Mandir is nation's agenda
It is astounding how people could be worked up about the Babri structure that
was pulled down in Ayodhya in 1992. First of all, Babar
was not an Indian. He was an alien invader.
Secondly, in the year the General built the mosque, the Muslim population of the
city could not have been more than a few hundreds, while the Hindu population
would have been tens of thousands. Leaving aside whether the Muslim place of
worship was constructed on the very site where there was a Hindu temple by
pulling it down, was it necessary that the mosque should be very near to the
place which is believed by millions of Hindus to be the birth place of their
most venerated God Rama? Could it not have been a few furlongs away from the
Hindus sacred place? The fact that it was built on the site or adjacent to the
site believed to be Sri Rama's birth place is to assert the Muslim arrogance of
their conquest of Hindus. How can a monument to the humiliation of Hindus
constructed by an alien invader be tolerated by the people of this country? When
they are not ruled by such conquerors? It is a historical fact that various
Hindu organisations in Ayodhya have been repeatedly rising in revolt against
Muslim powers to re-possess the site sacred to the Hindus. Also since 1947 there
had been no worship or prayers of Muslims at the “mosque”. It is arrogance
and fundamentalism and intolerance to question the belief of the Hindus that
Lord Sri Rama was born at a particular site.
Hindus do not question the virgin birth of Jesus of
prophet Mohammed going to heaven on a white steed from Al-Aksa-mosque. The
Hindus' faith and belief about Rama's birth place cannot be less respectable
than the faith of the followers of other religions.
No law can establish the facts believed in by the Christians, Muslims and the
Hindus. Let us be very clear about it. Objective
writers of history and the chroniclers of Muslim invaders of India have recorded
the fact of tens of thousands of Hindu temples having been razed to the ground
and in those very places or just by their side mosques were built by using the
bricks and stones and other materials of the razed temples.
The stones with images of the Hindu gods have been used as steps on which the
Muslims going to the mosques would be trampling. At many a place even today such
desecration can be clearly seen.
Independent India has removed the statues of so many
British generals and viceroys and even Queen Victoria because they are symbols
of India's humiliation at the hands of the alien invaders. Many countries around
the world have, after gaining independence from their colonial masters have
removed the statues of the conquerers; have renamed their countries and their
towns after their own historical persons and places and this is still going on.
People who had been wronged like the Blacks and the native Indians in United
States and Central American Republics and the aboriginals of Australia are
asking not only for apologies from the conquerors and colonists but are
demanding reparations. The Japanese emperor apologized to the Koreans; the
Federal Republic of Germany not only apologized but paid reparations to Israel
for the inhumanity it inflicted upon the Jews of Germany; the Black majority
government in South Africa has constituted a Truth and Reconciliation commission
(TRC) before which if the White conquerors confess their crimes and inhuman
treatment of the black natives for hundreds of years, they would be pardoned. It
is natural that when the oppressed and the wronged people come into their own,
become independent they would wage a struggle for righting the historic wrongs.
It is stubbornness and arrogance and intolerance of the former ruling classes
and communities not to acknowldge their guilt.
On the other hand, if they go on persisting in the
belief that they did no wrong, the wronged people will not be forgiving until
the symbols of the worst humiliation on their country and their faith are got
rid of Rama, Shiva and Krishna, the most venerated gods of the Hindus
irrespective of one’s cast and region. In the very places of temples for these
gods had come up mosques. How would the Muslims like that by the side of Al-aksa-mosque
or the mosques in Mecca or Madina, the British conquerors had built churches?
Wisdom and prudence require that the Muslims who have chosen to live in this
country after getting it partitioned for creating an Islamic homeland for them
should amicably settle the issue. If they persist in their stubbornness not to
acknowledge that this is an independent country, that it is not an Islamic
republic, that its people had been subjected to the worst humiliation for over
800 years, then there would be perpetual disharmony and suspicions about the
true mind of the Muslim residents of this country. History and religion are very
powerful in moulding the psyche of people.
It is for this that independent India restored Somnath, the shrine for Shiva in the first few years of independence itself.
Somnath was three times razed to the ground by Muslim invaders.
The so called secularists in the Congress and the perpetually anti-Indian
political multi-national communists and other parties are doing a great
disservice to the Muslim residents of India in stridently and repeatedly
including them to separatism, fundamentalism and in supporting their
stubbornness not to compromise on Ayodhya and the two other sacred Hindu sites.
It is these who are more culpable than the Muslims themselves. As long as the
Rama mandir is not built in Ayodhya the Hindu mind and Hindu people cannot be
expected to be at peace. The Rama Mandir in Ayodhya is a national agenda. If
Moslims in India agitate for the safety and sanctity of Al-Aksa in distant
Israel, can't they understand why the Hindus are agitated about Ram Mandir in
Ayodhya? History will condemn all those who are
unwisely stocking the indefensible arrogance, stuborness in the remnants of
those who have perpetrated inhuman crimes against the people of this country for