42 
W. Hoey —Set Mahet. 
[Extra No. 
To this paragraph objection must be taken. There is no shrine 
of Pir-Barana at Set Mahet and there was no person named Barana. 
There was a Pir Barahna. He was Sikandra Diwana, a faqir, a 
follower of Sultan Ibrahim Adham, and it was with the disciples 
of this Mussalman Saint a rule to abjure covering for the head and 
feet. A full account of them is given in the Saulat-i-Mas’udi. He 
accompanied Saiyad Salar to Oudh, and the Saiyad expired in his arms. 
He was himself killed by a shower of arrows while supporting the 
Salar’s head in his lap. He was buried beside the young hero in Bah- 
raich. There is no trace of any shrine at Husen Jot, and I have seen 
nothing to lead me to suspect a stupa in or near this hamlet. I am 
quite at a loss to see how the venerable archaeologist can have come to 
pen so erroneous a paragraph as this. Further north there is a grove, a 
mound, and a well. On the mound is a shrine of Mahadev, called here 
Bannu Nath. The lingam is a red sandstone pillar over which, in the 
place where it was found standing, the shrine was, I am told, built. 
This may or may not be so, but this place seems to be that which the 
pilgrims refer to in the narrative which was before General Cunningham, 
when he took Husen Jot to be the place where stood the stupa, marking 
the spot where Maudgalaputra tried to unloose Sariputra’s girdle. As 
regards Husen Jot a note should be made. The Saiyad Miran, who 
was left by Salar Mas’ud as kotwal of Set Mahet, and who is buried 
in Mahet inside the brick building called Miran ka dargah and also 
‘ Miran Asthan,’ was Saiyad Mir Husen who came with Saiyad Salar 
to Oudh. Husenjot is a hamlet where the descendants of the original 
Khadim of this Dargah still live. They hold a m’afi conferred by the 
Oudh Subahdars, but greatly reduced in area by the Balrampur Taluqdar, 
and they still maintain the Dargah, and observe the annual ‘ feast of 
oblation (’urs) in Mir Husen’s memory. 
I must now return to the extreme east to the village of Kandh 
Bari. This is but a small hamlet, in which are seen at the surface 
of the ground the remains of massive brick walls. There are many wells 
in the hamlet, which is on an elevation, and close by are some five or more 
magnificent old trees, mangos and others. These are north-east of the 
village and south-east of the gate. When I first visited this place, I was 
amused by a reference made to one Gandhwa in connection with the 
name of this hamlet, and it was carried back to the time of Arjun and 
Hahsadhvaj. I took no note of it; but I have since read the paragraph* 
in General Cunningham’s second report on Sravasti, in which he 
attempts to connect the story of the Gardener Gandamba (sic) who 
# Archaeological Survey of India , vol. XI, p. 95 . 
