Skip to main content

Interfaith cooperation in Punjab village as Sikhs and Hindus support mosque construction

By Bharat Dogra 
A recent heart-warming report on Sikh and Hindu families helping to build a mosque in a village of Punjab deserves wide attention. It is such examples that truly strengthen national unity. There are many instances of mutual respect and cooperation among people of different religions and faiths that need to be better known today.
The report under discussion was published in The Times of India (26 December 2025) and written by Shariq Majeed. It focuses on Jakhwali, a village in Fatehgarh Sahib district of Punjab with a mixed population, where people of different religions have long lived in harmony and with a spirit of mutual help and cooperation. Members of various communities freely participate in each other’s religious events and extend support when needed.
However, the Muslim community in the village does not have a mosque and has so far travelled to a nearby village for namaz. In this context, an elderly Sikh woman, Bibi Rajinder Kaur, donated land for the construction of a mosque. Several Sikh and Hindu families are also contributing financially and providing other assistance to support their Muslim neighbours in building the mosque. Construction work has already begun.
The former sarpanch of the village, Ajaib Singh, who belongs to the BJP, told the TOI reporter that when a temple was built, Muslims and Sikhs helped, and when a gurdwara was built, Hindus and Muslims extended support. He said, “This is how we live. We will contribute till the last brick is laid and the mosque is complete.”
When asked about her land donation, Bibi Rajinder Kaur remarked, “We feel very happy that they (our Muslim friends) will be happy.” It is a simple yet profoundly moving statement.
Such examples of inter-faith harmony, mutual help, and cooperation exist in many places and deserve greater recognition. While recent years have seen more discussion of divisive episodes in history, the broader historical picture reflects numerous instances of temples being maintained or even built with the support of Muslim rulers. Conversely, several Hindu rulers helped in the maintenance of mosques. These practices were widely accepted and supported by people of different communities, who entered into countless relationships of cooperation in everyday life. The unity of Hindus and Muslims was also evident during the great uprising of 1857, when they joined hands in many regions to resist colonial rule.
As an illustration of such harmony, one may consider the policies of Mughal rulers towards the temples of the Vrindavan–Mathura region. This major Hindu pilgrimage area was close to Delhi and Agra, the two principal centres of Mughal power, making their relationship with these temples particularly significant. Numerous contemporary documents reveal the policies of Akbar, Jahangir, and Shahjahan towards the temples of Mathura and Vrindavan, as well as their priests and devotees. These documents, preserved at the Vrindavan Research Institute and in several temples, were studied by Tarapada Mukerjee and Irfan Habib in papers presented at the 48th and 49th sessions of the Indian History Congress.
According to Mukerjee and Habib, Akbar enlarged and consolidated all grants to temples and temple-servants in the Mathura region through his farmans dated 27 August 1598 and 11 September 1598, covering Vrindavan, Mathura, and their environs. Jahangir not only continued these grants but significantly expanded them. He added at least two temples to the list of thirty-five supported under Akbar’s 1598 grant and provided 121 bighas of land to five families of temple sevaks. Jahangir also visited the Vrindavan temples in 1620.
The documents further show that when temple priests faced serious problems, they approached Mughal rulers or senior officials, who generally intervened to resolve them. Complaints included the stoppage of water supply to Radha Kund, the imposition of taxes on temple cattle, the cutting of trees around temples, and the forced labour imposed on temple gardeners. In all these cases, prompt action was taken to address the grievances. The fact that priests even raised relatively minor issues with Mughal authorities suggests that they expected fair and favourable outcomes.
There is also documentary evidence that Mughal rulers or their officials were asked to intervene in disputes between priests or other religious functionaries connected with temples. One such document mentions a dispute between Damodardas Radhaballabh and Kishan Chaitan that was resolved through official intervention.
Similarly, the Nawabs of Oudh granted land and other forms of support to the temples of Ayodhya and provided them protection. The diwan of Nawab Safdarjung built several temples in Ayodhya and arranged for repairs to others. Nawab Safdarjung himself granted land for temple construction, and the diwan of Asaf-ud-Daulah offered further assistance.
It should also be noted that several Hindu kings, including those who were independent of Mughal authority, reciprocated these gestures. For instance, the renowned ruler Shivaji built a mosque at a prominent location.
Remembering and acknowledging these long-standing traditions of unity and harmony is essential. The greatest teachers and saints of India have consistently shown the path of inter-faith understanding and cooperation, a legacy that remains vital for the present and the future.
---
The writer is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril, When the Two Streams Met, and A Day in 2071

Comments

TRENDING

The Nazia Elahi Khan controversy and the normalisation of hate

By Mohd. Ziyaullah Khan   The registration of two FIRs in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region against BJP Minority Morcha leader and social media influencer Nazia Elahi Khan for allegedly making derogatory remarks about Prophet Muhammad is not merely another isolated controversy. It is a disturbing reminder of how hate speech and communal provocation have become increasingly normalised in contemporary India.

Congress leader Gohil "misinformed" about the OBC caste status of Modi, contend senior Gujarat academics

Shaktisinh Gohil By A Representative Did senior Gujarat Congress leader Shaktisinh Gohil display his poor understanding of the caste system in Gujarat when he declared that Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi does not belong to the other backward class (OBC) but to an upper caste? At least two top senior experts, known for their proficiency in sociology and history of Gujarat, have wondered “how could Gohil go so wrong” on Modi’s caste status. Gohil, who all-India Congress spokesperson, has created a ripple by “disclosing” that Modi included his caste, modh ghanchi, into the OBC list three months after he came to power through a government resolution dated January 1, 2002.

Incarceration of Prof Saibaba 'revives' the question: What is crime, who is criminal?

By Kunal Pant* In 2016, a Supreme Court Judge asked the state of Maharashtra, “Do you want to extract a pound of flesh?” The statement was directed against the state for contesting the bail plea of Delhi University Professor GN Saibaba. Saibaba was arrested in 2014, a justification for which was to prevent him from committing what the police called “anti-national activities.”