From: DXA4@PSUVM.PSU.EDU (Dinesh Agrawal)
Subject: India - Vishwa Hindu Parishad Submits Questionnaire to Babri Committee
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 20:03:10 GMT


From: Dinesh Agrawal
Date: October 12, 1992
Source: Times of India, October 5, 1992

                               * * * * * *

VHP SUBMITS QUESTIONNAIRE TO AIBMAC

New Delhi, October 4. During the tripartite talks on the Ayodhya issue here
yesterday, representatives of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) submitted a 19-
point questionnaire to the All India Babri Masjid Action Committee (AIBMAC) on
some of the basic issues concerning the latter's claim to the disputed
structure.

According to the AIBMAC leader, Mr. Jilani, replies to the questionnaire would
be submitted during the next round of talks on October 16. The document, he
said, was not part of the official literature exchanged between the two sides,
but the AIBMAC had agreed to furnish replies to the questions.

Penned by the VHP's Lucknow-based legal advisor, Dr. Harsh Narain, the
questionnaire refers to some of the basic Islamic tenets and asks whether some
writers of the Mughal period, who stated that Babur built the structure after
demolishing a temple, were 'liars'. When the veracity of the writers' accounts
were not questioned so far, why do so today. the AIBMAC leaders have been
asked.

QUESTIONS POSED: Some of the questions posed are:
*Do you uphold the formula 'once a mosque, always a mosque'? But the Quran and
the Prophet do not sanction or envisage it. The Quran speaks of two kinds of
mosques - a mosque founded on piety (taqwa) and a mosque intended for evil-
doing (diraran). It prohibits prayer in the mosque of evil (masjidu'd-dirar),
as it has come to be styled. These provisions were occasioned by a real
'mosque of evil' built by some Muslims on the outskirts of Medina. They invited
the Prophet to inaugurate it by offering prayers, but the Prophet, though
agreeable in the first instance, set fire to it and smashed it to pieces. Does
it not cut the ground under the feet ot the 'once a mosque, always a mosque,
theory?
*If not, how?

*Caliph Umar bin Abdul-Aziz restored to Christians a church of Damascus turned
by Banu Nasr into a mosque. He also ordered restoration to Christians the
Church of John there turned into a mosque, though Muslims made the Christians
forgo their claim by restoring to the latter all the churches wrested by the
former in the area of Al-Ghut by force. Caliph Harunur-Rashid also permitted
reconstruction of several churches demolished by Ali bin Sulayman, the Abassid
governor of Egypt, during the caliphate of Mahdi.

RESTORATIONS: Such restorations occurred during the reigns of Akbar and Shah
Jehan. For instance, Akbar ordered restoration of a temple - turned mosque to
Hindus at Asir fort. Shah Jehan restored to Shanti Das Jauhari the Parsvanatha
Chintamani temple at Saraspur near Ahmedabad after dismantling the minarets of
the Quwwatul-Islam mosque into which Aurangzeb had converted it...Although,
after taking the reins of the government, Aurangzeb abrogated his father's
orders and restored its status quo ante as a mosque. Did they all violate the
Shariat?
*If not, why should Indian Muslims not follow suit?

*Is there any instance of a non-existent temple's being reported by Muslims as
forcibly converted into a mosque and that too when such a report was likely
to prejudice the case of the mosque party pending before the king of Awadh, and
even the British Resident had a say in decision-making?
*If not, why take it for granted in the instant case that the Ram temple did
not exist, in the face of unequivocal statements of its existence and
demolition by Babur?

As part of the 'Notes' section, Dr. Narain cites various references material,
including some Islamic literature. Mr. Jilani said the AIBMAC would be glad
to provide answers to the questions posed.

                                   * E N D *
Newsgroups: misc.news.southasia