Dear Readers,
Last week, the Indian Supreme Court gave a historic verdict on the decades-old Ayodhya land dispute case. Asian Voice and Gujarat Samachar did extensive reports on it. I welcomed the verdict as did the majority of Indians. There was an almost desperate need to put an end to the dispute as it was tearing the nation apart. In a much-divided world, this case, as per my understanding, is one for the books.
For those who have been living under rocks and do not already know what I am referring to, allow me to explain. On December 6, 1992, the Babri Masjid was demolished during a political rally that turned into a riot. In retaliation, Islamic radicals set off bombs in multiple Indian cities. The impact of the demolition was such, even Hindu, Jain and Sikh temples as well as other premises, in neighbouring Pakistan were attacked with no intervention of police officials. A land title case was subsequently lodged in the Allahabad High Court. Why such hue-and-cry over a piece of land, you ask? It is believed by Hindus that the Babri Masjid was built in a place where a Ram temple stood before.
In a verdict pronounced on September 30, 2010, 2.77 acres of the Ayodhya land was divided into three parts- between the Ram Lalla group, Sunni Waqf Board, and the Nirmohi Akhara. The verdict affirmed that the disputed land was the birthplace of Rama and that the mosque was built after the demolition of a Hindu temple.
Long story short, the recent verdict by the highest court in the country ordered the Federal Government to hand over the disputed Ayodhya site within three months to a trust that will oversee the construction of a Ram temple there. It also ruled that a separate five acre land be allotted to the Sunni Waqf Board in Ayodhya for the construction of a new mosque as relief for the “unlawful destruction” of Babri.
The decision was welcomed across the country, including by many people of the Muslim community. I was satisfied with the result myself. I use the word 'satisfied' and not 'happy' because what recent trends within Western media has shown me is that the verdict was a certain victory of Hindus OVER Muslims. Ever since the judgment, which was passed unanimously by five Supreme Court judges, one of them from the Muslim community, it appears that the press in the West has taken upon themselves to provoke bitterness or reaction from the otherwise lukewarm response from general public.
There are even articles claiming the esteemed judge panel is afraid of Narendra Modi. Why?! “Failure to talk openly about the dark side of the Indian Prime Minister's model is dangerous” says Gideon Rachman in an article titled 'The West Has Given Modi A Free Pass'. Okay, your resentment towards Modi is not accepted but understood. “Hindu nationalists”, he says in reference to the judgment, “are delighted by Mr Modi's increasing boldness”.
I fail to understand how the Supreme Court's judgment ends up being Modi's fault. The heights of ignorance were claimed by another article in 'The Times' that calls out the alleged failure of Modi's 'Swachh Bharat' campaign BECAUSE some people in rural India choose not to use the toilets he had built. I don't understand why the author of the piece thought it was Modi's responsibility to double check all 110 million lavatories built by him were actually occupied. Last I checked, that wasn't part of the Prime Minister's job description.
Okay. We all know Bethlehem as the birthplace of Jesus Christ. Did anyone ask for a birth certificate? No! We accepted it as part of Christianity, the Holy Bible. It was accepted by one and all. After 1967, Bethlehem came under Israeli control. Both, Jerusalem and Bethlehem are considered pilgrimages for the Jewish, Christians and Muslims.
Ayodhya is to Hindus, what Bethlehem is to these two communities. I don't see any need to question it. Ayodhya is Ram even to the Indians living in the deepest jungles of Guyana. I was very closely involved during the first convention of the GOPIO- Global Convention of People of Indian Origin, in 1989, at the Sheraton Hotel in New York. I was privileged to speak right after Yuvraj Karan Singh and Madhav Rao Scindia. I was staying at the hotel and so was the former prime minister of Guyana (previously known as British Guyana) Cheddi Jagan, and his American wife Janet.
Even during my university days, Cheddi was one of the people I looked up to. One evening during talks with him at the hotel, he told me, even in the deepest jungles in Guyana, in the darkest of evenings, you will hear kirtan, chopai, and Hanuman Chalisa. Our forefathers brought Indians as labourers to Guyana in the 1830s. He said the only connection between India and Guyana is the Ramayana and Hanuman Chalisa. Even though, there are Indians who converted to Christianity, he said, Ram is their idol.
Friends, to me, the Indian Constitution is the epitome of power and its words are the path to follow. Interestingly, former regional director (North) of Archaeological Survey of India, Dr. KK Muhammed said he felt vindicated by the Supreme Court verdict in the case. Part of a 10 member excavation team at the disputed site, he was one of the many to say a Ram temple existed before the mosque. He said the judgment “was ultimate and nothing better could have come out.”
“I, as a Muslim, was hounded by certain quarters when I spoke the truth, and today, I stand vindicated. The Honourable Supreme Court had admitted that pieces of evidence produced by the ASI were correct,” he said. “There were numerous shreds of evidence which showed that the mosque was built not only over the temple, but some remains of the temple were used to construct a mosque.” Muhammed has my respect for life for what he said next, “Some Muslim rulers in the past had knocked down Hindu temples. When this wrong act of the rulers is justified, then one becomes part of the original sin.”
As we go to Press, we hear that All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and another group are asking for the review of the judgement. Their primary claim is that “the mosques can’t be moved to any other place.” It is worth remembering that when the famous Aswan Dam was built in Egypt several historical Mosques were moved to higher grounds without any complaints from the Maulvis or Al-Azhar University (top most authority in Islam in Egypt).
Even during the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam in Gujarat, several temples especially the Shoolpaneshwar Mahadev temple. This temple hails from the Vedic times and was moved to the higher grounds with the approval of the Shankaracharya.
Similarly in both Saudi Arabia and Iraq, during major infrastructural developments especially for the canals on the Euphrates and Tigris river, some eight or more mosques were moved.
When I see media with superficial knowledge of history and current affairs, I worry. India is a working democracy. It's elections are held free and fair. For years I have seen the West mess with people's judgments and all I can say is, don't play your little game with Modi and the new India.
