Perched on the northern shore of Dal Lake in Srinagar, with the Zabarwan Hills as a backdrop, the Hazratbal Shrine is Kashmir’s holiest Muslim site. Its fame comes from housing the Moi-e-Muqqadas, a strand of hair belong to Prophet Muhammad ï·º.
Hazratbal is more than a mosque: it is a living repository of Kashmiri Muslim identity, a symbol of communal unity, and a site where religion, culture, and politics intersect. The shrine’s history spans over 400 years, weaving together Mughal patronage, colonial-era narratives, local devotion, crises, and architectural evolution.
Site origins — Ishrat Mahal to a place of prayer
What it was: In the early 1600s the Dal-lake shore site that now holds Hazratbal was a Mughal pleasure pavilion called Ishrat Mahal, built around 1623 under Sadiq Khan, a Subedar in Shah Jahan’s administration. It was a landscaped, leisure space rather than a religious building.
When Emperor Shah Jahan visited Kashmir 1634 the pavilion was converted into a prayer hall. That conversion is the first step in the long transformation from a Mughal garden pavilion into a public sacred site. Over the 17th century the place gradually acquired religious functions and local reverence, setting the stage for the arrival of the relic.
The relic’s arrival — who, when and how
The Moi-e-Muqqadas is venerated as a strand of hair from the beard of the Prophet Muhammad ï·º. For believers, it is a direct physical link to the Prophet and therefore a uniquely precious object.
Historical accounts place the relic’s arrival in the subcontinent in the mid-17th century (c. 1635). It was brought by Syed Abdullah Madani, a reputed descendant of the Prophet who left Medina and came to India. From him it passed to his son and then into Kashmiri hands.
Passage into Mughal and Kashmiri care: Records and local narratives say the relic passed to Khwaja Nur-ud-Din Eshai, a Kashmiri trader/noble. According to traditional accounts, at one point the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb seized the relic and sent it to Ajmer; later, after a reported dream and subsequent decision, Aurangzeb returned the relic to Kashmir (around 1700). Whether told as history or hagiography, this episode explains why the relic settled permanently in the Valley.
Establishing custodianship — Inayat Begum and the Nishandeh family
Founding custodian: Inayat Begum, daughter of Khwaja Nur-ud-Din Eshai, is traditionally credited with establishing the shrine and becoming the first formal custodian of the relic at Hazratbal. Her descendants — locally known as the Nishandeh or Banday family — have retained custodianship across generations.
Custodianship is more than an administrative role; it is a sacred responsibility, encompassing safekeeping, determining display times, arranging ceremonial presentations, and fulfilling a spiritual trust recognized by the community.
The Nishandeh family’s standing gives them both religious prestige and practical authority over how the relic is handled.
How the relic is kept and displayed — ritual practice
The relic is kept under strict care and is not displayed daily. It is stored in secure custody, with limited access to the custodial family and shrine officials. After the 1963 theft, security and protocols around handling strengthened substantially.
On days when the relic is to be shown, there is a formal, highly ritualized process: the shrine is readied, devotional readings and Qur’anic recitations are arranged, and the relic is brought out briefly for the assembled devotees. The exact practical steps (who removes the covering, how it is placed for view) are determined by the custodial tradition of the Nishandeh family and shrine elders.
When displayed, the relic is revealed for a short period during which crowds pray, recite the Qur’an, and express deep emotion and reverence. Large gatherings form outside the shrine; people may wait hours or days for a scheduled display. These events are highly charged spiritually and socially.
The 1963 theft — sequence, impact and recovery
On 27 December 1963, the Moi-e-Muqqadas was reported missing, sparking immediate shock across Srinagar and surrounding towns. The theft immediately provoked shock and mass gatherings in Srinagar and other towns. Devotional outrage quickly turned into large public demonstrations.
The reaction was intense: processions, public mourning, prayer meetings and demonstrations filled the Valley. The event became a national concern — not a private religious incident — since the relic carried regional and symbolic weight. The protests expressed not only grief but also anxiety about identity and the government’s capacity to protect sacred objects.
The Central Government, then led by PM Jawaharlal Nehru, directed a full investigation and the CBI was brought in. The recovery operation was politically sensitive; the government treated it as a matter of both law and public order.
The relic was reported recovered on 4 January 1964; it was publicly displayed on 6 February 1964 to reassure the population and calm tensions. The public display ceremony was deliberately ceremonial to restore collective confidence. The theft and its resolution left a permanent mark on public memory and transformed the relic into a potent political symbol in addition to its devotional meaning.
The incident had repercussions beyond Kashmir; it sparked communal tensions elsewhere (notably reported disturbances in East Pakistan at the time). Scholars view the 1963 episode as the moment when devotional reverence for the relic fused with regional political expression.
Rebuilding Hazratbal (1968–1979) — architecture, patronage and symbolism
In the decades after the theft and into the late 1960s, there was both a practical need (to repair, modernize and protect the site) and a symbolic desire to give Hazratbal an architectural presence fitting its religious status.
The Jammu & Kashmir Muslim Auqaf Trust (and allied political figures such as Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah) oversaw the reconstruction program. The rebuild was not solely a local exercise but part of a larger post-Independence effort to conserve and dignify major religious landmarks.
Between 1968 and 1979 the shrine was rebuilt in white marble with a prominent dome and a minaret. The new design mixes Mughal forms (dome, symmetry) with Kashmiri sensibilities — a calm, luminous structure that presents a sober, modern face without severing ties to earlier architecture. The white marble and clean lines were intended to reflect the shrine’s purity and sanctity.
The renovation also introduced improved facilities for pilgrims, controlled entrances, and structural reinforcement to protect both visitors and the relic itself. These practical changes followed the realization that Hazratbal now had mass pilgrimage flows and required modern crowd and security management.
Hazratbal’s religious and cultural meaning — expanded explanation
For many Kashmiri Muslims the shrine is the most immediate link to the Prophet ï·º. Seeing the relic, even briefly, is experienced as a direct spiritual blessing. That intensity explains the long lines and the emotional nature of displays.
Over centuries, Hazratbal has accrued local sayings and devotional lore (for example the idea that Kashmir becomes like “a second Medina” through the relic). The shrine is woven into songs, sermons, family stories and public commemorations — it is part of how Kashmiris narrate their religious continuity.
After the 1963 theft and during later events, the relic took on political valence, it became a symbol around which public questions of protection, justice, governance and identity coalesced. Scholars like Idrees Kanth analyze the event to show how a sacred object can become a “political object” when public trust or cultural identity is perceived to be at stake.
Custodial controversies, legalities and institutional oversight
The shrine’s day-to-day functioning involves the custodial family (Nishandeh), shrine clerics, and institutional bodies (Auqaf/Waqf organizations). Over time, interaction between private custodianship and institutional oversight increased, especially after the theft and during major renovation projects.
Because custodianship is both spiritual and administrative, occasional disputes can surface over authority (who decides display dates, who controls donations, how to balance open access with security). Such tensions are common where heritage, religion and modern governance meet. The public scrutiny around Hazratbal reflects this delicate balance.
The state and central authorities have at times been drawn into shrine matters (for security, investigation or restoration funding). That involvement can reassure the public but can also prompt sensitivities about state presence in religious life — a recurring dynamic in Hazratbal’s history.
How Hazratbal functions in everyday Kashmiri life
The shrine has both routinized and peak moments — regular Friday prayers attract local worshippers, while festival days and relic-display days bring thousands from across the Valley and beyond. People plan travel, prayer and work around these known peaks.
Hazratbal often becomes a space for communal gatherings (prayer meetings, sermons, condolence assemblies) during times of private grief or public crisis. It performs social as well as spiritual functions, helping knit communities.
Local economies — vendors, transport providers, guides — benefit from pilgrimage seasons. The shrine’s maintenance and facilities also employ caretakers and staff, linking Hazratbal to the Valley’s cultural economy.
Families pass down stories of visits, seeing the relic, and the 1963 crisis; Hazratbal appears repeatedly in Kashmiri literature and oral memory as a touchstone of faith.
Detailed timeline
1623: Ishrat Mahal built by Sadiq Khan as a Mughal leisure pavilion — sets the physical site.
1634: Shah Jahan orders conversion of the pavilion into a prayer hall — site takes on sacred function.
1635: Syed Abdullah Madani brings the Moi-e-Muqqadas from Medina to India — the sacred object arrives.
Late 1600s–1700: Transfer of custody through Khwaja Nur-ud-Din Eshai; Aurangzeb’s seizure and eventual return of the relic to Kashmir (traditional accounts cite a dream leading to return). Ownership stabilizes under Inayat Begum.
27 Dec 1963: Relic stolen; mass public unrest begins.
4 Jan 1964: Relic recovered by authorities (CBI involvement); authenticity reaffirmed by religious leaders.
6 Feb 1964: Public display to restore confidence and calm the populace.
1968–1979: Major rebuilding in white marble under Auqaf Trust and local political patronage — Hazratbal acquires its present architectural form.
Preservation, authenticity debates and scholarship
For the faithful, authenticity has always rested on communal recognition and the custodians’ testimony. After the 1963 episode the government and religious authorities publicly affirmed the relic’s identity as part of efforts to maintain social calm.
Scholars treat the Moi-e-Muqqadas not only as a devotional object but as a social and symbolic artifact. Works such as Idrees Kanth’s analysis show how the 1963 theft turned the relic into a locus of public mobilization, identity politics and state-society relations. The shrine’s history is thus a case study in how sacred objects can acquire secular power as mobilizing symbols.
Visiting Hazratbal today — practical and respectful guidance
The shrine is open daily, with Fridays, major Islamic festivals, and special display days (announced locally) being peak times for visitors.
Modest dress, quiet reverence, follow shrine staff directions; during relic displays respect the crowd and clerical procession.
Expect crowd control and security checks during high-attendance events; plan travel early.
Why every detail matters
Hazratbal is not merely an architectural landmark; it is a living institution whose history combines Mughal patronage, sacred custody, mass devotion, traumatic theft, state intervention, and modern preservation. The Moi-e-Muqqadas functions on multiple levels: spiritual relic for the faithful, cultural symbol for Kashmiris, and — after the 1963 crisis — a political object in the way communities define and defend their identity.
Tags:
Jammu & Kashmir