A 500-Year-Old Dispute Threatens Modi’s Plan to Remake India

[wolfschanzze]

I wont mind if more of these illegal mosques should be demolished which were made by destroying the Hindu/jain temples....

Ayodhya is the beginning, we will reclaim,Kashi and Mathura too.Those are important Piligrimage sites, its upto the Minority Muslims to give up those structures as a good will gesture since those are important Holy Piligrimage sites for Hindus.
In return we will help them rebuild their mosque someplace else .

 

[The_magnificent]

Mandir wahi banayenge . Inshaallah

 

[oFFbEAT]

Why should we accept status quo and not build anything on our holy land, just to appease some butthurt mullahs over their mosque?
Everyone knows Mosque is not a religious structure, but merely a building for praying and They routinely demolish mosques in middle east, to build new structures.
While a Temple is a Religious structure and it cannot be replaced,That too a place like Ayodhya is very important Pilgrimage site for Hindus.
We can't compromise that.

Yes, logically I agree with you, but think practically....
We cannot deny our past, unfortunately, the Mosque was there before India adopted the 'secular' identity....and after adopting a 'secular' and 'democratic' way of ruling ourselves, we cannot use unconstitutional force to settle disputes, we've to rely on judiciary for that....and the last Supreme Court verdict on the matter is to maintain Status-Quo....does that mean the Supreme Court is appeasing Muslims too??....if you think so, or even if it is so, we're bound to abide by its verdict, we chose our destiny ourselves........

Ayodhya is the beginning, we will reclaim,Kashi and Mathura too.Those are important Piligrimage sites, its upto the Minority Muslims to give up those structures as a good will gesture since those are important Holy Piligrimage sites for Hindus.
In return we will help them rebuild their mosque someplace else .

Yes, that's one of the ways we can take, trying to make them understand the significance of the matter, what it matters to Hindus, give them examples of 'Makkah' and 'Vatican', give them alternate sites to build their Mosques.....i.e, we have to try to solve the dispute amicably, force/violence is no longer an option I guess....and legal battles will invariably result into stale-mates since, like Ram Mandir, the Babri Masjid was also a reality.
Therefore, it all depends upon how well we can make them understand and what majority of the Muslims want.......
I cannot think of a better approach than this, can anyone suggest any other ways??

 

[The_Showstopper]

Wow, the birthplace of the Hindu God Ram is now a Mosque?

It is a Hindu belief and as far as the mosque or temple building is concerned, it is for the Supreme court of India to decide.... I would say it's a politically dead issue in most of India but it still has relevance in some areas...

Now that is a problem in 'Secular' India....
I personally wouldn't mind if the Ram temple is not rebuilt as long as the Mosque is also not rebuilt.....the land should be declared disputed and no further construction should be allowed there.....

And if that remains disputed for ever, then the politicians are sure to milk it. Why not get to a decision and get rid of this forever. Mutual agreement would be preferable but I don't think Supreme court order should be problem.

 

[oFFbEAT]

It is a Hindu belief and as far as the mosque or temple building is concerned, it is for the Supreme court of India to decide.... I would say it's a politically dead issue in most of India but it still has relevance in some areas...

While you may argue about the existence of Ram, you cannot deny the fact that the Archaeological Survey of India confirmed the presence of a Hindu Temple structure under the Mosque......there are also several well documented historical evidence indicating that the site was actually a Hindu holy site before the Mosque was erected.....

And if that remains disputed for ever, then the politicians are sure to milk it. Why not get to a decision and get rid of this forever. Mutual agreement would be preferable but I don't think Supreme court order should be problem.

In 2010, The Allahabad High Court gave a verdict(on several lawsuits on the issue), Ayodhya land to be divided into three parts, 1/3 to each of the claimants....
BUT, none of the parties wanted a split of the site, so they moved to Supreme Court and SC ordered to maintain Status-Quo.......

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

Wow, the birthplace of the Hindu God Ram is now a Mosque?

Is that what they call Secularism in India?

LOL. Are you trolling

 

[utraash]

Need a amicable solution without any bloodshed......

It is a Hindu belief and as far as the mosque or temple building is concerned, it is for the Supreme court of India to decide.... I would say it's a politically dead issue in most of India but it still has relevance in some areas...


And if that remains disputed for ever, then the politicians are sure to milk it. Why not get to a decision and get rid of this forever. Mutual agreement would be preferable but I don't think Supreme court order should be problem.

Politically dead but not religiously.....

 

[wolfschanzze]

Yes, logically I agree with you, but think practically....
We cannot deny our past, unfortunately, the Mosque was there before India adopted the 'secular' identity....and after adopting a 'secular' and 'democratic' way of ruling ourselves, we cannot use unconstitutional force to settle disputes, we've to rely on judiciary for that....and the last Supreme Court verdict on the matter is to maintain Status-Quo....does that mean the Supreme Court is appeasing Muslims too??....if you think so, or even if it is so, we're bound to abide by its verdict, we chose our destiny ourselves........


Yes, that's one of the ways we can take, trying to make them understand the significance of the matter, what it matters to Hindus, give them examples of 'Makkah' and 'Vatican', give them alternate sites to build their Mosques.....i.e, we have to try to solve the dispute amicably, force/violence is no longer an option I guess....and legal battles will invariably result into stale-mates since, like Ram Mandir, the Babri Masjid was also a reality.
Therefore, it all depends upon how well we can make them understand and what majority of the Muslims want.......
I cannot think of a better approach than this, can anyone suggest any other ways??

So, Just because the Supreme court orders you to stop worshipping certain temple and give it to Muslims will you give it?
Supreme Court is just Court not heavens Verdict. People decide what is right and wrong, in case of Holy places of Hindus,if the Supreme Court gives verdict against us,still we will go ahead and build it.
What Secular Identity?Secularism is only applied when it comes to Hindus and Hinduism,why should we bear the cross of Secularism when the minorities of India don't,why should only hindus make compromises to appease minorities when they never do the same for us.

We told them the significance of those temples and they understand it perfectly well the importance of Piligrimage sites like Ayodhya,Kashi,Mathura ,they were always given the option to relocate to alternate sites and will be given assistance,even then they persist and wont vacate those places amicably.That is their ego which makes them think they still rule Bharat and they can persecute Hindus in their own Homeland.
Then the only option left is to take it by force.

1)They asked for Partition of this nation based on Religion,we gave them that, but they never left fully why?
Why cause trouble for us?

2).They had 68 years to settle these issues amicably, our patience is not eternal.They don't give up amicably we will take it by force,then they will cry victim.That is acceptable to us,since we gave them enough time 68 years to settle it.

3)Don't be a apologetic Hindu, who is always making compromises in order to not upset others, even when they encroach on your own land, stand up for your right and fight for it.

4)We keep the peace in this nation, and follow the rules in this nation not some Minority.
It's in the interest of Any constitutional body to be amicable to our legitimate demands,Stop doing that and you stand the risk of upsetting the Peace and us breaking all established rules to forge New rules amicable to us.

4) Let me reiterate again, The day Hindus stop following Secularism is the day, No Supreme Court, nor any Army can stop us from getting what we want.Supreme Court should keep that in mind and not ask for undue Compromises in Hindu Pilgrimage sites.

 

[oFFbEAT]

Aarey bhai dimag se soch, dil se nahi....

So, Just because the Supreme court orders you to stop worshipping certain temple and give it to Muslims will you give it?
Supreme Court is just Court not heavens Verdict. People decide what is right and wrong, in case of Holy places of Hindus,if the Supreme Court gives verdict against us,still we will go ahead and build it....

SC's verdict is not God's order BUT you have to abide by it according to the Indian constitution.....if you do not do so, you'll be breaking the law...if that's what you're proposing, then that is a matter of another debate(what Hindus should do if SC 'prefers' Muslims).....
There is a reason the word 'supreme' is attached to it....you cannot challenge its verdict(only file a review petition) without bringing changes to the Indian Constitution......

4)We keep the peace in this nation, and follow the rules in this nation not some Minority.
It's in the interest of Any constitutional body to be amicable to our legitimate demands,Stop doing that and you stand the risk of upsetting the Peace and us breaking all established rules to forge New rules amicable to us.

4) Let me reiterate again, The day Hindus stop following Secularism is the day, No Supreme Court, nor any Army can stop us from getting what we want.Supreme Court should keep that in mind and not ask for undue Compromises in Hindu Pilgrimage sites.

I said, due to 'secular' India, we're unable to re-build the Ram Temple and you're saying, you'll change the 'Secular' Identity("breaking all established rules") if necessary, to re-build the Ram Temple......baat toh ek hi hui na....

 

[wolfschanzze]

Aarey bhai dimag se soch, dil se nahi....

SC's verdict is not God's order BUT you have to abide by it according to the Indian constitution.....if you do not do so, you'll be breaking the law...if that's what you're proposing, then that is a matter of another debate(what Hindus should do if SC 'prefers' Muslims).....
There is a reason the word 'supreme' is attached to it....you cannot challenge its verdict(only file a review petition) without bringing changes to the Indian Constitution......

I said, due to 'secular' India, we're unable to re-build the Ram Temple and you're saying, you'll change the 'Secular' Identity("breaking all established rules") if necessary, to re-build the Ram Temple......baat toh ek hi hui na....

Dimaag se hi bol raha hoon, i don't say things in a emotional state.
If you don't stand for your rights, then you will always be brow beaten by Secularism and these Pseudo-Secular Liberals who will not shed a tear for Hindus but will cry rivers of blood for even a broken window pane of Minority.

I indicated earlier that Supreme Court won't matter in this case,if they give verdict in our favour its ok, if not we will still go ahead and build Temple, therefore,It is incumbent on Supreme Court to not let the situation deteriorate to the state, where people lose hope and resort to breaking Established laws and order of Court.
It is our Legitimate demand,we are only asking what is rightfully ours not making outrageous demands, if even that is denied, then there is no point believing in Justice system or rules which unjustly target only hindus.

Yes,Secularism is only Dependent on us Hindus, once we say' NO to Secularism' What can even the Supreme Court do? Force us to follow Secularism?They cannot.. Likewise, It would be better if they kept this in mind when passing judgements.
Does a nation run due 79% of population following secularism and rules or according to 21% of population?

 

[The_Showstopper]

While you may argue about the existence of Ram, you cannot deny the fact that the Archaeological Survey of India confirmed the presence of a Hindu Temple structure under the Mosque......there are also several well documented historical evidence indicating that the site was actually a Hindu holy site before the Mosque was erected.....

I don't think the ASI report would be considered as a fool proof evidence of a temple's existence and is sure to be questioned. The following are few excerpts from couple of news articles which question the findings of ASI...

""The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report cannot be taken to be conclusive. This is only part of the evidence. The report will be analysed, its authors will be cross-examined to find out whether they are right or wrong.

Several historians opposed to the VHP's claim have questioned the validity of the ASI findings.

Although there is no dispute that objects were recovered from the site, the interpretation is the key.

Professor of history at Aligarh Muslim University, Irfan Habib, told the BBC: "The floors of the mosque have been declared to be a temple. Broken bricks and stones used for filling up the floor of the mosque have been declared as pillars of the temple.

"Glazed pottery common to Muslim architecture has been completely ignored. Flower motifs are common to Muslim architecture but the ASI has interpreted it as a Hindu pattern."

Source: BBC NEWS | South Asia | Experts split on Ayodhya findings

The ASI excavation under the mosque built in 1528 by Babar's commander Mir Baqi has raised eyebrows not only because it was inordinately quick (took only five months) but also because its conclusion was a little too pat.

But there are more than a few chinks in ASI's armour. The core of the central chamber could not be excavated due to the presence of an idol of Ram at that spot in the makeshift structure.

Skeletal remains were also found in the trenches in the north and south which put a question mark over the ASI's conclusion. As Allahabad University historian Sushil Srivastava points out, the ASI has formed its opinion based primarily on its finding of a wall and pillars. "One should understand the difference between history and archaeology.

While history defines the time frame, archaeology highlights culture. Unless the archaeological findings are confirmed by historians such reports cannot be credible," he says. More than that, says archaeologist Suraj Bhan who visited the excavation site, the pillar bases are not similar. Among other sweeping statements made by the ASI: the use of lime and mortar was a sign of pre-Islamic architecture and that the use of stones and decorated bricks was enough to indicate that it was a temple.

But even well-known archaeologists involved in the excavation are doubtful about the findings. Says Sita Ram Rai, former director of the Bihar Archaeology Department who spent a fortnight during the excavation in Ayodhya: "The ASI has carved pillars out of the excavated floor to draw some inaccurate conclusions.

Rai, who was summoned by the Allahabad High Court bench (where the ASI report was opened) to make his observations, said no structure had been demolished before the construction of the mosque.

He and three other archaeologists, who made a detailed study of the method of excavation and the artefacts recovered from the site, believe that there was no temple at Ayodhya.

Source: ASI finds temple lies below Babri Masjid, VHP sees prospect of reviving Ayodhya campaign : NATION - India Today

In 2010, The Allahabad High Court gave a verdict(on several lawsuits on the issue), Ayodhya land to be divided into three parts, 1/3 to each of the claimants....
BUT, none of the parties wanted a split of the site, so they moved to Supreme Court and SC ordered to maintain Status-Quo.......

I do know that but I would still want that this has to be resolved once and for all. Maintaining status quo is only going to keep the issue burning...

 

[Force-India]

It will be a big shame on us Hindus if temple is build at the site. Worshiping in temples is not Hinduism. We need government run India's best university at the site where top students from all over the country will come to study.

 

[oFFbEAT]

I don't think the ASI report would be considered as a fool proof evidence of a temple's existence and is sure to be questioned. The following are few excerpts from couple of news articles which question the findings of ASI.....
.................
................
..............

I can show you examples of Archaeologists supporting the findings of ASI(people working in ASI are Archaeologists themselves), like you showed me examples of those who do not support.......
Now, since we're not experts ourselves, we're in no position to judge who's right and who's wrong in such a situation, we've to rely on the courts for that and the courts(after studying and examining what the experts have to say) have come to the conclusion that there was indeed a predating Hindu religious structure under the Mosque(though they are not sure whether the Mosque was built after demolishing the structure)......
Thus, both the existence of the Hindu and Muslim religious structures are a reality.....if we still insist on clinging on to one side of the story, we would be showing our bias and cannot call ourselves, Secular.

 

[The_Showstopper]

I can show you examples of Archaeologists supporting the findings of ASI(people working in ASI are Archaeologists themselves), like you showed me examples of those who do not support.......
Now, since we're not experts ourselves, we're in no position to judge who's right and who's wrong in such a situation, we've to rely on the courts for that and the courts(after studying and examining what the experts have to say) have come to the conclusion that there was indeed a predating Hindu religious structure under the Mosque(though they are not sure whether the Mosque was built after demolishing the structure)......
Thus, both the existence of the Hindu and Muslim religious structure are a reality.....if we still insist on clinging on to one side of the story, we would be showing our bias and cannot call ourselves, Secular.

If you check my previous post, it mentions statements from just one muslim historian and multiple hindu archaeologists(though some may want to call them "sickular"). Anyways let the Supreme court decide the matter and I hope peace prevails irrespective of the outcome....

 

[CMYX4BJ]

It will be a big shame on us Hindus if temple is build at the site. Worshiping in temples is not Hinduism. We need government run India's best university at the site where top students from all over the country will come to study.

Keep this crap to yourself. Ram Mandir must be built, as promised by Modi ji. There are a hundred different sites where universities can be built.