Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: Some of Rajeev Gowda's actual views on Ayodhya ...
From: <DXA4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 18:11:47 EST
 t.com><1993Jan23.163850.15432@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca> <1993Jan23.113856@IASTATE.EDU>
Organization: Penn State University

In article <1993Jan23.113856@IASTATE.EDU>, jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed Ahmed Khan)
says:
>
>In article <1993Jan23.163850.15432@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca>,
>bond@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (Girish) writes:
>>
>>     Yes, Hindus have been fighting for the Ram Janma Bhoomi since
>>     Mir Baqi demolished a temple and constructed a mosque-like
>>     structure on top of it in 1528.
>>
>>     In 1855, Hindu-Muslim clashes erupted over shrine. But the
>>     dispute was resolved temporarily by erecting a wall around
>>     the disputed structure. In the rebellion of 1857, the near-
>>     defunct Muslim dynasties tried to curry favor with the Hindus
>>     in order to launch joint effort to re-estiblish their rule.
>>     The Nawab promised to give the Hindus the Ram Janma Bhoomi
>>     site back, in an effort to quench their anti-Muslim animosity
>>     and redirect their attention towards the new common enemy
>>     from Britain. This is the only instance in modern history
>>     when Muslims offered concessions to Hindus. But this promise
>>     never materialized.
>>
>>     In May 1883, Hindus asked for a permission to build a temple
>>     at the Ram Janma Bhoomi site. Following objections from some
>>     Muslim leaders, Deputy Commissioner of Saket (Faizabad) refused
>>     the Hindu plea.
>>
>>     In January 1885, the mahant of Ram Janmasthan requested permission
>>     to construct a temple by moving a petition in the court of a
>>     subjudge at Saket. The request was turned down and the appeal
>>     was dismissed. Probably, the court decisions at that time were
>>     manipulated too! :-)
>>
>>     -- Girish.
>
>What I can't understand is that if the matter was so obvious and evidence
>so irrefutable why did the BJP-RSS-VHP shrink from presenting the court with
>such evidence and solve the matter once and for all.

VHP and other Hindus who have been supporting the RJB movement have never
shrunk from a court verdict on the issue of the existence of a temple at the
disputed site and their right to worship the idols there. Dont you know that
the cases on these issues have been their in the court for the past four
decades, and almost all the interim judgements have gone in their favor. Does
that not prove that they have stronger evidence than their opponents. The only
thing they donot want the court to sit in the judgement on the issue of Ram's
birthplace which is a matter of faith.

On the other hand, it was Babri committee and muslim leaders who have been
shrinking from going to the court or being a party to refer the case to the
court (irrespective of what Mr. Shahabuddin had said) for one point determina-
tion of whether there was temple prior to the construction of the mosque. They
opposed it during VP Singh's time when an ordinance (similar to the recent one)
was issued with the condition of one point reference to the SC, which was with-
drawn within 24 hours bacause Imam Bukhari opposed it, they again opposed it
when similar proposal was brought on Nov. 22, 1992, and they are again opposing
now when such an ordinance has been issued on January 7, 1993 with the pre-cond
tion of one point reference to the SC's opinion under article 143. In fact they
have threatened to challenge the whole package in the court, in their opinion
it is against Shariat. Even Muslim Personal Law Board has also opposed the
court's opinion. Also Imam Bukhari is on the records that if a court judgement
goes against Muslims, they will not accept it since such a judgement will be
against Koran. Regarding their respect for court rulings, their past record is
well known and has been highlighted numerous times (Shah Bano case etc.), but
recently when on January 2, 1993 the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court
ruled that Hindus be allowed to perform darshan and puja in the make-shift
Ram temple at the disputed site. Not a single Muslim leader or any so-called
secular party leader accepted court verdict, nay, all of them issued statements
to oppose it and requested the central government to take steps to nullify it.
Are the Hindus only expected to follow the court orders, and if they dont, they
are damned? Why dont the same standards be applied to non-Hindus?

Another reason for not involving the courts in such cases is the sluggish legal
procedures. Remember the first case was filed in Feb. 1950 and still the
verdict is awaited. Parties can no longer wait any more, otherwise the issue
will continue to generate fire between the communities.

>
>The judges certainly aren't so dumb that they would refuse to accept such
>"irrefutable" evidence!!.

No they are not. But the politicians and Muslim leaders are. Otherwise by now
they would have seen the truth of Ayodhya long back and had not dragged this
issue so long and in the process only these 'dumb' politicians and muslim
leaders are the ones suffering and repenting now. Among the secular leaders
it was Mahatma Gandhi who had realized the truth of Ayodhya in 1937 when the
dispute took an ugly turn and Hindus had damaged the domes which were repaired
by charging penalty to Hindus of Ayodhya, and after that Muslims of Ayodhya
had volunteerly abandoned the site, and only after this Gandhi Ji issued an
appeal in the 27 Feb. 1937 issue of Nav Jeevan to hand over the site to Hindus.
But British government and Muslim national leadership did not pay attention to
Gandhi Ji's appeal, and rest is recent history.

>
>The BMAC couldn't have called the bluff for so long if the BJP combine
>weren't sure of the evidence themselves.

It is other way around Mr. Javed (see above), and otherwise these Babari walas
had not run away from negotiation tables again and again when confronted with
irrefutable evidences of VHP vs only opinions (and not evidences) of BMCC, on
one pretext or the other. In their opinion the tonns of evidence unearthed
recently (June 15, 1992, Dec.6, 1992 and January 6, 1993) + BB Lal's findings
are all either 'transportable' material or planted by Kar Sevaks. However, in
their opinion a 2.2 lbs piece of glazed pottery with islamic designs is not
transportable item and provides a clinching evidence that there was no temple
destroyed and the mosque was built on an empty land. Any body who believes
these Babari historians must be intellectually bankrupt. I wonder the most
recent findings of archaelogical items on January 6, 1993 in support of temple'
s existence on the disputed site, when the security forces  were digging
the ground near the make-shift Ram temple to erect barbed railings, there was  o
no kar sevaks, no VHP leaders etc. and hence no possibility  of planting of
of these evidences, has not moved these Babari historians to issue any comment?
As I said in my earlier post that for these Babari walas (which includes you
too, Mr. Javed), even if Badashah Babar resurrects from his grave and annonces
that he really did order the destruction of a temple and building of the
mosque on its ruins, he would be asked to shut up and be accused of having
gotten brain washed by RSS/VHP/BJP propaganda machinery.

Dinesh Agrawal...
>
>--Javed.
>