Deepthi 2022

tributors of knowledge through the progression
have started identifying their academic works
within the ideology one practices. This attempt
has overlaid ways to two perceiving end points
for a single plot in the history. The task of determining
the communal histories has led to sectarian
conflicts which has actually emerged as a new
trend in the silences. It has shaped as mentioned
above the divisions of secular and communal history.
Each set of scholars contribute in different
ways as voices of factions. Atrocities are the major
context of discussion the latter group whereas
secular history define their history of origin and
communal stereotypes prevalent in the society. 1
There is a visible boundary that each scholarly
work confines itself or sets it up for themselves.
The challenge has been to analyse the works of
each author through the narrative that is representing
a time period of population that in being
talked about. The text referred keep it convincing
for the reader to ‘make believe’ and ‘capitalise’ on
it and it is the secular version of the history that
brings a balance to the whole.
Construction or destruction of temples
The influence of narratives in which instances
are builds upon has a wider impact on the popular
belief seekers. The attempt of capitalising the
issue is nothing mere a worship place destruction
rather a play of intellect. The area of focus remains
on the aspect of popular belief issues which deviates
from rational understanding. Attempt made
in this paper is to address the same, the communal
history being used as a controversy that substantiates
the popular belief seeker. By which it
talks about a majority holding sectarian group that
interprets its foundation to be a God-father for the
communities in the country.
There are proven particulars on established institutions
and intuitively are subjected to interrogation
in the course of time but the damage to the
whole model strikes when there is a contradictory
or a parallel narrative to the existing one. ‘The
Taj Mahal is a Temple Place’ by P. N. Oak, is one
such attempt to bring damage to the consciousness
of the reader. It desembarks with convincing
narrative to assert their ideology through this pattern
of knowledge production. This is no means
to portray Oak as a perpetrator but a mere investigation
to comprehend such beliefs. The publised
work by this scholar has been an inspiration to a
new ecosystem of ideologies. Notably he is known
Zo]vXn 2022
for his Hindutva centric opinions and as an ardent
practitioner of historical revisionism.
Yet, the establishment of the subject with a distinctive
history description is significant. This
work, disproves all the accounts that choruses
the fact that Taj Mahal is a building complex, who’s
source of origin is Shah Jahan for his beloved
Mumtaz. He critiques the attempt made in the
academia in the propagation of content that Oak
claims to be false. The text mentions the name of
Raja Mansingh who was owning the mansion that
was later exchanged with the emperor in regards
to the burial of his queen. The author also
rubbishes the notion of romance that he says is
being developed to compensate the misinformation
that is accumulated. Even refuting to the notion
of Islamic architecture and its far reaching
entrenchment in the Indian history. Admitting to
the face that Taj Mahal is a Hindu architecture,
the domes and mausoleums by the successor state
rulers are also being brought under this argument
of Indian-ised design which apparently is being
misused as a Muslim tomb. References from the
official chronicles. 2 Each source is evident in its
citing that the probable contradiction in the narration
of history is not bluntly circling around the
ownership of the Taj Mahal or the mansion, rather
it is the communal ineterest that rests behind.
Romila Thapar aptly furthers the discussion. The
culmination of Hindu and Muslim hatred is not a
product of colonialism alone, rather it is a natural
reactionary method adopted by any form of community
residing in a society when a foreign entity
comes into the land, close to insecurity complexion.
But it is the perception of historians that
confines the relationship among these communities
to non-associating sects. Romila discussess the
notion of representation in terms with the events
at Somanatha, the account focuses on the historical
question of how or why invasion occurred, she
covers it with a wide span of understand by looking
at it through the circumstances that led to the
events. 3 Oka and Thapar are one the two side of
the same coin, arguing at two ends with respective
ideologies.
Secular versus Communal
The textual disparity among both the champions
of academia is that the content produced by
the communal historians tend to confine themselves
into orthodox sectarianism. Where identity
of the communities has visibly marked bound
Hm¿Ø-tUmIvkv Xntbmtfm-Pn-°¬ skan-\m-cn, tIm´bw 157