O, Hindus! Unite to build Grand Ram Temple at Ayodhya!

Ram is the 7th Avatar of the Hindu deity Vishnu. Ramayana states that Ayodhya on the banks of the Sarayu river is Rama’s birth place.

It is strange and tragic for Hindus to know that even Rama’s birth place viz. Ayodhya is being disputed and discussed by the so-called Ardent Muslims duly supported by pseudo secularists, liberals, leftists, rationalists and Congress along with SP, BSP etc.

Hindus in their own Land of Dharma are continued to be treated as second class citizens – all due to disunity of Hindus in defending their religious rights and freedoms of worship and their votes being split on narrow castes’ lines as against en-bloc solid votes of other minorities’ sects – to press their unjust demands from the Government and even from Courts.

In Buddha’s time (600 B.C.), the present day Ayodhya was called Saketa and only during the Gupta times, it was made their capital after which it was called Ayodhya. Kalidasa wrote Raghuvamsa here and Rama was believed to have ascended to heaven through the waters of Sarayu River.

After the Gupta’s period, the capital of North India moved to Kannauj and Ayodhya lost its importance. But it was revived in the 11th Century A.D. during Gahadavala period. Gahadavalas, being Vaishnavas, built several Vishnu temples in Ayodhya, but, only five of which survived till Aurangzeb’s reign and it was surmised that a temple might have been built at the birth spot of Rama by the Gahadavalas and thereafter, Ayodhyas’ importance as a pilgrimage centre grew.

According to various historical records, the following facts emerge: Young Babur came from Kabul to Awadh (Ayodhya) in disguise dressed as Sufi ascetic and met the Sufi saints Shah Jalal and Sayyid Musa Ashiqan who were ready to bless Babur, if he built a mosque after demolishing the Janmasthan Temple in Ayodhya. Babur took a pledge in return for their blessings to destroy  Ram’s Ayodhya temple after conquering Hindustan.

In order to fulfill his pledge, Babur destroyed among other things Ayodhya Ram Temple and built a masque which was called Babur Masjid.

Jai Singh II (popularly called "Sawai Jai Singh", 1688-1743) purchased land and established Jaisinghpuras in all Hindu religious centres in North India, including Mathura, Vrindavan, Banaras, Allahabad, Ujjain and Ayodhya. The documents of these activities have been preserved in the Kapad-Dwar collection in the City Palace Museum in Jaipur.

Professor R. Nath concluded that Jai Singh had acquired the land of Rama Janmasthan in 1717. The ownership of the land was vested in the deity. The hereditary title of the ownership was recognized and enforced by the Mughal State from 1717.

The first recorded instances of religious violence in Ayodhya occurred in the 1850s over a nearby mosque at Hanuman Garhi. The Babri mosque was attacked by Hindus in the process. Since then, local Hindu groups made occasional demands that they should have the possession of the site and that they should be allowed to build a temple on the site, all of which were denied by the colonial government.

In 1853, a group of armed Hindu ascetics belonging to the Nirmohi Akhara occupied the Babri Masjid site, and claimed ownership of the structure.

Subsequently, the civil administration stepped in, and in 1855, divided the mosque premises into two parts: one for Hindus, and the other for Muslims.

In 1883, the Hindus launched an effort to construct a temple on the platform. When the administration denied them the permission to do this, they took the matter to court.

In 1885, the Hindu Sub Judge Pandit Hari Kishan Singh dismissed the lawsuit. Subsequently, the higher courts also dismissed the lawsuit in 1886, in favour of status quo.

Hindus and Muslims are said to have worshipped at the "mosque-temple," Muslims inside the mosque and Hindus outside the mosque but inside the compound. After the British took over the State, they put up a railing between the two areas to prevent disputes.

In 1946, an offshoot of the Hindu Mahasabha called Akhil Bharatiya Ramayana Mahasabha (ABRM) started an agitation for the possession of the site.

In 1949, Sant Digvijay Nath of Gorakhnath Math joined the ABRM and organised a 9-day continuous recitation of Ramcharit Manas, at the end of which the Hindu activists broke into the mosque and placed idols of Rama and Sita inside. The date of the event was 22 December 1949. 

Jawaharlal Nehru insisted that the idols should be removed. However, the local official K. K. K. Nair, known for his Hindu nationalist connections, refused to carry out orders, claiming that it would lead to communal riots. 

As thousands of Hindu devotees started visiting the place, the Government declared the mosque a disputed area and locked its gates. However, the idols remained inside and priests were allowed entry to perform daily worship.

So, the mosque had been converted into a de facto temple since December 22, 1949.

In 1986, a district judge ruled that the gates would be reopened and Hindus permitted to worship inside, providing a major boost to the movement.

In September 1990, BJP leader L. K. Advani began a "rath yatra" (pilgrimage procession) to Ayodhya in order to generate support for the movement.  Advani later stated in his memoirs, "If Muslims are entitled to an Islamic atmosphere in Mecca, and if Christians are entitled to a Christian atmosphere in the Vatican, why is it wrong for the Hindus to expect a Hindu atmosphere in Ayodhya?"

The yatra resulted in communal riots in many cities in its wake, prompting the government of Bihar to arrest Advani. On October 30, 1990, many were gunned down by the police on orders of the then Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav, when they gathered in Ayodhya as participants of the Rath-Yatra; their bodies were thrown in the Sarayu river.

Accusing the central government led by V.P. Singh of being weak, the BJP withdrew its support, necessitating fresh elections. In these elections, the BJP won a majority in the Uttar Pradesh legislative assembly increased its share of seats in the Lok Sabha.

On 6 December 1992, the VHP and its associates, including the BJP, organised a rally involving 150,000 VHP and BJP kar sevaks at the site of the mosque. The ceremonies included speeches by the BJP leaders such as Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Uma Bharti. The mob grew restive through the duration of the speeches, and stormed the mosque shortly after noon. A police cordon placed there to protect the mosque was heavily outnumbered. The mosque was attacked with a number of improvised tools, and brought to the ground in a few hours. 

This occurred despite a commitment from the state government to the Indian Supreme Court that the mosque would not be harmed. More than 2000 people were killed in the riots following the demolition. Riots broke out in many major Indian cities.

On 16 December 1992, the Liberhan Commission was set up by the Government of India to probe the circumstances that led to the demolition of the Babri Mosque. It was the longest running commission in India's history with several extensions granted by various governments. The report found a number of people culpable in the demolition, including BJP Top leaders as well as VHP leaders including Shiv Sena Chief Bal Thackeray and RSS leader K. Govindacharya. 

In July 2005, terrorists attacked the makeshift temple at the site of the destroyed mosque. The legal case continues regarding the title deed of the land tract which is now a government controlled property.

In 2003, the Archaeological Survey of India conducted excavations of the site on court orders. The ASI report indicated the presence of a 10th century temple under the mosque. Hence with this, one major issue – Babur Masjid was raised only by destroying a temple and also using the many columns of the destroyed temple for the construction of the mosque, was settled once for all and the Court had fully agreed with the findings.

On the writ petition filed by Ismail Faruqui in the Allahabad High Court in 1993, Constitution bench of Supreme Court in 1994 ruled that a mosque is not an essential part of the practice of the religion of Islam and namaz (prayer) can be offered anywhere, even in open’. In the recent Supreme Court’s judgement to expedite speedy hearings on Ayodhya title suit, the Apex Court declined to refer the question ‘Is a mosque as a place of prayer an essential part of Islam’ to 7 bench judge, as references cannot be made to a larger bench merely because of questionable observations made in an earlier judgement. Further, acquisition – be it a temple, church or mosque – is sovereign power and places of worship of all religions are liable to be acquired by the government under the Doctrine of Eminent Domain. 

In 2010, Allahabad High Court ruled that the 2.77 acres (1.12 ha) of Ayodhya land be divided into 3 parts, with 1/3 going to the Ram Lalla or Infant Lord Rama represented by the Hindu Maha Sabha for the construction of the Ram temple, 1/3 going to the Islamic Sunni Waqf Board and the remaining 1/3 going to a Hindu religious denomination Nirmohi Akhara. 

The excavations by the Archaeological Survey of India were heavily used as evidence by the court that the predating structure was a massive Hindu religious building. But, as all are not ready for such a settlement, it was advised that the court should decide title to only one party for a lasting solution for the dispute.

The Hindus are fighting to acquire ‘now so-called’ disputed government owned site to build a Ram Temple which was in existence since long, but, was pulled down by Babur to construct a mosque using the ruins of temple which was proved to the fullest satisfaction of courts of India.

The Hindus Forums formed to get back the Ram Janmaboomi site had pleaded earlier to arrange for excavations at Babri Masjid to know whether there was a temple existed and whether Masjid was built after temple demolition. This genuine request was turned down on the pleas that ‘it is irreligious and against Islam to dig their place of worship’ and neither the then Congress Government nor other pro-Muslims’ secular brigades had shown sympathy or genuine concerns to give some semblance of arriving at an amicable settlement – but blamed the Hindus under the guise of secularism that the Hindus are fundamentalists and are having no justification to claim the site of Babri Masjid.

Due to such environments, Hindus’ tolerance was under heavy thrust and their anger against injustice was very much evident throughout length and breadth of India. They had lost their faiths with Government, Courts and Muslims. Ruthless suppression of their protests after Advani’s Rath Yathra wherein thousands of Kar Sevaks were gunned down and their bodies were bundled up in gunnies packs and were thrown into Sarayu River during Mulayam Singh Yadav’s rule in Uttar Pradesh. It is a different story that Mulayam Singh Yadav had admitted afterwards that he should not have ordered firing of Kar Sevaks!

With Congress Government at the Centre under Narasimha Rao and BJP government at UP, the Hindus’ Karsevaks of around 1.50 lacs had pulled down Babri Masjid and could install Ram & Sita idols in the makeshift temple. The destruction had become inevitable, as the Hindus’ voices were not heard and had lost their patience. ‘Enough is Enough’ mentality crept into the minds of Organisers spearheading the Ayodhya moment and Babri Masjid was pulled down by them.

Destruction  of Babur Masjid was only for Construction of Ram Temple – establishing justice forcefully in the absence of judicial support and wanton delaying tactics of the opposing parties to the dispute. The Hindus had made many solemn requests to Muslim Brethren that though thousands and thousands of their places of worship throughout India were demolished by Muslims’ Invaders, the Hindus had asked the present day Muslims’ Organisations restricting their demands for restoration of demolished temple only to three most holy of holy places of worship for the Hindus viz. Ayodya Ram Temple, Kasi Viswanath Temple and Mathura Temple as a permanent solution and long standing peace thereby confining to Ram, Shiva and Krishna – representing Vaishnava, Shiva and Yadava sects. But the Hindus’ requests were simply rejected and even mocked by not only Muslims but also by So-called Secular Parties including Congress which was the ruling party then.

Now the Supreme Court had ordered that the hearing in the main Ayodhya title suit appeals would resume in a new three-judge bench in the week commencing from October 29, 2018. 

Hope that justice will be ensured and that the judgement will be pronounced in this year itself. 

O, Hindus! Unite to build Grand Temple at Ayodhya!

SATYAMEVA JAYATHE!  JAI SHRI RAM!