathura. [Please don’t use laser cleaning on idols of deities].  
6. The equipment & technicians can be arranged through various technical institutions. 
7. What has been said above can become a model for the collection of scientific evidence in  Hindu temple matters and will be immensely helpful to quickly collect legally admissible scientific evidence in Kashi Vishwanath & Krishna-Janmabhoomi & all such matters throughout India! 
8. NOTE: I have written to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) for scientific non-destructive archaeological surveys & very meticulous archaeological excavation at the ORIGINAL sites of  Visvesvara Jyotirlinga (Bibi Razia mosque) & Avimukteshvara Lingam (Gyanvapi mosque) and only such scientific archaeological exploration can confirm the historical truth in this matter of great national, religious and spiritual importance. I hereby place on record that my letter to the PMO on this matter dated 6.6.22 was forwarded to several divisions of ASI and further appeal dated 2.7.22 is still pending with ASI. More details in another paper to be published by me in the future. I was also interviewed by Himanshu Asthana of Dainik Bhaskar  (Varanasi) and an article was published on 11 June 2022 on the misconceptions & mess in the Kashi Vishwanath matter and that Bibi Razia Mosque is the original ancient site of  Visvesvara Jyotirlinga. This article refers to my said letter to PMO too.

THE FUNDAMENTAL SOLUTIONS TO RESOLVE THE MESS IN THE KASHI  VISHWANATH MATTER: 

1. It is extremely important to immediately revise all court petitions and ensure factual accuracy & legal correctness in this matter. Otherwise, these factual flaws render the flawed court petitions and prayers invalid (void ab initio) & also make a mockery of justice. This matter needs very sharp advocates who can assimilate historical, archaeological &  shastriya inputs and who have the evolved mindset to work with researchers in their back-end team. 
2. Videography is not a survey of the site & ‘demolition’ is not scientific. Non-destructive methods of collection of scientific & legally admissible evidence should be attempted first so that the Muslim side does not get unduly apprehensive. GPR of the entire area covering both the original sites of Visvesvara jyotirlinga (presently Bibi Razia mosque) & Avimuktesvara linga (presently Gyanvapi mosque) & adjoining/intervening areas including the road in between, Adi-visvesvara temple & erstwhile Carmichael Library /  Gate. No. 4 is recommended.  
3. It is of vital importance that learned historians, researchers, and genuine shastra-gyani pundits – particularly those who have researched this particular topic of Kashi Vishwanath, come forward and provide genuine research-proven & evidence-backed information about this matter. Only those who have an in-depth & correct understanding of this particular matter will be of use. While Kubernath Sukul deserves credit for making a great contribution in this matter – even his book has errors. I will publish another paper with a detailed analysis of the flaws & inconsistencies in the works of different scholars including those named above and provide reference citations as evidence. 
4. The said advocates don’t seem to have considered modern non-destructive scientific methods to gather legally admissible archaeological evidence and to top it all – they are oblivious to the basic fact that the Gyanvapi – Kashi Vishwanath matter HAS ALREADY BEEN SETTLED  in the Mughal court during Akbar’s time & also during Shah Alam II’s time and also in  English/British Courts between 1852 AD and 1942 AD and that no further survey or court battle is required for the Gyanvapi matter! Moreover, I was surprised to note that there is a  major lack of understanding about the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991 and it appears that vested interests are deliberately spreading rumors and misconceptions about the said Act of 1991 which is in no way applicable to the Kashi-Vishwanath matter.  I will present well-researched papers on the legal mismanagement & blunders in the Kashi  Vishwanath matter very soon.
5. AND…NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT A PEACEFUL OUT-OF-COURT SETTLEMENT THROUGH DIALOGUE.

JAI HIND!

---

The published article is an edited version of the full monograph published here. Copyright and Legal disclaimer: As cited on page no. 25 of the monograph therein applies.)

---