The Reign of Non-History

[SarthakGanguly]

Do we really know if the mosque was built on an established and worshiped structure

Yes. A 'temple dating to at least the tenth century AD'. I am learning from the posts prior to this. Quoted from there.

But they are not destroying other sacred houses for that.

I have added some text in the previous post. Pls recheck. Taking from that - the Kaaba has not been taken over by anyone else in history.
The Sikhs in India have had a painful history in this regard. The Akal Takht was used by terrorists (bred by Mrs Gandhi). After Blue Star, the Takht was rebuilt by the Government. The hardline seculars stated that that should suffice! The Sikhs did not accept that. Know what they did?

They rebuilt it from their own money. @Sidak

Bottomline: Satyameva Jayate.

 

[scorpionx]

Bottomline: Satyameva Jayate.

Amen to that.

 

[kalanirnay]

@scorpionx

If you really want to fact facts and be honest then,

1. Law of Adverse possession. (for u'r house over a temple)
2. Definition of mosque. (If not in use then its not a mosque, irrespective of its history)

 

[Bang Galore]

Could it be that vedic, at least rigvedic civilization be much older than IVC? Also similarity between avestan and vedic literature may point to a divergence at some point in time from a common parent civilization

Except that the similarity occurs with the late parts of the Rig veda.(Mandala 8 is where the most similarity is). Also every major Avestan scholar has noted that Avestan mythology starts after much of the earlier evolution of the Rig veda, connecting it to the late parts of the Rig veda. This particular fact has confused & worried every major scholar especially those who were firm believers in AIT where the seperation should logically have predated the early parts of the Rig veda.

 

[Indrani]

There rests the point. If I (Scorp) do not know if that place is the birth place of Rama or not why should I support the building of the temple in the first place? My support for a temple (You perhaps agree that still the destruction of mosque was unjustified) must be based upon some credible proofs. Unless I get the proofs why should I champion some thing that I don't understand at all? I am saying again, it was the teaching of Vivekananda( He got it from his mentor though) that judge thousand times before you accept some thing.I am just following the same principle and still being called Marxist.

And Indrani had already quoted Koenraad Elst. I am thinking how to debunk this gentleman. He, unlike his friends is smart and eloquent.

Actually destruction of the mosque is not unjustified at all. Goel presented about 20k+ temples which were destroyed and mosques built on them for which the Marxists had no answer or perhaps were too snooty to answer. Hindus have a right to correct a historical wrong. Germany still pays reparation for the WW to many countries in EU as well as Israel. USA still allows extra-constitutional rights to the Indians on their territory for having wronged them. India has constitutional provisions and affirmative actions for SC/ST for the wrong done to them. If all these places wrongs have been attempted to be righted, then there is no reason why those mosques should not be brought down and temples built in their place. We can of course not replace the loss of human life and other indignities. But in their magnanimity and cause of national integrity Hindus have pared down their demands to just 3 temples rather than the whole 20k+.

As to your attempt to find whether Rama was born in Ayodhya or whether Rama was a historical figure, it is a matter of faith for the billions that the matters of Ramayana happened and for the people of Ayodhya that Rama was born there. If you respect the right of Muslims over Kaaba and right of Christians over Lourdes and Jerusalem and Bethlehem, then it is a shame that you would disrespect equal rights to Hindus to their beliefs.

Also it is not a case of manipulation that throughout history since the demolition of the mosque took place, Hindus have never given up claim over that site, that even while being persecuted time and again they have returned to the place to worship time and again.

 

[Bang Galore]

Dada - I don't decide history. I don't know what right wing historians say about Ram. I can not refute any argument because I am not competent in this regard. I can't debate on things I don't know.

As for challenging in public forum and not in courts - that is fine, but then I am not qualified to do this. May be @Bang Galore, ...can do that.

And I don't call people Hinduphobe - never done that till date.

I don't think Ram's birth certificate can be found. That is besides the issue - the existence of a temple is reported and I buy that. For me that is enough. If something new comes up, we'll see

This is a topic that I remain uninclined to wade deeply into. It is quite possible that the Mosque was built over some other structure, maybe a temple but the evidence for a actual temple demolition is almost non-existent except for belief & some evidence that locals (even early on) did call the Babri Mosque complex by certain other names suggestive of a Hindu origin. Does not mean that there was no demolition, just that no clear evidence (from any source)exists. There is also no evidence that any temple there(if there was one) was famous or was well known (outside of the immediate area) widely. This is a case that has now been long lost to politics. Even judges seem wary of sticking to the law as seen in the HC verdict which was essentially an attempt at judicial compromise.

Would probably go by what the ASI has submitted (find it intriguing that different governments of differing persuasions didn't seem to have too much impact on the ASI) but I also admit that the arguments put forth by @scorpionx is equally sound. This case eventually rests on what arguments one is inclined to support. Personally I have always found the evidence in the Ayodhya case far less compelling than Kashi or Mathura where it is far more clear. The tragic part will remain the demolition in 1992 regardless of the hoary past of the structure.

 

[kalanirnay]

This is a topic that I remain uninclined to wade deeply into. It is quite possible that the Mosque was built over some other structure, maybe a temple but the evidence for a actual temple demolition is almost non-existent except for belief & some evidence that locals (even early on) did call the Babri Mosque complex by certain other names suggestive of a Hindu origin. Does not mean that there was no demolition, just that no clear evidence (from any source)exists. There is also no evidence that any temple there(if there was one) was famous or was well known (outside of the immediate area) widely. This is a case that has now been long lost to politics. Even judges seem wary of sticking to the law as seen in the HC verdict which was essentially an attempt at judicial compromise.

Would probably go by what the ASI has submitted (find it intriguing that different governments of differing persuasions didn't seem to have too much impact on the ASI) but I also admit that the arguments put forth by @scorpionx is equally sound. This case eventually rests on what arguments one is inclined to support. Personally I have always found the evidence in the Ayodhya case far less compelling than Kashi or Mathura where it is far more clear. The tragic part will remain the demolition in 1992 regardless of the hoary past of the structure.

LOL...what kind of evidence are you looking for ? Eye witness account ?

Is there any other famous Ram Temple in Ayodhya ?

 

[scorpionx]

If all these places wrongs have been attempted to be righted, then there is no reason why those mosques should not be brought down and temples built in their place.

A wrong in place A can not justify similar wrong in place B. Sorry but this logic does not seem reasonable.

As to your attempt to find whether Rama was born in Ayodhya or whether Rama was a historical figure, it is a matter of faith for the billions that the matters of Ramayana happened and for the people of Ayodhya that Rama was born there. If you respect the right of Muslims over Kaaba and right of Christians over Lourdes and Jerusalem and Bethlehem, then it is a shame that you would disrespect equal rights to Hindus to their beliefs.

The entire arguments revolves around this whether human settlement was there at the time of Babar's expedition through the area and temple was already being used by the settlement. It was not necessary at all from ASI's point of view to fabricate report to show respect to the Muslim rights in Kaaba and that of Christian's in Israel in 1975.

Also it is not a case of manipulation that throughout history since the demolition of the mosque took place, Hindus have never given up claim over that site, that even while being persecuted time and again they have returned to the place to worship time and again.

The whole thing could have been solved in a much more rational way rather than what we have done. I prefer to give the discussion a little rest for the time being. It's going heavy.

 

[Indrani]

A wrong in place A can not justify similar wrong in place B. Sorry but this logic does not seem reasonable.

Then are you saying that the affirmative actions in India for SC/ST is wrong?

The entire arguments revolves around this whether human settlement was there at the time of Babar's expedition through the area and temple was already being used by the settlement. It was not necessary at all from ASI's point of view to fabricate report to show respect to the Muslim rights in Kaaba and that of Christian's in Israel in 1975.

No that is not the argument. The argument is what predated the mosque and whether the temple was there. The evidence so far given the existence of pillars of the temple in a wider area than the mosque and the numerous artifacts found there proves the temple existed. The human settlement could have sprung up there once the temple was destroyed and then at a later period the Mosque could have been built over it or as Elst posits a mosque over a mosque.

But that was not what you stated in your argument. You stated you need proof that Rama was a historic figure at all and born in Ayodhya, which is why the argument of your lack of respect for Hindu beliefs was brought in.

The whole thing could have been solved in a much more rational way rather than what we have done. I prefer to give the discussion a little rest for the time being. It's going heavy

There was no other way to solve it because the Marxists would not allow it. It is their adamancy that led to the destruction of the mosque while the Hindus had suggested legally moving the mosque away to an alternate site. While you wail like Pakistanis wail for evidence when proof after proof has been given is the reason.

Also there is a thing called justice. It is still legal in India to sentence a murderer to death as a measure of justice. It is still legal in India to take away the freedom of those who go against the law of the country. As long as these principles of justice exist, it is no wrong to bring down the mosque to build the temple.

 

[Parul]

@SarthakGanguly Akal Takht was destroyed before Operation Blue Star too (by Muslims). What you've mentioned is true. The Sarkari Takht was tear down and new Akal Takht was build through the Sikh Tradition of Kar Seva and Self Service.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

@SarthakGanguly Akal Takht had been destroyed before Operation Blue Star too (by Muslims). What you've mentioned is true. The Sarkari Takht was tear down and new Akal Takht was build through the Sikh Tradition of Kar Seva and Self Service.

"....was destroyed before ....." - You communal

I know. I did a Seva way back in 2007. Not much, just cleaning the water and like.

 

[Parul]

"....was destroyed before ....." - You communal

I know. I did a Seva way back in 2007. Not much, just cleaning the water and like.

My English is Bad. Thank you for correcting it. I'm proud to be.

The place where Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji stays has its doors open to anyone anytime, nobody is stopped from entering Gurdwara. Even Secular's can visit and do seva, like you did. I'm proud to be a member of a religion which in true sense universal and pluralistic, which preaches, universal peace, brotherhood and love between the entire human kind.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

My English is Bad. Thank you for correcting it. I'm proud to be.

The place where Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji stays has its doors open to anyone anytime, nobody is stopped from entering Gurdwara. Even Secular's can visit and do seva, like you did. I'm proud to be a member of a religion which in true sense universal and pluralistic, which preaches, universal peace, brotherhood and love between the entire human kind.

I know. No one asked me anything(no name/religion/nothing). I got ready and went in with a jhadu - the water was drained out already. Good experience. Wish we could show even 10% of the selfless dedication in keeping Amritsar clean.

 

[kurup]

Why don't you post a thesis by any Marxist historians that had destroyed India and its history as claimed by Shourie. So that we can discuss the merits and demerits right here to clear up the ambiguities.

Since I am very illiterate as far as history is concerned , I cannot contribute anything worthy to the discussion .

As we are debating Marxist v/s Right Leaning historians , can you have a discussion on how both see Tipu Sultan (Patriot v/s Religious bigot)

@SarthakGanguly , @Joe Shearer , @Bang Galore , @INDIC , @Indrani , @nair , @levina , @Ravi Nair , @SpArK , @abjktu , @sreekumar , @Butchcassidy , @kalanirnay

 

[Butchcassidy]

Since I am very illiterate as far as history is concerned , I cannot contribute anything worthy to the discussion .

As we are debating Marxist v/s Right Leaning historians , can you have a discussion on how both see Tipu Sultan (Patriot v/s Religious bigot)

@SarthakGanguly , @Joe Shearer , @Bang Galore , @INDIC , @Indrani , @nair , @levina , @Ravi Nair , @SpArK , @abjktu , @sreekumar , @Butchcassidy , @kalanirnay

He was an opportunist.