जन्मभूमि या रणभूमि ?


Come 28th September and Allahabad High Court will safe its decision on the Ayodhya case, which is there for almost two decades. The event which changed the face of Indian Politics. The event which wreaked havoc across India. Today, when we sit back and analyse, most of us say that it was purely a political move by the Bharatiya Janata Party to woo the majority in the country. But more than the BJP it was the Late Congress Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi whose one action resulted in this irreligious act, the ramifications of which are in some way visible even today.In 1985, in the Shah Bano case, Rajiv tried to please the Muslim voter. Rajiv Gandhi’s yielding to mullahdom was in fact a continuation of a ‘secular’ trend set by his predecessor and maternal grandfather Nehru who legislated the Hindu Code Bill to reform Hindu society. He was safeguarding the muslim vote bank. The Shah Bano case generated tremendous heat in India. It proved that fundamentalist minorities can exert pressure on government and judicial decisions. He tried to balance out his action by trying to appease the Hindus. And that was why the Prime Minister ordered unlocking to take place and a shilanayas of the temple to be organised.

The volatility about the disputed land in Ayodhya existed from the beginning. But in modern India, it was only due to political protection that the issue got revived and frenzy was incited by the people in power and it would be wrong to blame individual communities for this be it Hindus or Muslims. The barbaric act of demolition saw one of the worst riots in the country which claimed more than 3000 lives. The first was mainly a Muslim backlash as a result of the Babri Masjid demolition in the week immediately succeeding 6 December 1992 led by Hindu hard-line elements in the city of Ayodhya. Many argue that people have moved on since 1992 and the verdict is not of much importance today. Intellectuals say that a generation has passed and it really does not matter to the common man anymore. But that is probably a rosy picture we want to portray of the modern India that is progressive and above such ‘petty’ issues.

HISTORY- ISLAM & HINDUSTAN

 The first contact of Muslims with India was the Arab attack on a nest of pirates near modern-day Bombay, to safeguard their trade in the Arabian Sea and with this Islam came into India and a new chapter in the history of Indian Subcontinent started which saw struggle, havoc, rampage, intolerance, violence, destruction and subjugation.

History has many records which talk about the existence of temple in Ayodhya which was demolished by Babar [Part of ‘Spread Peace’ campaign which Islam talks about?]

Mirza Jan wrote in 1856 that

“a lofty mosque has been built by badshah Babar” on “the original birthplace of Rama”, so that “where there was a big temple, a big mosque was constructed, and where there was a small temple, a small mosque was constructed. Mizra Jan also wrote: ‘wherever they found magnificent temples of the Hindus ever since the establishment of Sayyid Salar Mas’ud Ghazi’s rule, the Muslim rulers in India built mosques, monasteries, and inns, appointed mu’azzins, teachers, and store-stewards, spread Islam vigorously, and vanquished the Kafirs. Likewise, they cleared up Faizabad and Avadh, too, from the filth of reprobation (infidelity), because it was a great centre of worship and capital of Rama’s father. Where there stood the great temple (of Ramjanmasthan), there they built a big mosque, and, where there was a small mandap (pavilion), there they erected a camp mosque (masjid-i mukhtasar-i qanati). The Janmasthan temple is the principal place of Rama’s incarnation, adjacent to which is theSita ki Rasoi. Hence, what a lofty mosque was built there by king Babar in 923 A. H. (1528 A.D.), under the patronage of Musa Ashiqan! The mosque is still known far and wide as the Sita ki Rasoi mosque. And that temple is extant by its side (aur pahlu mein wah dair baqi hai) ’ (Mirza Jan: Hadiqa-i Shahada (“The garden of martyrdom”), Lucknow 1856p. 247). Mirza Jan also wrote (quoting a relative of Aurangzeb), that the temples of Rama, Shiva, Krishna as well as Sita’s Kitchen (i.e. part of the Ramkot complex) “were all demolished for the strength of Islam, and at all these places mosques have been constructed”


MODERN PERSPECTIVE – ASI REPORT

Archaeological Survey of India conducted excavations at the site and came up with a report in the year 2003. ASI excavated more questions than answers in Ayodhya. The ASI failed to shed any light on the site’s link to Lord Rama, the key issue in the entire political controversy. According to an archaeologist involved in the 1976 digs at Hanuman Garhi and Sita-ki-Rasoi in Ayodhya headed by Prof B B Lal, all that the ASI report does is establish beyond doubt the presence of a structure beneath the demolished Babri mosque, and push the antiquity of the site back by six centuries. Prof Lal’s report, published in the Indian Archaeology Review of 1976-77, dates the antiquity of the site to circa 7th century BC, while the present ASI report says the site dates back to the “middle of the 13th century BC”.  Here are two perspectives of the ASI report published in the year 2003.

PROOF OF TEMPLE FOUND AT AYODHYA : ASI

http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/aug/25ayo1.htm

NO SIGN OF TEMPLE AT AYODHYA

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2981106.stm

Hindus welcomed the report while the Muslims and the Sunni Waqf Board rubbished it saying the report is ‘vague and self-contradictory’. So now it is for the Court to decide whether there was a temple or not. But the larger question is that ‘Can matters of faith be judged inside Courts’? It is obvious that the verdict will make one community happy and the other sad. One community will celebrate and the other will knock the doors of Supreme Court. In short if the verdict “suits” the fanatics (Hindus & Muslims both) they abide by the law but if it doesn’t they say “Law” is not above faith.


The barbaric act


DEMOLITION- Who was responsible?

ROLE OF CONGRESS:

PV Narsimharao, his Home Minister SB Chavan and the Muslim leaders of Congress were also responsible for the demolition of the mosque. Narsimharao was the supreme architect. The shrewd man let ‘things take their own course’ and found no reason to invoke president’s rule when North India was boiling, though he immediately after dismissed the BJP governments in even MP and Himachal Pradesh for no apparent reason. Narsimharao lied to the nation. He promised on live television that the mosque would be rebuilt, but gave ample opportunity to the Kar Sewaks to build the make-shift temple, and in process hurt the confidence of millions of Indians in the government and the official machinery. He would not have been able to do so, had the Ministers in his government taken a firm stand. But the ‘qaum farosh’ leaders showed little remorse or action. Ministries were more important than the mosque or the faith of the minorities. Worse was to follow. Riots were engineered in Mumbai (and Surat) and Congress CM Sudhakar Rao Naik let the Shiv Sena mobs go on rampage in the metropolis.


ROLE OF BJP:

The Ram Rath Yatra began from Somnath on September 25, 1990, Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya’s birth anniversary, and was supposed to culminate at Ayodhya on October 30, after traversing 10,000 km. Although linked to the liberation of Ram Janmabhumi, its aim was to raise three fundamental questions that had all along lurked in the collective sub-conscience of the nation but nobody had dared ask them, fearful of retribution from the pseudo-secularists who had ruled India by default since 1947. These questions were:

• What is secularism? What is communalism?

• Can national integration be achieved by constantly pandering to minority communalism?

• Cannot Government reject the cult of minorityism?


The continuous appeasement of muslims by the Congress at the Center was one of the sole reasons behind the Rath Yatra and even today the situation is no different. But sadly the Rath Yatra failed to answer these questions and became a symbol of ‘communal’ violence in India. The Rath Yatra was a huge success and it drew large number of people towards it to contribute to the much hyped ‘cause’ of Demolition. After Shah Bano’s case , Rath Yatra & the Babri Masjid demolition remain ‘classic’ examples which made a mockery of the law & order situation in the country and above all defied the Constitution. I still feel ashamed when I see listen to the provocative speeches and hate slogans being played on the news channels. BJP, VHP & RSS in the shadow of Hindu Dharma played the worst kind of communal politics.

The provocative speeches made by Advani & other ministers in the well organised rallies were no less than terror spreading campaigns with “Jai shree Ram’ echoing in the background. A Janata Dal minister at that time made a statement “Musalman hamare kiraaedar hain” I wonder where is he right now? Some of the provocative slogans which fuelled the entire event:

Maarenge Mar Jayenge, Mandir Wahin Banaege.

o Jis Hindu ka khoon na khole woh khoon nahin paani hai

o Mandir wahin banaege lathi goli khayenge

o Tel gira do Dabur ka Naam mita do Babar Ka

o Yeh to keval jhaanki hai kaashi Mathura baaki hai

o Jo Hindu hit ki baat karega wahi desh par raj karega

o DeshDrohiyon saavdhan jag utha hai raam bhagwan.


Kar Sevaks


KEY PLAYERS:

Uma Bharati
Present near the disputed site on December 6, 1992. Accused of inciting karsevaks for demolishing the mosque and making inflammatory speeches. Faces IPC Sections 153-A, 153-B, 505, 147 and 149. Eyewitnesses said when the first, second and third domes fell, she was seen hugging Sadhvi Rithambara.

L.K. Advani
Present a few metres from the mosque on December 6, 1992. Charged with propagating communal violence, rioting and spreading ill will. During the NDA government, the charge of criminal conspiracy was revoked against him. But a key witness, who was also his then security officer, told the Rae Bareli court that Mr Advani had expressed his desire to go inside the disputed site on December 6. When he was told that it would not be possible, he asked Ms Bharti to go there. Faces IPC Sections 153-A, 153-B, 505, 147 and 149.

M.M. joshi
Former BJP chief and currently the party’s Varanasi MP M.M. Joshi was among the seniormost Sangh Parivar leaders who were present near at the disputed site on December 6, 1992. Eyewitnesses claimed before the court that Mr Joshi, along with party colleague and the then BJP chief L.K. Advani, had incited karsevaks by making inflammatory speeches who later demolished the mosque. He was also the HRD minister in the NDA government. Faces IPC Sections 153-A, 153-B, 505, 147 and 149.

Ritambara
The founding member of Durga Vahini, the women wing of the VHP, Sadhvi Ritambara was one of the active members of the Ram Janmabhoomi campaign and was known for making provocative speeches on the issue. She is charged with making inflammatory speeches on that day asking prodding karsevaks to bring down the mosque. Witnesses have told the court that Sadhvi Ritambara had exhorted karsevaks to pull down the mosque faster. Sadhvi Ritambara also faces IPC Sections 153-A, 153-B, 505, 147 and 149.

Vinay Katiyar
Founder president of the Bajrang Dal, Katiyar was among the Sangh Parivar leaders present near the disputed site. Before reaching the disputed site, senior Sangh leaders had a meeting at Mr Katiyar’s house in Kanpur. Charged with making inflammatory speeches at the disputed site, rioting and propagating communal violence. The Liberhan Commission report has also indicted him for the demolition.

A. SINGHAL
International president of the VHP. Present near the disputed site. After the Ram mandir movement failed to gather the momentum, he was the first leader who criticised the BJP for giving a political colour to the entire movement for its gain. Along with his Parivar colleagues, he is charged with making provocative speeches to incite the karsevaks. Faces IPC Sections 153-A, 153-B, 505, 147 and 149.

*Courtesy Deccan Chronicle *


And today the most disappointing thing is that leaders involved in this still say that they are proud of what happened. Proud of what? Proud of the communal tension it caused or the riots that followed? Proud of the human lives lost? BJP & other leaders involved have a lot to answer. And it’s not the political leaders alone, the very educated and urbane common man also shares the same thought about the temple. But it’s easy to make claims on the internet. If tomorrow riots erupt in their cities will the same people go and do “KARSEVA”? The self-proclaimed guardians of the Hindu Dharma just brought shame to the entire community. An average sane Hindu today and even 18 years back never approved the demolition. It is in Hinduism where people believe that God resides in the hearts of all. Then why is the temple so important? Are we lesser of a Ram Bhakta today? Are we making Ram Lallah happy by demolishing the mosque? Why on earth we need a temple to prove our faith in God? There are hundreds of temples in Ayodhya then why do we need one more? It’s a well-known fact that a large number of temples were demolished and looted by the Islamic rulers but the larger question is what is the point repeating the same thing?

Also, I don’t really understand the Muslims fancying about the mosque.  A youngster on twitter argues that Babar did not make a brothel after destroying the temple. He just made another place of worship! Then I think Sangh Parivaar was correct in demolishing the mosque.

Many muslims debate that Lord Ram is just a mythological character and there is no evidence if he actually existed. I say if Lord Ram is myth, then so is Allah who probably stays on 6th, 7th, 8th or probably on the 786th heaven! As far as my knowledge goes the Mullahs won’t prefer a place where idols are worshipped by infidels (kaafirs) since two decades. Intellectuals fear that any verdict against them will provoke organisations like Indian Mujahidin & Lashkar-e-Taiyabba to attack the Common Wealth Games.

* An emotional Hindu inside me says that Kashi, Mathura, Ayodhya are all sites sacred to Hindu which were encroached upon by Aurangzeb & Babur. They are as important as Mecca to Muslims.

Something like this could have been the solution!

HINDUS SAY:

While the Supreme Court has postponed until September 28 its hearing on a plea to defer the Allahabad high court’s verdict in the Ayodhya title suit, in the pilgrim town itself, there’s no dispute: The place was, and is, Ramjanmabhoomi for its Hindus. Purushottam Kumar who owns a shop in Ayodhya explains that each generation has known that this is the place where Ram was born and that there was a temple. “What will the court’s judgment change? Nothing,” he says smiling benignly. “Every Hindu knows in his heart that this is the Ramjanmabhoomi and it will not be anything else.”

MUSLIMS SAY:

One of the litigants, and the last surviving of the six who filed the petition, Ansari demands that the court give its verdict soon. “At least in my lifetime,” he says pleadingly, adding, “All of Ayodhya’s Muslims are waiting for this.”  Ahmed, member of the Helal Committee says demolition was wrong. Muslims paid the price for the sins of their forefathers. We are still waiting for the judgment .

*Courtesy TOI*

SOLUTION?

The anxiety level both in Lucknow and New Delhi over the potential repercussions on the emotive issue of the verdict is visible. The government is pleading & making appeals to the citizens to maintain law & order. Hindutva vadi’s and Mullahs are appealing for peace.

The intellectuals all over the country have come up with large number proposals (which are utterly impractical and childish) on “How to use the disputed site”? Many say both temple & mosque should co-exist there. Some say make an orphanage or a school there. Few say a hospital would be good. We all can only assume because eventually 3 people inside the Court will decide what is good for 1 billion people. I think the land should remain “disputed” and neither a temple nor a mosque should be built. It should arise as a symbol of extremism & hooliganism in our country which helps us and our future generations learn a lesson that extremism in religion causes nothing but destruction!


Post demolition RIOTS


KABIR says:

Saints, I see the world is mad

If I tell the truth they rush to beat me

If I lie they trust me!

HINDUS claim Ram as the one, Muslims claim Rahim.

Then they kill each other knowing not the essence!

With prayer beads & caps. And brows of holy paint.

They lose themselves in sacred hymns but know not their souls.

Many holy men I’ve seen. Teachers of holy books who acquire disciples, venerate graves.

But know NO GOD!

The world goes on like this and yet they call me mad.

But Kabir says, Listen Who’s the INSANE?


JAI SHREE RAM!!!

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “जन्मभूमि या रणभूमि ?

  1. My thought,as you have already said,

    I think the land should remain “disputed” and neither a temple nor a mosque should be built. It should arise as a symbol of extremism & hooliganism in our country which helps us and our future generations learn a lesson that extremism in religion causes nothing but destruction!

    Its time we move on….whatever happened has happened. Now we have two options, be drowned in it or move towards progress & prosperity of the country.I choose the later, I guess the young generation too chooses the same. It won’t affect anybody if the Hindus have one Temple less or the Muslims have one Mosque less but it will, if this one mosque or Temple becomes the cause of yet another communal riot.

    Like

  2. Gr8 wrk dude… U hv actly put wrds 2 d present generations thoughts…
    Nd ya i agree d land shud remain disputed… Watever b d courts verdict, d nxt tym a temple or mosque is constructed there, d opposite party z gonna try n wreck it again… The political parties r never gonna let ths issue die…
    Nd ya its actly gud dat d court has deffered its decision fr nw… hope d verdict comes after d cwg only… Otherwise god knws hw these fanatics may disrupt d whole games….
    anyways… gud wrk dude… kip posting!!!

    Like

  3. Pingback: Tweets that mention जन्मभूमि या रणभूमि ? « Techrahul's Blog -- Topsy.com

  4. hmmm…u ve completely covered the ground story..ofcurz as expected a nice article:):)ve gone thru several blogs concerning Ayodhya’s dispute…n most of the messages posted for d articles reflect the SAD attitude for each others religion….temple or masjid???
    ah…y not jst leave the land “disputed” as u suggested above… one cant ever understand India’s religio-politics…they cant think beyond their political interests so common mass need to think n then act..v ve 2 stop this cycle of hatred!
    Infact ram & allah would be pleased that instead of wasting time over the piece of land people do something constructive.:):)

    Like

  5. Rahul,
    Even though a lot of info is posted, I see a very high level of antagonism against some BJP & Sangh leaders whom you are accusing of Dec 6th 1992 (yes, via Deccan Chronicle). How about Narasimha Rao, the PM? How about the HM?

    While I agree that bringing down a dome, however unIslamic or barbaric it’s own construction was, was probably not the best message India could give to the world, I fail to see the jump on the same bandwagon that *only* blames BJP or right wing people, conveniently forgetting that it was Rajiv Gandhi who helped the whole communal buildup in late 80s.

    Was expecting a better balance for the blame part.

    – Kiran

    Like

  6. Clarification to my prior post:

    I am not ignoring the parts of your blog where PVN & Rajiv have been mentioned. But in reality, going to the extent of IPC details for one section by our ‘secular’ society, while just a brushing condemnation of PVN/Rajiv’s failure for the other section, is what I was highlighting. The ‘balance’ in blame part was not personally meant for you, but for the way we deal with this issue.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s