It should be clear to everyone, most of all to the judges who ordered the judgment deferred, that if the issue has defied a solution for a hundred years, no miracle is likely in less than a week.
The Supreme Court of India on September 23 gave a pause to the vexed Mandir-Masjid controversy and the contending title claims to the site made by the Muslim Waqf Board and the Hindu Dharam Sansad, by directing the Allahabad High Court to defer the pronouncement of the long-awaited judgment. Now, a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India S.H. Kapadia is set to decide on the matter on September 28.
The learned judges of the Supreme Court, whatever their publicly stated positions, are not so naïve as to believe that within less than a week a solution could be found for the contentious case. It should be clear to everyone, most of all to the judges, that if the issue has defied a solution for more than a hundred years, no miracle is likely to happen within less than a week. All the water that has flowed down the Sarayu river through all these years has not helped Ayodhya to recover the meaning of its name — a place without war. On the contrary, the claims and counter-claims by the parties involved in the dispute have only helped to harden the respective positions, which have spread the hatred and distrust thus generated to the whole country.
Given these facts and the situation, what prompted the judges last week to grant a stay could not be the possibility of an imminent solution. They were probably trying to convey a message to the nation, particularly to those who are party to the dispute, as well as to the government. The case has dragged on for such a long time under the assumption that it could be resolved by the intervention of the judiciary. The court now seems to suggest that it is not the case; a real solution lies in the political domain, with the active participation of civil society.
The salience of the civil suit lies in the fact that it is implicated in the larger issue of the dispute pertaining to the Mandir and the Masjid on which the court cannot really pronounce a judgment, even if it gathered evidence from historians. The government was using the judiciary as an escape route. And the judiciary, instead of dismissing the case, attempted to overreach itself. As far as the civil suit for the title of the land is concerned, it was in fact decided in 1885-86. It was in the post-1857 period when political conditions were fluid that the mahant of Ayodhya constructed a chabutara on the land leading to the masjid and started worship, claiming it to be the janmasthan of Sri Ram. The mahant filed a case in 1885 claiming title to the land, but it was dismissed. So were his appeals to the superior courts. The British officials favoured the status quo, for religious and political reasons.
Record of aggression
The history of the Mandir-Masjid dispute during the post-Independence period is but a record of aggression by Hindu communal forces, and a series of compromises and reconciliation bids by the Central government led by the Indian National Congress, particularly under Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao.
In 1949, Hindu communal forces conducted a seven-day continuous recitation of Ramcharitamanas, which proved to be the precursor to the installation of an idol of Ram Lalla in the mosque. The fact that they got away with the defiance of the state not only emboldened them to indulge in further aggression, leading ultimately to the demolition of the Masjid. During this period, the Sangh Parivar not only organised a series of agitations to mobilise Hindus in the name of Ram but also made preparations for the construction of the temple. It assiduously built up a tempo of aggression, with Uma Bharti and Rithambara leading the charge. The finale of this carefully constructed aggression was the Rath Yatra led by Lal Krishna Advani 20 years ago, which finally led to the demolition of the Masjid in 1992. The demolition was a criminal act according to the laws of the country, as the mosque was a 400-year-old historical monument that the state was committed to protect.
While the Hindu communal forces were engaged in a progressive assault, the state was unable to solve its own political dilemma. The Congress which led the government during this period was committed to secularism in principle, but the party realised that it was not possible to survive without the electoral support of Hindus. As a consequence, the party indulged in secular rhetoric, but followed communal politics in practice. It pursued what has now come to be termed ‘soft Hindutva'. Through this means it hoped to outsmart the Hindu communal forces.
The leader who initiated this disastrous policy was Rajiv Gandhi. He ordered the opening of the locks of the Masjid, thereby permitting Hindus to perform puja inside. He did this in order to steal the thunder from the Hindu communal forces. His successor-Prime Minister pursued the policy of compromise much more vigorously, and ‘officially arranged' the shilanyas of the temple. The Congress thus became an appendage of communal forces; that is what emboldened a mob to demolish the Masjid, thus inflicting a major blow on democracy and secularism.
Decisive factor
The failure of the Indian state was a most decisive factor behind the act of demolition. As is evident from the account given later by Narasimha Rao, it is clear that the state failed to discharge its duty of protecting the monument. It failed to prevent Mr. Advani's Rath Yatra, which led to the loss of several lives: everybody knew it would have disastrous consequences. Even after the demolition, the construction of a temporary temple was not stopped. At least now the state can rectify its mistakes by charting out a bold and innovative step in line with the principles of secularism.
The parties to the dispute and those who indulged in violence in the name of Ram are not representatives of India's Hindus and Muslims. They have no authority to speak on behalf of Hindus and Muslims. They are actually seeking to coerce the members of these communities by claiming to speak on their behalf.
(Dr. K.N. Panikkar is a former Professor of Modern History with Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi. He is currently Vice-Chairman of the Kerala State Higher Education Council, Thiruvananthapuram.)
Keywords: Ayodhya issue
This is my first comment on the issue.What i feel about this issue is that no political party will let this issue to be solved.Both Hindu and Muslim political parties will use this issue to gain political mileage.
We all are Indians and I love human beings. May there be peace and harmony all over the world. Live and let others live peacefully.
this a timely written article through which writer has made us aware not to think against indian secuarism and constitutionalism..this time state must be strong enough to maintain peace and harmony in the nation..
Now that the High court has delivered the verdictlet us all unite and live happily.It is neither a victory nor defeat of any community. Fanaticism doesnot serve any meaningful purpose.It creates barriers which are not wanted by any neither a true muslim nor a true hindu
All religions are true. Purity, patience and perseverance are the three essentials of success, above all-love . - swami vivekananda , so, love is more important tool to solve any problem. This is only one way to prove Indian, we are all Indian " jaihind"
Judiciary and political system has taken time in their support to bring peaceful solutions for communal harmony.Even now, time wll play a primary role to give a healing touch to the turmoil.There should not be any hurry.It may pronounce the verdict in a delayed moment,but maturity of social sentiment is supposed to bloom without any U-turn.
If we are able to see RAM ON RAMZAN and ALI ON DIWALI
then there is nothing to be worry about the structural appearance of the worship building(i.e.temple,masjid or church).
SKY IS ONE
EARTH IS ONE
GOD IS ONE
SOUL HAS NO RELIGION.IT IS ONE AND ONLY THE ONE.
ALL IN ONE AND ONE IN ALL.
MAY GOD BLESS ALL TO BELIEF IN THE UNITY.
HARIOMM TATSAT
YA ALI
JESUS
Yes. The best solution is build a school there instead. Would be very symbolic of what India needs to do going forward.
My forefathers (if they would have been alive today) would feel shame about I am sure they cannot answer a basic question “why our country was looted by foreigners for 700 years and why country was not safeguarded even after repeat insults were committed by them for years and years? It is like a Gunda in your neighborhood raped your mother for seven years, several times daily and you were kept quite just because you are so week that you cannot save your mother! Or you felt that it was just simple things and you can simply ignore it.
If my kids ask the same question to me my answer is “I am here to correct all historical mistakes. The ASMITA of my motherland is my first objective of my life.” There are several people around who talk about building something at 3 ASHMITA PLACES, by birth they are Bhartiya but they are called Indian, they just talk like stupid but cannot do anything, we can simply ignore them because they even do not know the difference between RAPE and SEX.
@Arun Raghavendran, Rohan Gupta and others: Please keep your answer to your kids written here on page so it can be shared to them in history (Thanks to Google).
One sincere suggestion, India has culture and tradition of “Niswarth TYAG and DAAN” FOR YOUR motherland (Don’t ask me examples please, it is in the blood of us) and so as a good example to society, please come forward and share half of your family property to society and society will build several community centers, toilets, schools etc across the country. We can think of millions great ideas which can be built and society will be grateful to them.
Ram Janm Bhumi, Mathura and Varanasi, the 3 cases are historical mistake of Aurangzeb and the kids of this motherlands now want to correct the things ASAP. Any stupid comment actually insults them and the country which should be avoided.
Before speaking, everyone around should visit the 3 places, seek the evidence of historical insults which is basically the portion of building and government is hiding from common people since ages.
You can give your decision ON SPOT. A politically corrupt and weak Court System who has failed and cannot deliver NYAY to common people, cannot deliver the decision in above 3 cases. Above statement against court is WRONG but unfortunately it is cruel reality and reality should never be ignored.How long we should have FALSE HOPE?
IT was Sardar Patel who has strong political will and corrected similar mistake of SOMNATH TEMPLE. Unfortunately he will never born again and correct the 3 other things!
I think somebody has raised this issue just to spoil the harmony that is existing between hindus and muslims . I feel that there should be a MAN-JID(mandir+masjid) or in that land should be used for the construction of old age home or home for the abandoned children . we should set an example to the other countries that India is a place for Unity and humanity
I would like to give one of the fantastic suggestion. Instead of fighting for the land the govt should prepare one good garden in that place where public can visit and it would be managed by the government. If any single judgement or any any single decision leads to riots then all the public should come together and consider the solution as mentioned above.
I think, the outcome of Ayodhya verdict would be a disaster. But the govt can do something like this; build up a "temmos" (temple + mosque) and allow everyone to join hands and pray.
When Panikkar says 'At least now the state can rectify its mistakes by charting out a bold and innovative step in line with the principles of secularism.', he actually means 'in line with principles of Islam'. It is indeed refreshing to see such an unbiased article analyzing both sides of the coin so perfectly
I would like to propose a solution for the Ayodhya dispute.
Muslims should hand over the Ayodhya site to the real Hindus in India.
To a panel of Hindu religious and community leaders who have proven records of upholding the real values of Dharma, love and tolerance.
There must be a guarantee from the Hindu community and the government, that the Hindu fanatic organizations (BJP/RSS/VHP/BD etc.) will have no stake in the ownership, no participation or interest in constructions or maintenance of the temple or mosque.
The constructions must include a mosque in a nearby site, which is deemed by the Hindu leaders' panel as approriate.
The two major aspects of this solution:
------------------------------------------------------
1. It is a great opportunity for the Muslims to show their compromising and tolerant attitude in the interest of this great nation with a rich culture and legacy of mutual respect and peaceful co-existence.
2. Hindus in India need to isolate the communal fanatics among them, who has grossly mis-used the name of Hinduism and patriotism, while they have practised evil and furthered narrow and fascist interest against the true spirits of the nation's culture. It has been a wrong practice among Hindus and even others including governments to consider the fanatics as represetnatives of Hindus. Most of the temples, religious institutions and even ideological matters within Hinduism are left under the control and discretion of these fanatics and they are happily exploiting them for their mean interests. By proposing this deal of Ayodhya, Muslim community will be pointing a strong finger at this social anomaly.
We all are Indians before belonging to any caste, creed or religion. So whatever be the decision of Allahabad High Court on the the matter with regard to Babri dispute we all must need to maintain harmony & peace in the country .
All religions are true. Purity, patience and perseverance are the three essentials of success, above all-love . - swami vivekananda , so, love is more important tool to solve any problem. This is only one way to prove Indian, we are all Indian " jaihind"
After reading the article and the comments the only conclusion is that the people in our country want peaceful life. I hope our leaders also get this message.
1949 On December 23rd, Muslims finished their night prayer and left for their homes. A shock was waiting for them, who came for fajr prayer. Inside the Mosque a mob kept Rama, Laxamana, Sita statues and claimed that their God took avatar (appeared) inside the mosque and they started agitating against innocent Muslims.
An FIR was filed at faizabad police station. Afterwards central and state government banned Muslims to conduct prayer inside the mosque and this became one of the important issue in Indian history.
Then Innocent Hindu’s mind were brain-washed with hatred feeling against Muslims by spreading a false propaganda that “Babri Majid was built by demolishing Ram Temple”
If the propaganda of Saffron Group ” Babri majid was built after demolishing Ram Temple” is true then no Muslims will fight for this issue. Because in Islam, demolishing other religious Temple is strictly prohibited. Due to their false claim about Ram Temple, Muslims are fighting to get back their mosque.
We don’t want to divert the subject by exposing the comment of Chatterji, AK majumdhar, Nehru, Karunanidhi etc that RAM is an imaginary character.
Because the subject is to discuss by doing research whether any Ram temple existed in the disputed location ? Whether Masjid was built in that location by demolishing Ram temple? Not about the existence of Ram or whether it is a imaginary character or not!!!
Even Ram is an imaginary character; no Muslims will accept the demolition of Ram temple and build a mosque in that location.
Was Ram born at Ayodhya ?
We’ll see how the claim of Ram born in that disputed location will be true.
Whatever the decision Hindus want to take, it should not be fundamentally taken from the comment of RSS or any other saffron organization. It should be taken from Hindus Vedas and Purunas. In fact, it would be opposite to Hindu ideology, if some decision taken apart from this jurisdiction of Vedas.
Valmiki wrote first about Ram and his words explained everything about Ram in crystal clear format. Valmiki explained in his Ramayana that he born at DHIREDHA Yuga.
A basic measurement unit of time, to denote the Hindu’s belief of time is Yuga. There are four Yugas.
Kirudha yuga 17,28,000 ( 17 lakhs, 28 thousands ) years
Dhiredha Yuga 12,96,000 ( 12 lakhs, 96 thousand) years
Duvaba Yuga 8,64,000 ( 8 lakhs, 64 thousand ) years
Kali Yuga 4,32,000 ( 4 lakhs, 32 thousand ) years
Now we are living in the time of Kali Yuga. Kali Yuga starts before 3102 years of Christ. Now 2009 finished after Christ. So 5110 years finished after kali yuga starts.
Duvaba yuga was before Kali Yuga and Ram didn’t born during this time. Before this was Dhiredha Yuga and even Ram born during last stage of this Yuga and according to Valmiki Ramayana’s Judgment ” Ram should have born before 8,69,110 years ( 8,64,000 + 5110 )
Like Valmiki Ramayana told about Ram’s Yuga, he specified the birth place too that is “He born at Ayodhya city ”
That means ” Ayodhya” should exists before 8 Lakhs, 64 thousand years. A report was submitted on 1976, 77 by central government archeological department regarding ” when Ayodhya appeared?”. This report in its 52, 53 page explained that “A place name called Ayodhya in which people started dwelling was before 700 BC.
That means, before 2708 years, there would be no Ayodhya according to their archeological research.
Afterwards this was re-researched by C.P.Lal and K.N Theetjit , a notable historian. They also found that it was true whatever the archeological department found.
Valmiki told that Ram born before 8 lakhs 69 thousand years at Ayodhya, but it is crystal clear that there was nothing called Ayodhya at that time.
How Hindus can conclude by neglecting Ramayana and archeological finding?
The age of this Ayodhya is 2708 years. But this is not the one explained by Ramayana. May be it is in different place. It is general to find many places in the same name. By considering these facts, they have to come for conclusion, which will not contradict with Ramayana and research facts.
There is lot of testimonials in Ramayana that Ram born at Ayodhya which is different from the existing one.
While speaking about Ayodhya, Ramayana spoke about Sarayu River. Sarayu River exists 1.5 yojan distances from Ayodhya. (1.5 yojan means 23 kilometers )
Even though there’s one river called Sarayu at Ayodhya, it’s running inside the city, not 23 kilometers away from the city.
That means, Ayodhya and Sarayu River told by Ramayana is not the existing one. Ramayana teachings will be correct when you believe Sarayu River flows 23 kilometers away from Ayodhya.
People are simply neglecting Hinduism, if they consider existing Ayodhya is same like Ayodhya explained in Ramayana.
Also Valmiki Ramayana explains that “ Sarayu River join with Ganga”. But this Sarayu River mingles with Raabthi River. What we learnt from this? Ramayana doesn’t denote this Ayodhya and Sarayu river. Also Valmiki Ramaya explains Sarayu river flows from east to west. But Sarayu river in UP flow from west to east.
A researcher, Saer Singh Identified a truth. There is one Ayodhya at Nepal. 20 kilometers away from that city one river is flowing from east to west. Also it mingles with Ganga.
So, those who believe Ram born at Ayodhya, which is at Uttarpradesh, are neglecting Ramayana and its ideology.
Real Ayodhya should be one, which was explained by the Ramayana with all testimonials.
was Ram temple existed at Ayodhya ?
Babar Majid was build at 1528. We’ll see whether any truth present with the opinion of ” Mir Baahi” a minister of Baber, who was accused for demolishing Ram Temple in the disputed location”
RSS claimed that Ram temple was built by king Vikramathithya. Vikramathidya is general name like Chola,Pandya kings. Chandra Gupta, samutra Gupta kings are called in the name of Vikramathidya.
They contradict in specifying the actual king who really built the Ram temple. There is not fact in their claim.
Gupta kings ruled some part of U.P during the period 300 AD to 1100 AD. These kings who ruled for 800 years are called as Vikramathidya.
During the period 300 AD to 1100 AD, there was not even a smell of human at Ayodhya, according to the chief of Indian Archeological department.
P.P Lal who submitted research report and was published at famous magazines” The Week” (25.02.1990) and “Sunday Times” (20.11.1987 ). In that report, after showing several evidences, he was confidently explained that, at Ayodhya during that period of 300 – 1100 AD, there was no human, building, temple or anything.
In some place, which is untouched by human, how can they build a temple? How Baber can demolish a temple which was not existed? I request Hindu Brothers and sisters to think about this.
When Ram was worshipped as God?
If temple to be built for Ram, it should be built after Ram was worshipped as God. Now Hindus are worshiping Ram as God, but they didn’t do it before. Ram was not considered as God, Especially during the period of 300-1100 AD, which was claimed by RSS, the time when Ram temple was built.
Amar Simha of AD 600, released many Sanskrit Poetry resources in the name of ” Amara Kosa”. In that, those who are worshipped as God in India were specified. Ram name was not in the list. So Hindus during that period were not considering Ram as GOD’s Avatar and its considered as big testimonial.
A Sadhu called Lakhsmidhar, collected the information of all sacred place up to 11th century (until last time of Gupta Dynasty). Ayodhya Ram temple is not existed in that.
If Ram temple was build during Gupta period, why it was not included in the list of sacred place?
Same like that, S.S.Iyer , a notable research scholar, published book called ” Indian Temples, Historic notes”. He didn’t specify anything about Ram temple. He noted five temples which was built by Vikramathidya. Ayodhya Ram temple is not there.
At 1989 November 12, IAS officer Ramachandra Kadri wrote one article at “Radiance”. He referred so many evidences with Encyclopedia like Britannica and comment that only after 1100 AD, Ram was worshipped as God.
That means, until the last period of Gupta kings, Ram was not worshipped as God. Can any Hindu who has real conscience, believe that Ram temple was build during the Gupta period?
If we want to tell more clearly, Valmiki wrote Ramayana in Sanskrit. Sanskrit was not popularly spoken by all people and only Brahmins knew about that. Because of this Ram was not considered as God.
Valmiki Ramayana was translated and released in Hindi by Tulsi Das. After that, Ramayana was very famous among people. After Tulsi Das translated Ramayana in Hindi, people start considering Ram as God’s Avatar.
What’s the time of Tulsi Das ? Tulsi Das Lived during the period of Baber (in Ayodhya ), which was claimed for demolition of Ram temple. Baber ruled during 1500 AD and Tulsi was living under that rule.
Ramayana was translated in Hindi during the rule of Baber and that time Ram was not considered as God. So it becomes true that Hindu people didn’t have any knowledge about him.
How Ram was worshiped as GOD when Ramayana was not spread across people? How temple was build for him? Dear Hindu Brothers and sisters, think about this.
India’s first president was Dr. Radha Krishnan. His son Gopal who was good Hindu devotee and very good research scholar too. In his research article, he proclaimed that “There was no temple for Ram before 1750 AD, in any part of India. He confidently declared that “All Ram temple belongs to 18th century”.
if Ram temple was not existed before 200 years, how Baber demolish Ram temple at Disputed location of Ayodhya. I request every citizen, to think about this.
The truth is, the foundation of Babri Majid was laid by Ibrahim Lodi, on 1524. He was unable to continue the service for long time and he was killed in war by Baber. Then, Baber build a Majid, with the foundation laid by Ibrahim Lodi. So it is untrue to tell that Baber demolished the temple.
Will Baber Demolish temple ?
So far, the evidences provided here is enough for everyone, who can really able to distinguish between good and bad. For debate purpose, even though if any temple was there in the disputed location, Baber would not demolish that.
Because, in same Ayothya, for five temples like Hunumangiri ,Jenmasthan, Baber provided incentives by writing in brass . This been safeguarded still now by temple management and was reiterated with evidences by Ramrasha Thiribathi.
How a person will demolish a temple, who provided incentives to many temples?
Also the population of Muslims during Baber reign would be meager when compared with present population. Sovereignty of the kingdom will be maintained only by the support of majority Hindus. Baber would be thrown-out from his throne, by agitators of Hindu Majority, if their temple was demolished. No king will be involved in such activities, if he really wants to retain his power.
Hindus during that time were not involved in any riots or agitation, but only welcomed all Mughal heirs like Babar, his son Humayun, his son Akbar. This shows the courtesy and kindness were showered by Mughal emperors towards Hindu majority.
During the last time of Baber, he wrote one WILL to his son Humayun written in Persian language and it is been preserved still today at Central government’s National museum at Delhi. In that he gave advise as “Dear son, you are going to rule a country where Hindus are in majority. They are respecting COW as God. So don’t eat Cow’s meat (Beef) at any instance.
How a Good Citizen can believe that Baber demolished a temple, who advised his son to renounce the eating habit of Cow’s meat (beef)?
Guru Nanak who founded Sikh religion was considered as big enemy during Baber’s reign. He rigorously opposed Baber, especially for the issues related with women. If Baber demolished the temple, he would have indicated that with his strong resentment. But history commenting that he went to Ayodhya and enjoyed the beauty of Babri Majid’s Structure.
Person like him who lived in those years only knew that whether Baber constructed Majid by demolishing temple. In such case, he would never enjoy its building structure.
Some falsely imagine and claim that people didn’t oppose the rule because of Babar’s tyrant nature.
Baber was neither hated by Hindu people nor was he was a tyrant king. This is the truth. For debate purpose, if we consider Baber was a tyrant king, it would not be true.
After Baber, his kingdom was ruled by his son Humayun. After 25 years of Baber’s death, his grandson Akbar ruled the kingdom. He gave up Islam and was following New Religion Din-ilahi, for which he was the founder. Akbar was like a Hindu king and even he got appreciation from many saffron organizations.
If Baber demolished the temple, it should have been noticed by many people who lived during the period of Akbar too. They don’t need to worry about Akbar and they would have asked to rebuild the temple which was demolished by his grandfather. Surely, Akbar would have satisfied such people, if his grandfather would have demolished such structure. People could have requested, only if temple was demolished!!! But there happened no such incidents.
We’ll leave that. Even after the Mughals era was ended by Britishers, this issue was not raised by anyone until 1948. There was no case registered too.
In 200 years rule of British:
No case was registered during British rule against the demolition of mosque and nobody requested British government to get back their temple.
Problem suddenly rose to its full vigor only after December 23, 1949, when a mob placed Ram idol inside the mosque.
In Ayodhya there are more than 30 Temples which manifest about Ram’s birth place. Hindu scholars identified many places as Ram’s birth place and they didn’t include Babri Majid among them.
This was the reality, until saffron group diverted the attention of Hindus by such false claims.
Saffron Group discovered that by evoking extreme hatred among Hindus and Muslims, they can capture the opportunity to rule India from Congress. Finally they captured the rule by cheating innocent Hindu citizens who believe that” All the glitters are Gold “.
Dear Hindu Brothers and Sisters!!!
Let's strive to preserve the UNITY.
Let's neglect communal forces, which have vested interest in creating extreme friction to the development of our country.
Let us work hard for the economic development of our country and for its prosperous future.
what is the actual force behind communities to react in an aggressive manner for religious issues? I think it is nothing more than Politics. Politics is the soul of communal violence, not the religion. Religions do not want nothing more than peace and order in society. Religions working for make this order and peace. when the people understanding the real black magic of politics behind the religion then they definitely will come to peace and unity. people must want to understand about this black politics to make communal harmony and to lead the nation to development.........
After all we are Indian. Many mosque and mandirs in India are never visited by respective believers and are remain almost abandoned during namaj and puja time. This masjid-maindir fight is not going to effect any one in real religious sense becuase every religion preaches the message of peace and says to maintain patience. India always love peace and we Indians must remain peacful at every moment. We should not be swayed away by bigotry and intolerance. Let us wait for the decision of the court and always follow the rules of law, which will give opportunity to the aggrieved party to appeal in Supreme Court. Go by the precedence, Supreme Court will take another many years to deliver judgement.
when now we are considering among the economical power then what is the need to overlight the such issue which can exposed the country religious image.it will be welcomed if this issue will solved by mutual understanding to respecting the sentimental values of the both community.
It is a great transformation that Muslims have rejected the leaders who were instigating them in the name of babri Masjid.
Every Muslim leader has denounced terrorism and terror activities of both insiders and of those across the border.
Islam preaches peace and harmony and never allows anyone to kill innocents, if a few misguided elements carry out terror activities islam and Muslims as a community can not be blamed.
The problem with majority of Hindus is that, they do not raise their voice against the fanaticsm of Sangh Pariwar.
Surprsisngly no religious leaders has condemned the rapes, killings, burning alive of women, children and old people.
Why should the Indians allow the fanatic groups to take hostage of entire peaceful Hindu Religion?
Who authorized and recognized RSS/BJP/BajrangDal as custodian of Hinduism?
Who are the people who endorse raping of women in the name of religion?
Which religion allows burnng of human beings?
The pattern of rioting and communal frenzy is not spontaneous, there has been a large conspiracy,training and preparation for carrying out heinous crimes against the minorities of India.
The pattern of Killing of Sikhs (Delhi), Killing and rapes of muslims in Gujarath(2002), Killing burning and rapes of Christians in Kandhamal, all show that the apttern of crimes is similar and the motto is quite evident , to challenge the secularism and communal harmony of India and self respect of minorities.
From Delhi to Kandhamal, Bhagalpur to Gujarath, Neillie to Hubli, in all the cases the killers are Hindus and those killed are minorities.
Is the Govt. not aware of the evil designs of saffron pariwar? What are our security and investigative agencies doing? Can't they trace out the epicenter of all these communal killings? Are they doing justice to their religion and mother land? Their silence and misleading conclusion and directionless investigations and deliberate delays in judgements and ditortion of facts etc. all makes us believe that there is a systematic and well planned infusion of communal elements in all the democratic institutions.
Can any one expect peace when the custodian of law are involved in heinous crimes?
Does it make a sense that a Dracula being made incharge of blood bank?
But it happened in NDA rule in India and BJP rule in Gujarath, Orissa.
There is a need to ban all communal organizations without any prejudice and bias.The organizations shall be made to compensate for the losses during rallies, yatras, processions.
Collective punishment shall be imposed on the entire locality where loss of human lives and properties take place.
Lat but not the least, the police officers in whose jurisdiction the law and order is disturbed shall be transferred to Naxal infested areas( Kudos to late NT Rama Rao who succesfully applied this tool to make AP free of communalism).
Now, when the Supreme Court has dismissed the plea for deferment of Ayodhya verdict and the High Court is slated to pronounce the judgement on 30th October, Let's hope that whatever verdict comes, it is respected by all and taken in right spirit. Already, the nation has got a fair share of shame over the Commonwealth Games row and Ayodhya shouldn't give another chance to we Indians to be shameful.
Archeological Survey of India has established that originally a temple was there in existence right below the disputed structure being demolished. It is therefore clear what exactly the history was. Therefore what actually was there should be restored.
I fully agree vid the author.It iz nothing but political gimmicry. It was the fundamental duty of the state to protect this historical monument and loss of lives as well. However, indian judiciary has enough potential to decide the matter peacefully and make india proud. Unity in diversity is the only mantra which can save us in any crisis. So i request my brothers to respect the verdict of the honourable court and set an example for our future generations.
It's best if an Orphanage or an Old age home is built at the controversial site, it shows "Humanity is the only religion".
Ramajanmabhoomi is something special to Hindus in so far it is believed to be the birth place of Rama,religious and spiritual icon of Hindus.On the other hand,Babhri Mosque has no special significance to Muslims.It is like any one of the many mosques in India.The question is can't the Muslim brothers show large heartedness and over this site to Hindus and thereby earn their gratitude forever?
K N Panikkar conveniently starts from the point which helps him to articulate his own viewpoints. Why can't he start from the fact that archaelogical survey of india has proved with evidence there was in fact a temple existed below the Babri Masjid structure?
Will anybody doubt the existence of Jesus in Bethlaham?
Will anybody doubt the existence of Prohphet Mohammad in Mecca /Madina?
If so then why only Hindus are forced to prove everytime Lord Rama existed in Ayodhya?
i liked the post and information. I want to ask few question from this article writer who seems to be very knowledgeable on this topic. When does the Archeological Survey of India established the historical facts about ayodhaya including existence of a temple there. If those facts are found after demolition of Babri Masjid by thousands of violent mobs, can anyone rule out the possibility of keeping or burying idols at the demolished site to be found by the Archeological survey of India later.
Even if idols are truly found which seems to be unlike, does it proves existence of Bhagwan Shree Ram birthplace and does it's justice to build a temple at that place.What if some idols are found in the soil of one's house, will his property be seized and his property converted to a temple. I think Britishers and the communal groups used this issue to their own interest. There is a long campaign in which hindus are made to believe that Bhagwan Shree Ram birth place is same as Babri Masjid.
I am a muslim but i know Bhagwan Shree Ram is most important God for hindus among thousands of Gods and i have no doubt about His existence. The Babri Masjid was built in just 16th century and before that those places were ruled by Hindu rulers. My point is why there is no history pilgrimage and worship at that claimed temple of most important God of Hindus. We have history of sacred places like haridwar, mathura,etc. So, please make your opinions according to facts and not just because of opportunistic parties which always want this issue to remain as a dispute for their vested interests.
Dear Sir,
I doubt very much whether Democracy is the best suited solution for political turmoils in a nation.
Nice article - Even if we were to build a temple or mosque at the site, would the devotees be able to worship in peace at a site which has been the reason for the deaths of many innocent people in our country.It is really saddening to see that religion has been dragged to the courts for "judgement"....
No one in india is ready to compromise, we only want others to do so but do not want to become the other person .
i beleive the only practical solution is that the disputed property be seized by govt and matter be dissolved .
It is quite remarkable that the loudest voices for peace are coming from the Hindu RSS "rogues" while the minorities are conspicuous by their silence and absence from the similar cries to exercise restraint. Still more suspicious is that mainly the Muslim minority locations such as Gujarat, UP and Karnataka have been given the protection ahead of the ruling. AP, particularly Hyderabad with a larger Muslim population is untouched. It is my speculation that all this points to some major bruising to the Hindu sentiment, I strongly smell the huge Minority appeasement in the making!
This is a rubbish issue, that needs to be brought into the glaring light of rational, progressive thinking. INDIA was born on August 15th 1947. ON that day, whatever was the structure in this spot is what INDIA inherited. It is a monument and no religion should have any kind of say over such a structure. It is time to put the NATION ahead of any RELIGION.
The Honorable SC's interim stay cannot be regarded as unnecessary interference inthe affairs of the lower judiciary. In view of the importance of the matter and in view of the short time awailable it has just deferred the pronouncement of judgment by the High Court. One can reasonably presume that finally the application will be dismissed as the aggrieved parties have right to appeal to the Apex court. Postponing the judgment after such prolonged hearings does not serve any purpose. Any one indulging in violence after the judgment should know the violence will weaken their case further in the eye of Law as well as in the eye of the public.
Govt which is expected to protect the cultural and religious of the people of the land which has been endowded with legacy of values Ramayana which beckons the millions of the Bharat should desist from appeasing the minorities with an eye on vote bank. It should follow what Archeological Survey of India indicates about the historical facts of Ayodhya.
Is there a purely secular party in India? Everyone knows that BJP and the Shiv Sena clearly do not deserve that description. Media knows, but does not propagate the fact that the Congress party indulges in secular rhetoric, but follows communal politics in practice as pointed out by Prof. K. N. Panikkar. The Communists and the various political parties owing allegiance to local individual leaders depend heavily on muslim votes and their seculrism is limited to BJP baiting. Since a problem like the Masjid-Mandir controversy in Ayodhya needs mediation by widely respected political leaders who are seen by Hindus and Muslims as leaders who do not mix communalism with politics especially during election time. If there are senior political leaders in India today who fall in this category, one may venture to say that a solution to the vexed Mandir-Masjid controversy in Ayodhya may be possible.
When will we, the Indians learn to unite as citizens of India rather than Hindu and Muslim and Christian ?
I liked this article by Dr. Panikker-the facts presented, the analysis,the views expressed and all that that the article contained.
While we all await curiously the all important verdict on the contentious issue to be delivered in near future, I am hopeful and prayful that irrespective of what the judgement is going to be, every Indian citizen would take this opportunity to behave with utmost responsibility and in a dignified manner so that we could prove to the World that India is nation with "Unity in Diversity".
The author has rightly pointed out that India's civil society has a major role in solving the mandir-masjid row. It would make every Indian proud, if the government is bold enough to take up the disputed land and build an ashram (on the lines of Sabarmati) for the destitute and homeless children. That would glorify our spirit of secularism and universal tolerance.
Using the religious sentiments of Indians to gather votes is an old but still fruitful trick. I blame the people itself for such a crisis situation. They have set their priority on "being the better caste" competing among themselves rather than the growth of the nation.
My solution to this problem is making out a Man-jid, an attached Mandir and Masjid, creating a revolutionary Hindu-Muslim brothers theory.
Now that it has become such a deep problem and knowing the public response is super-critical before actually declaring the judgement, one other solution is to carve out a Temple on the basis of "First Come First Serve" theory supporting the Archeological finidngs that there was a temple previously at the site.
At the time of demolition of masjid the indians are only 12% literate so they can be melt by anyone because they don't know anything which led to destruction of lives and property ,but today indians are 66% literate they understood the matter very well they know the vote bank politics so such kind of destruction is not possible today .
so why to wait for such a old dicison respected S.C. must give advice to H.C that give dicison as soon as possible,and we happily welcome that.
Very well written. The contruction of the mosque by the Mughals have been described as a barbaric act by the communal forces. Didn't they do the same act 20 years ago?
Will the court be able to give an unbiased verdict? Let us wait and see.
Build a university / medical college / something similar ... end of story :)
The author has projected the facts, which is appreciated. But I think we must be further go much prior to the quoted 1847's and refer vedic periods.
We respect that India is a secular State and pledge to abide by the Constitution. We also acknowledge the fact these religious anarchy on any side, may it be Hindus/Muslims cannot and should not be tolerated.
However the author comments seems to have completely ignored the facts which portray the unblemished truth of Lord Ram, reigning in Ayodhya much much before the Kali Yuga as imminently described beyond doubts in Vedas. The same gets further translated in the form of Bhagvat Gita in the Dwapara Yuga, and hence is still is being regarded in the form of Bhagvad Gita in the so called "courts"
Camouflaging Secularism, since Independence, what was once a majority population, have been reduced to mere minority for political gain, denied every single diligent right and selling to various castes,sub castes, sub sub castes. Can history forget the Mandal Commision related deaths in the 1990's. But for these political crooks, India can still shine in a well regulated, equal Secular state
stranger becomes the issue of Ayodhya when the postponement of justice takes unwanted and inexplicable turns. It repeatedly raises doubts about the secular concepts of Indian republic. At a time when the world is against a great religion, the steps to enhance our secularist paradigms must be taken seriously.
An unnecessary and avoidable interference in the affairs of lower judiciary by our Supreme Court. When the matter will surely be brought to the Supreme Court by the aggrieved party after the Allahabad HC judgement, there was no need for our respected SC to stay the Judgement. This has set an unhealthy and hitherto unheard of precedent.
It seems after giving the lessons of stay united we still can't put up with it.... Why can't we think of a mutual decision and look at something more concrete. Mandir and masjid both are prayer halls to connect with th supreme power. Then why the fight and that too dragged for so long. Why can't we build a common prayer hall where despite the religion or caste or creed one can go and be one with the almighty. The court should not narrow their scope to just hindu or muslim but take an integrated decision on this matter.... But the action should be quick and crisp...
An unnecessary and avoidable interference in the affairs of lower judiciary by our Supreme Court. When the matter will surely be brought to the Supreme Court by the aggrieved party after the Allahabad HC judgement, there was no need for our respected SC to stay the Judgement. This has set an unhealthy and hitherto unheard of precedent.
By deferring the verdict on Friday, SC has again created a gloom over the long pending issue. The court must have declared the verdict and closed the case once for all.
There will not be much religious tension by declaring the verdict as India of 2010 is different from that of India in 1992.
i think they could ve given it today only. . they cannot postpone all the consequences after verdict. . . and greatest thing we indians should learn is a very strong tree may fall if its eaten by bugs internally. . we shiuld not allow internal conflicts . . we should be one ,together. the land belongs to mother earth it doesn belong to anyone else jai hind!!!
This should never have been allowed to become an issue. It has been very clearly demonstrated that the self-assumed "protectors of the faith" on both sides (not to mention politicians) have not shown the maturity a group of illiterate villagers would have shown. They have rather used this opportunity to empower themselves, disregarding the cost to the millions of faithful whom they have deprived of life and livelihood in the many riots that rose out of this dispute. So allowing them to enjoy the fruits of their felony would be unwise. In a country where faith is just another tool for grabbing power, more real estate disputes are bound to crop up to keep the pot boiling. And we are bound to be treated to the edifying spectacle of dogs fighting over yet another bone. The obvious way to deal with these sort of disputes would be to take away such sites. No bone, no snarling and barking. Indians being what they are, the assurance of such action will ensure more disputes cropping up as we cut our own noses to spite our neighbours. This would free up some prime real estate. This would also cause a loss of employment to some people, but, frankly speaking, they can be employed in areas more productive than gouging pilgrims or running the brothels which seem to be a part of every temple town. We already have disputes at Varanasi, Mathura and Bodh Gaya. The Amarnath pilgrimage is a rallying point for terrorists who call themselves freedom fighters. Now all we need is for someone to say that the dargah at Ajmer was originally a Hindu temple. Maybe a hundred years later, when Indians learn to treat the whole idea of religion in a better fashion, we could let them have their temples and mosques back.
It is not at all a problem to find an amicable solution to the problem, if only the politicians keep themselves away from the scene. Left to themselves, Indian people are peace loving and secular. The whole problem is created by the politicians for their selfish end.
Dear Sir,
Hundreds of salutations to the Supreme Court Justices R.V. Raveendran and H.L. Gokhale for their timely intervention.Better late than never. Perhaps wisdom may come even at the last minute. Who knows the whereabouts of the SUPREMEand the MIGHTY ONE who is incorporeal and in whose hands we all are only the pawns.
this is not abt any religon,it is a test of al of us,being the citizen of india......test of our sensibility and to rise above the religious dead lock and act as a nation not hindusa or muslims.....
this is not surprising but is it right to postpone the decision when whole world is waiting for it & what they will do in 3 day already they had taken 50 years .
Submission of senior Counsel Mr Mukul Rohatgi that if the judgment in Babri Case is not deferred it could lead to serious problem is not wise on his part being a senior counsel. Problems in Jammu and Kashmir and floods in northern India is linked to deffer the prouncement of Babri Judgment does not favour balance of convenience.
Both paties are right in their approach.If 50 years are not sufficient to resolve the issue amicably, how can the court decide that some more time given will result in an amicable solution? It is an indefinite procastination to decide.Possibly another 50 years may thus be gained. Who knows?
Both parties are right.When conciliation has failed for50 years,how suddenly it can work out.The stay may lead to indefinite procrastination only.
Please Email the Editor