The recent verdict on the Ayodhya issue made me take a look at what the fuss was all about. The entire nation was waiting anxiously for the verdict.All my colleagues, my room mates, my parents and almost everyone I knew were waiting for it. Even next day, my group manager, who sits in US, asked me about how the things were in Hyderabad after the Verdict. Never in my life I had seen people waiting so eagerly for a verdict. Frankly speaking, I don't really care about religious issues. But this issue intrigued me and I could not resist to explore it.
Here's what I dug up. Some X hundred years ago, Babber, supposedly, destroyed a Hindu Temple and built the Babri Masjid. Then in 1949, someone found idols of Lord Ram in the Masjid premises and filed a case in court that the land actually belonged to Hindus. Then after 40 odd years, some fanatics destroyed the Babri Masjid leading to communal riots across the nation. And then after nearly 20 years, the verdict on the Ayodhya issues came, dividing the disputed land in three equal parts.
I was talking to some of my friends regarding this and they really helped me understanding what goes on in the minds of the people regarding this issue. I asked them "What's the problem in making a temple at some distance from the disputed land?" I mean doing this can resolve this issue for once and all. If the Muslims have their Masjid over their now, let them have a land. I got some really interesting answers.
Here are some of the points that struck me the most. It was clearly wrong to destroy a temple and make a Masjid on the same land. After some 500 odd years the truth finally came out and the idols of Lord Ram were found in the Masjid premises. For the Muslims, the land does not signify any thing. Only thing is that connects them to Ayodhya is the Masjid. But for Hindus, Ayodhya has a much deeper meaning. Its the birthplace of Lord Ram. So, why don't the Muslims back off and lets us make the temple on the disputed land and they make their Masjid at some distance from the disputed land. If the Hindus back out Here (Birthplace of Lord Ram), they will, in short, declare that please come destroy our temples and make Masjids on the same land.
Their opinions did make some sense. But I was not totally convinced. They told me that it was wrong to destroy the temple and make a Masjid on top of it. I said, isn't this the same thing we tried to do in 1992? Also its not proven that Babber destroyed the temple. The temple could already be in ruins when he made Babri Masjid. I agreed to the point that Hindus have a connection with Ayodhya. But again, was Lord Ram not born in that exact place? So Hindus have a connection with Ayodhya and not the disputed land.
Now lets come to the point of Muslims backing off. I am not on anyone's side over here. People should realize that God does not want you to kill another human being, achieve victory, make a Temple/Masjid and worship him. Is a Temple/Masjid at one particular spot so important to connect with God? Let me give a very simple example. Suppose you drive over a dog by mistake (be it any reason, does not really matter). You will stop your car and at least check if you can do something for the poor soul. And anyone with a heart does this! But when is comes to religious issues, people kill each other in the name of God. What religion teaches this!
Actually, you can not say that a person fighting for this cause is wrong. There is no right or wrong here. Its just that some person can relate to the issue and fight for it and others like me don't feel so strongly about the issue. But one thing I can say for sure and it is "Whatever be your (religious)beliefs, it can not justify killing of and other human being". Its time now for us to move on from such things. We have been played with enough on this by media and politicians. Its time we all stand together and pray together on the same Holy Land of OURS.
Interesting read ... one version of the story is that in 1949 some people deliberately put hindu idols in the temple.
ReplyDeleteMandir to ban jaayega Par Ram kahan se laaoge?
ReplyDeleteUss masjid ki deewaron ko Kya pak kabhi kar paaoge?
Jis chaukhat par log jale Ram wahan na jaayenge
Jin galiyaron mein khoon gira Maula kya reh paayenge?
simplest solution is to become atheist, because politically correct secularism sucks big time!!
ReplyDelete@AD: yeah...
ReplyDelete@Manish: nicely summarized :D
@taper: becoming an atheist is not the solution...just try to respect each other as humans...
My Views (can be treated as another topic :D) --
ReplyDeleteVerdict says there was a huge Hindu temple on that land. Ayodhya is believed to be the birth place of Ram. But that means the whole Ayodhya is birth place. How can you pin point to that small area of 10x10 feet! Plus there must be hundreds of other Ram Temples all over Ayodhya, then why associate so much with just this one! So this exactly, I believe, is not the complaint Hindus have, but the fact that mosque was built on the ruins of huge Hindu temple, may be the biggest temple which is believed to have existed in that region, at the janmnabhoomi of Shree Ram, which was an important place of worship for Hindus. I am stressing on temple being biggest or highly religious place because, otherwise there is no point for Hindus to crib for.
And yes, it is proved archeologically that the temple existed.
Now the question is – if the temple was destroyed by Babar to build mosque? Or the mosque was built on the ruins of age old temple.
In the former case, it is definitely unacceptable by Hindus and even Muslims, since any religion considers it an evil act to destroy other religions’ worship places and build yours. So in this case, the one who has committed crime should be submissive to the verdict whatever it may be. The High Court judgment suits best in this case – divide land, let us not destroy existing structure completely, and let the mosque be there at one end, build temple at other.
In case the later had happened, then some questions arise.
• If that was such an important temple existing in that area, first of all, how the hell did it end up into ruins? Sounds impossible…
• Everyone, including Babar, must have known that according to mythology, Ayodhya is birth place of Lord Ram. Then why the hell did Babar choose that very piece of land where temple/ruins existed, to build mosque??! Why not any… any other place in Ayodhya?? Was it to curb Hindus and Hindu religion from the very source of it?? That is so much unacceptable!!
Both cases imply something that is unacceptable by Hindus.
Politics apart, I feel the the persuasion of the case by Hindus and future implementation of the verdict, is far more ‘symbolic’ than religious. It is to symbolize that ‘No, we will not accept our religion getting curbed by someone for spreading his religion’. Ok, even if that doesn’t make much sense to many in today’s world, one thing that we need to know very well is - who should be submissive among the TWO?
The best thing that happened after the verdict i think is..there were no riots again :) I wont say that our democracy has become more mature n stuff, but atleast people have started thiking. They are not falling pray to prvocations by politicians. And again, the verdict has tried to kind of pacify all ..
ReplyDelete@sidd: i do agree to some of your points. But you want to say who will be SUBMISSIVE between the two and I want to say that at some point someone will have to be the bigger person. The whole point of the post is to say just one thing. No matter what you think it can not justify you killing someone. If this thing can be sorted out peacefully then its well and good.
ReplyDelete@asawari: Everyone knew that this verdict will be of no use. Whatever might have been the outcome, one or the other was going to be unhappy and will move the case to higher authority. And yes, people for sure din't fall to provocations by media and politicians. You must have read the headlines in TOI and Deccan Herald. They were for sure offensive.