From: selvakum@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering)
Subject: Re: Win Win situation for Muslims Hindus & Secularists at Ayodhya
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 04:54:20 GMT

In article <C0K1qC.8Fw@ucunix.san.uc.edu> bhatnagr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Raj Bhatnagar) writes:
>In article <C0F0o9.AsH@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> selvakum@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering) writes:
>
>
>>    It is truly a shame that you and a few others like Virendra Verma, 
>>    the Purple Bleeder, Indu, Deepak, Kuram Narayana and a 
>>    more sober-sounding person from princeton,  Raj Bhatnagar, .. 
>>    should write in support of this absolutely barbarious act.
>>    What is bothersome is that in the name of religious fundementalism
>                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>    a section of Indian Citizens are subjugated to a second class
>>    citizenship 
>
>
>A very brief comment :
>
>  The name Babri Masjid has two words in it.
>  Babri connotes a foreign invader who destroyed a native temple
>  at that site and masjid makes it an Islamic place of worship.
>
>  The nationalist perspective is that it was "BABRI masjid" and 
>  since it was at the cost of a symbol of native heritage, it had
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  the lower priority and could be removed. 
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^******************

         I think it is not inappropriate to think that Babur was
         a KING of a part of present-day India. This is history
         whether one likes it or not.
         He might have been a tyrant etc. but that does NOT mean
         he was not a King of a part of present-day India just like
         Gupta or Harsha who also ruled a part of India. To talk of 
         Babur as an invader and 
         BABRI masjid as a symbol of invaders of several centuries
         ago  ( and hence your chilling perception that it can be
         'removed' ! ) is nothing but serious revisionism which leads 
         to many other dangerous isms.
         Muslim and Christian cultures are intrinsic parts of
         Indian culture. They might be minority cultures just as
         vedic culture or Naadar culture but they have just as much
         right as any other and no other ( including the majority)
         group has any RESPONSIBLE right to trample upon it. 
         
         I therefore do NOT understand how the Babri Masjid is
         at the cost of native heritage. 
         
         Whether you like it or not Asoka, Harsha, Babur, Akbar
         et al ruled parts of present day India and numerous
         cultural and literary elements have become part of India.
         Vast majority of muslims I understand are 'native people'
         no different from the 'hindus' and as such one has to 
         respect their ( our muslim co-citizens) viewpoints. 
         This is NOT minority appeasement. Some political parties
         and organizations are systematically distorting basic
         facts.  

          
        
>
>  The other perspective is that it was "babri MASJID" and should
>  be viewed as an Islamic place of worship *only*..
>
>  In my view, the latter is the "religious fundamentalistic" 
>  perspective and the former is the secular, nationalistic
                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

       This is a strange view ! You said 'BABRI masjid' (with 
       emphasis on 'Babri') was 'at the cost of a symbol of
       native heritage; it had a lower priority and can be
       REMOVED' ! How can this become secular and nationalistic? !!
       It is nothing but cheap politics of an ugly kind to focus
       national attention to gain political ground by some
       political parties with serious support from fundementalist
       organizations. Secular and nationalistic ?? !! You must be
       kidding ! [ I know and have read many of your long
       articles in support Ayodhya citing archeological
       studies..  ] 
       
>  perspective. If the backers of former perspective were indeed
>  after BM because of it being a MASJID, then they could have
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  harmed 1000s of other MASJIDS if they wanted to but they did not.
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

             Seriously, this is an equally chilling perception !
             Nothing less than cruel threat to minorities !!
             I DID notice the 'if' you had used but I understand
             this kind of arguments :-)
             
>  The insistence was on BABRI and the temple underlying it! But
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  I guess some choose to see it onbly as a MASJID and close their
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  eyes to all other aspects of the structure.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

             This is a clever argument ! 

              WHY SHOULD AN EXISTING STRUCTURE BE DEMOLISHED ?
              why can't a structure be built somewhere close by ?
              There are many temples of Vishnu believed to be 
              built on Siva temple, similarly it is said that Siva
              temples were destroyed and Buddha Vihars were built;
              Buddha Vihars were destroyed and hindu temples were
              built; so too about jain-buddha-hindu temples..
              are we going to correct all these ?!!
              TODAY to resort to destroying masjid-temple-church
              is nothing but pure paganism. 
>
>  Despite the above, it remains true that BJP went out of the
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  constitutional framework to achieve its goal, and RJB-BM is only
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

          I am glad at least you acknowledge this much! In my opinion
          the very goal is ill-conceived ! ( I know you will not 
           agree with this)

>  a symptom of the conflict between nationalisms grounded on the one
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  hand in Indian civilization and in Islamic brotherhood on the other.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

        I think it is a symptom of relgious fundementalism gaining
        ascendancy. To say that it is a symptom of conflict of
        Indian __civilization__ grounded on nationlism with something
        else is oxymoronic. Can destruction of a mosque be some
        act of civilization ?!
        Although, it might sound strong, it is nothing but one more
        act of  hindu-nazism ( which also spoke of a certain nationalism
        in a certain manner). 
>
>
>---raj
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>Where the world is headed is indicated by the three demolitions
>during the last few years :
>
>Bolshevism, Berlin Wall, and Babri Masjid.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>        ^
         |

           Neo-nazism is gaining ground in Germany ( not serious yet)
           neo-hindu-nazism is gaining ground in India ( quite serious
           I think), and ethnic wars are going on in former 
           Yugoslovia ( extremely despicable attrocities, very
           saddening) and some
           nazi elements are gaining ascendancy in former USSR..
           What matters is NOT where the world is headed but
           whether it is headed in the 'right' and civilized direction. 
           Although, I too believe that hindu fundementalism will
           gain further ground, will make new 'history' and
           new 'reforms'  ( rewriting school history books and
           bringing back many old oppressive systems with a new
           label etc. and many other things just like
           communists did in USSR), it will die just as 
           nazism ( I hope !)

     - Selva

Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian