WHO IS LAW ABIDING ON THE ISSUE OF
BABRI MASJID?
Palani Baba
|
The Babri Masjid has been a hot issue for so many years; both Muslims and Hindus claim it to be their worship place. The real issue is not only about a mosque versus a temple, or Babri Masjid versus Ram-Janam-Bhoomi, or the place to worship the only God; the unseen and all powerful God Almighty; creator of the universe versus the place to worship a man called Rama, who never claimed to be God, while he walked this earth.
The mere fact that Rama was born (whether at the site of Babri Masjid or anywhere else) is enough for any sane person to realize that Rama was not God. How can Rama, a man be justified with God? Let us reason in detail:
The claim for Babri Masjid by Rashtriya Swayarn Sevak Sangh (RSS), Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Hindu Munnani is illegal, illogical and unproven. The Radio-carbon dating method (C-14 test) scientifically proves that Babri Masjid pillars are not even 500 years old. Then, how can it be birthplace of Rama, who lived 5000 years ago, according to the Hindu belief. Hence, it is scientifically proven that it cannot be the birthplace of Rama.
The Law of the Nation Should Decide the Rightful Owner
The R.S.S. chief Balasaheb Deoras and BJP leader Mr. Advani have asserted that Babri Masjid issue cannot be decided by the country's court. The highest judicial body in any country is the court of law. If the law of the land is not qualified to impart justice in a secular state with regard to religious issues -- who else can? Will it not be a free for all affair? Is this law of the jungle, where the strong crushes the weak? No responsible leader or politician will make such an arrogant statement in the press. This is a sample of the Hindu fanaticism.
Christianity Vs. Hindu Fanaticism
Including Neelakkal (near Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu State) at present there are 72 places of worship belonging to Christians and 120 places of worship belonging to Muslims that are claimed by the Hindu fanatical forces as Hindu worshiping places. In addition, very Recently Hindu Munnani has prepared a list claiming that there are 3000 places of worship belonging to Muslims were once temples. Against Christianity, RSS, VHP and Hindu Munnani are running a dangerous campaign in areas such as Nagercoil and Tirunelveli (Tamil Nadu State). As a result, violent bloodshed has started on both sides.
Look at the Historical Facts and Evidence and Decide for Yourself
Neither history nor fact can come to their rescue. Their motives are not confined to Babri Masjid. If they succeed in snatching away Babri Masjid from Muslims, it will be made a precedent to extend the agitation to every other place of religious importance to the Muslims.
It is clear that the allegations, on which, the demands of RSS, Vishwa Hindu Parishad & Hindu Munnani are based for laying claim to Babri Masjid are rooted in hatred.
In India, several Buddhist and Jain temples were demolished and several Hindu temples constructed instead. If the Buddhists and Jain claim on historical demands for justice, then will the Hindu agree to demolish them and allow the Buddhists and Jain to erect their places of worship?
Today, in India there are 20% Muslim, 3% Christian, 2% Sikh, 0.7% Buddhist and 25% Untouchables. According to Puri Chankaracharya, Untouchables are not Hindus and are not allowed to enter temples. (Total non-Hindu population of India = approx. 51%). Our Great RSS chief Balasaheb Deoras, Shiva Sena's Bal Thakeray and Advani never uttered a word against Puri Chankaracharya's claim.
Are you aware of the theory that Taj Mahal is a Shiva Temple? A paper presented at the World Hindu Conference at Columbo in April 1982 claimed that "The Hajrul Aswad (Kaaba, the Black Stone) is only a form of Shivalinga." There is no limit to the Hindu fanatical imagination.
According to the District Gazetteer Faizabad 1905, it is said that "up to this time (1855), both the Hindus and Muslims used to worship in the same building. But since the Mutiny (1857), an outer enclosure has been put up in front of the Masjid and the Hindus forbidden access to the inner yard, make the offerings on a platform (chabootra), which they have raised in the outer one."
Militant Hindus in 1883 wanted to construct a temple on this chabootra, but the Deputy Commissioner prohibited the same on Jan. 19, 1885. Raghubir Das, a mahant, filed a suit before the Faizabad Sub-Judge. Pandit Harikishan was seeking permission to construct a temple on this chabootra measuring 17 ft. x 21 ft. the suit was dismissed. An appeal was filed before the Faizabad District Judge, Colonel J.E.A. Chambiar who after an inspection of spot on March 17, 1886, dismissed the appeal.
A Second Appeal was filed on May 25, 1886, before the Judicial Commissioner of Awadh, W. Young, who also dismissed the appeal. With this, the first round of legal battle fought by the Hindu militants came to an end.
During the "communal riots" of 1934, walls around the Masjid and one of the domes of the Masjid were damaged. These were reconstructed by the British Government.
On mid-night of December 22, 1949, when the police guards were asleep, idols of Rama and Sita were quietly smuggled into the Masjid and were planted by a group of Hindu Nazis. This was reported by constable, Mata Prasad, the next morning and recorded at the Ayodhya police station.
According to a pre-conceived plan, the following morning (Dec. 23, 1949), a large "Hindu" crowd made a "frantic attempt" to enter the Masjid on the pretext of offering puja to the idols illegally planted. The District Magistrate K.K. Nair has recorded that "The crowd made a most determined attempt to force entry. The lock was broken and policemen were rushed off their feet. All of us, officers and men, somehow pushed the crowd back and held the gate. The sadhus recklessly hurled themselves against men and arms and it was with great difficulty that we managed to hold the gate. The gate was secured and locked with a powerful lock brought from outside and police force was strengthened (5:00 pm)." Thus, the fight of fanatics became frustrated.
On hearing this shocking news Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru became very furious and directed UP Chief Minister Govind Ballabh Pant, to see that the idols were removed. Under Pant's orders, Chief Secretary Bhagwan Sahay and Inspector-General of Police V.N. Lahiri sent immediate instructions to Faizabad to remove the idols. However, K.K. Nair feared that the Hindu mob would cause "bloodshed and manslaughter" and pleaded inability to carry out the orders. Since then, the Hindu extremists came to believe that "disorder and violence" alone would pay.
Does this not prove that the Hindu militants believe in "bloodshed and manslaughter" as a means to achieve their goals. On Jan. 5, 1950 the chairman of the Faizabad-cum-Ayodhya Municipal Board was appointed Receiver to take charge of the Masjid under Sec. 145 of the Cr.P.C. The Civil suit (No. 2 of 1950) filed by Gopal Singh Visharad on Jan. 16, 1950 before the Civil Judge Faizabad seeking permission to worship these idols (which had been illegally planted in the Masjid), is still pending and the matter is now before the High Court. There are eight defendants including five Muslims and the Govt. of UP. The statement of the Deputy Commissioner, J.N. Ugra, filed before the court, said: "on the night of Dec. 22, 1949, the idols of Ramachandraji were surreptitiously and wrongly put inside the Masjid."
On Jan. 25, 1986, a 28-year old Umesh Chandra Pandey who was not even born when the suit was filed, went to court seeking permission for himself and his co-religionists to worship these idols in the Masjid. The District Judge, K.M. Pandey recorded a statement of the District magistrate (i.e., the Revenue Officer) T.K. Pandey and without even giving an opportunity to the others who were parties to the dispute, passed an interim order related to a dispute whose file was at the High Court. At the time of passing the orders, the main file was not before the said District Judge!
Within minutes of passing the order the locks that had been put 37 years ago (on Dec. 23, 1949) were broken and "idol worship" started. It is very clear that V.C. Pandey, K.M. Pandey and T.K. Pandey all belong to a subsect of a sub-caste, as their very names indicate.
Curiously the State owned TV lost no time to telecast the opening of the locks, the worship and the mob fanfare on that very day. All this goes to show the TV officials might have had prior knowledge of the court's orders. Evidently the media was under the influence of high-caste Brahmins.
The upper Hindu caste-controlled "national press" has hidden the above mentioned facts while highlighting the events related to the Baht Masjid / Ram-Janam-Bhoomi issue. The media is projecting only the Nazi view-point.
Lately, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and other like minded militant Brahmins are holding meetings where pledges are being taken that the Babri Masjid shall not be released to Muslims irrespective of the final judicial verdict. And these Nazis are the very people who often boast that "judiciary is the only hope of India". Those who advocate the rule of law are breaking the law on Babri Masjid.
Back to Section IndexIt is Facts That Make History Not Faith
The Babri Masjid / Ram-Janam-Bhoomi dispute will be decided by a three-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court, Home Minister Buta Singh announced in the Lok Sabha on Monday. He said the Government of Uttar Pradesh would be moving the matter before the division Bench on July 10, 1989 when he expected all the parties to the dispute to be present.
Mr. Buta Singh was replying to an animated special discussion on the communal situation in the country. A noteworthy feature of debate, which cut across party lines, was that the participants were unanimous in condemning communalism and demanding a statutory ban on all organizations professing communalism.
The Home Minister reaffirmed the Government's resolve to combat communalism with a heavy hand but regretted that no state Government had so far set up a "Composite" police force for dealing with communal tension.
Pressed by several opposition members, particularly Mr. Thampan Thomas (Janata Dal) to state the Government's stand on the issue which has become a serious threat to communal peace, Mr. Buta Singh said: "while the Government is keen to do all it can, to resolve the issue early, it would scrupulously keep away from taking any stand on it."
"We will not interfere in the matter. That State comes in only on the question of law and order," he said and added "we only tried to find a way out but one particular group of a contending party Vishwa Hindu Parishad, took the unfortunate stand that it would agree to the court verdict only if it favors their stand." Is this the respect this Hindu Organization (VHP) has for the Indian legal system?
Responding to the remark of Sayed Shahabuddin that something should be done to check communalism gaining ground in the country, Mr. Buta Singh said: "It is a fact this is a dangerous trend which must be nipped in the bud."
Shahabuddin Rules out the Shifting of Babri Masjid
The Insaf Party leader and Babri Masjid Action Committee convener Syed Shahabuddin has ruled out the shifting of the Babri Masjid from its present site in Ayodhya to facilitate the construction of a Sri Rama Temple at the spot.
Mr. Shahabuddin rejecting Mr. Purohits claim said it was wrong to state that temple standing on the site was destroyed to construct the Babri Masjid.
Mr. Shahabuddin further said "Minarets are not an essential part of any Masjid. There is no historic evidence to support the statement that minarets were built during the day and pulled down at night. No Muslim has questioned Hindu belief that Sri Rama was born in Ayodhya. But his birth site is already marked by Ram-Janmasthan Mandir and Ram Chabootra."
Mr. Shahabuddin said, "My solution is to let the Babri Masjid remain where it is and to construct a temple on the Ram Chabootra or on the vacant land just to the west of Babri Masjid and let the mosque and temple co-exist in peace to the glory of our mother land."
Advocating an early solution to the dispute in the interest of communal harmony Mr. Purohit had said, "we cannot leave it for the succeeding generation of Indians to fight it out violently. Such disputes will only weaken our sense of national integration."
"We Won't Accept the Court Verdict"
The statement of Home Minister Mr. Buta Singh regarding the Vishwa Hindu Parishad had given its concern to accept the court decision pertaining to the Babri Masjid / Ram-Janam-Bhoomi was disputed and disagreed by the general secretary Mr. Ashok Singol in a public meeting held here. Mr. Ashok Singol said "we will never consider any verdict in this regard at any cost." we further said that "millions of Hindu spirits cannot be deferred by any court of law." He also criticized that the Home Minister Buta Singh has no right to say so.
India is a secular country. The above mentioned arguments will make any sane person agree with the facts. If not, only the world court can explain the adamancy of Hindu fanaticism.
Can We Say proudly, "I am a Hindu?"
We are thankful to those Hindus who sympathize with the Muslims, Christians and other minorities of India. The common Hindu has started realizing the baseless caste system originated by the Aryan Brahmin. As a result they started to follow other faiths. To keep them under psychological bondage using religion as a tool, the Aryans (Brahmin) of today, who have complete control over the media, are instigating these peace loving low caste oppressed Hindus to act in an unfriendly manner with the Non-Hindu communities of India. This set up helps the Brahmin master to keep the common Hindu busy in trivial matters so that the high caste Brahmins continue to rule over them for centuries as was in the past.
In a nutshell, the survival of Brahmin originated Hindu militant forces remains in only dividing our mother land India into pieces and creating communal violence whenever and wherever possible.
Shiva Sena's Bal Thakeray says "Say proudly I am a Hindu". Of course, it is true to say so. Let us look at the facts on his claims:
 | In the past 4 months, more than 3,725 people of mostly Harijans were murdered by the High caste Hindus due to the caste system. Is this an achievement to be proud of? The low caste Hindu who are embracing other faiths are now however, immune to such atrocities. |
| Sati (committing suicide on their husbands death) was justified by His Holiness Shankaracharya and Rajmatha, (Rajmatha herself is a widow and still living). Instead of committing sati herself she is insisting others to commit sati. Every Hindu Indian women must disown Hinduism. Otherwise they should be prepared to commit sati on their death of their husbands, according to Shankaracharya and Rajmatha. Isn't the Hindu husband very lucky that when the darling wife dies, he is able to marry another wife instead of killing himself. (More on Sati) |
| If you believe Rama was good person (Which is against the original scriptures of Ramayan) tell the world that the original source is wrong (better read Valmiki's Ramayana). |
Instead of saying "say proudly I am a Hindu," let us "say proudly I am an Indian."
What You Have to do is...
| Unite and mobilize the public opinion against the Hindu fanatic communal forces. |
| Send letters, telexes to the Government officials, political leaders not only in India, but also, all over the world. |
Courtesy: Dalith Liberation Movement, 14 Aziz Mulk, 5th Street, Thousand Light, Madras 600008, India. Pamphlet (1990)
|
|