by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
Asaduddin Owaisi
Hyderabad : MIM president Asaduddin Owaisi on Tuesday said the Sangh Parivar wants to use Ram temple issue to save Narendra Modi in the 2019 general elections as he has failed on all fronts.
He said the RSS, VHP and BJP should not be allowed to polarize the voters on temple issue and justified the stand taken by Sunni Wakf Board’s lawyer Kapil Sibal in Supreme Court that the hearing of the title suit be deferred till the elections.
Talking to reporters here, he said a leader of VHP has announced that the temple construction will begin in October 2018 while RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has stated that only a temple can come up in Ayodhya.
“These statements are all aimed at influencing and threatening Muslims and raking up the issue before the elections to save Mr Modi, who has failed to provide jobs, check farmers’ suicides and his actions like demonetization and GST have destroyed business in the informal sector. The elections should be held on these real issues,” he said.
“When you don’t allow release of a film in Gujarat on the ground that it will influence the elections, how can you ignore the impact the temple issue may have?” he asked.
The MP also dismissed criticism of Sibal in a section of media and said he was representing Sunni Wakf Board in the apex court and not the Congress.
He reiterated that Sunni Wakf Board need at least six months to present its arguments before the court as a voluminous record of 17,000 documents need to be translated.
Replying to a query, the Hyderabad MP sad Parliament can’t legislate on the temple till the matter is in the Supreme Court.
“We have separation of powers. The judiciary, executive and legislature are independent. If somebody wants to become a dictator, then people will decide,” he said.
Owaisi said the issue of Babri Masjid was not an issue of Muslims but a matter of justice.
“Even after 25 years of the demolition of Babri Masjid, the case against the accused who instigated people through their provocative speeches and which led to the demolition has not been heard,” he said.
He reiterated his support to the suggestion by Justice M.S. Liberhan (retd.), who had headed the commission probing the conspiracy behind the razing of the disputed structure, that the hearing of title suit be deferred till the criminal case was disposed of.
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
Amit Shah
Ahmedabad : Latching on to Kapil Sibal’s statement in the Supreme Court for deferring hearing in the Ramjanambhoomi dispute till after the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, BJP President Amit Shah on Tuesday asked Rahul Gandhi to clear the Congress stand on the Ram temple issue.
He accused the Congress of having “double standards” on the contentious issue and said the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on the other hand wanted an end to the matter as soon as possible.
“I appeal to the future Congress President — please clear your stand on the issue,” he said.
“On the one hand, temples are being visited (by Rahul Gandhi) ahead of elections. On the other hand, they are trying to delay hearing of the Ramjanmabhoomi case (in the Supreme Court). The Congress has double standards on the issue. They should clarify their stand,” Shah said.
He alleged that the Congress did not want the issue of the proposed Ram temple at Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh to be resolved soon.
“The BJP demands that the case should be heard as soon as possible. The Supreme Court should give a judgment and a grand Ram temple should be built in Ayodhya,” Shah said.
Senior counsel Kapil Sibal, who is representing the Sunni Waqf Board in the Ayodhya case, asked the apex court to hear the matter only in July 2019.
The Supreme Court will commence on February 8, 2018, the hearing on a batch of petitions which challenged a 2010 Allahabad High Court verdict on the Ayodhya title suit that divided the disputed Babri Masjid site between the Nirmohi Akhara, Lord Ram deity, and the Sunni Waqf Board.
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
Asaduddin Owaisi
Hyderabad : MIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi has said that the title suit of the Babri Masjid can be decided only on the basis of evidence and not on ‘aastha’ (faith) as the Sangh Parivar is demanding.
Addressing a public meeting here on Sunday, he voiced his apprehension that the Sangh Parivar might vitiate the atmosphere in the country on the issue before the 2019 elections to gain political mileage.
The Member of Parliament condemned the statements by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad leaders that the construction of the Ram temple in Uttar Pradesh’s Ayodhya will begin on October 18, 2018.
Owaisi wondered how they could make such a statement when the title suit was still pending in the Supreme Court.
He said such attempts could repeat the violence and bloodshed witnessed in the country in the 1990s during BJP leader L.K. Advani’s Rath Yatra and after the demolition of the Babri mosque. He warned that this could weaken the country.
The public meeting was organised by the Joint Action Committee comprising various Muslim organisations just days ahead of the 25th anniversary of the demolition of the mosque on December 6.
In 1992, on that date, a large number of religious volunteers or “Kar Sevaks” gathered in the temple town and demolished the 16th century structure, leading to widespread rioting and political crisis.
Taking strong exception to Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief Mohan Bhagwat’s statement that only a temple could be built in Ayodhya, Owaisi said: “Muslims would not be cowed down by such threats.”
“What is pending in the Supreme Court is title suit, which will be decided purely on evidence and not an aastha,” he said.
Owaisi said Babri Masjid was not the issue of Muslims but an issue linked to secularism. “This is an issue which will decide the course of this country,” he said.
The MP said he supports Justice Manmohan Singh Liberhan’s suggestion that the title suit should not be taken up for hearing till the criminal case relating to the demolition of the mosque was disposed off.
Owaisi also quoted former Chief Justice A.M. Ahmedi reportedly saying that had Justice Venkata Challaiah not permitted Kar Seva, it would not have led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid.
He said even 25 years after the demolition, the contempt of court case had not come up for hearing in the apex court.
The MIM president alleged that the BJP is returning to its real agenda as it has failed to provide jobs to the unemployed and demonetisation and the Goods and Services Tax has hit the people and dealt a blow to the economy.
Babri Masjid Action Committee convenor Zafaryab Jeelani said it was not an issue of “aastha” but of the political interests of some communal groups. He recalled that even the FIR registered in 1949 states that idols were stealthily kept in the mosque.
He said some elements tried to spread the falsehood that it was the birthplace of Ramchanderji (Lord Ram) but this has nothing to do with facts.
The speakers called up on Muslims to peacefully observe the shutdown on December 6 to demand reconstruction of the mosque at its original place.
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
By Saurabh Katkurwar,
Ayodhya : This is a town held sacred for its association with Hindu religious lore, which in latter days acquired the unflattering reputation of being a hotbed of Hindu-Muslim antagonism and religio-political conflict whose reverberations are felt both nationally and internationally. But what is little known, and may be even difficult to believe, is that Ayodhya has traditionally been known for its inter-faith harmony where it is not out of the ordinary for a Muslim tailor to stitch clothes for the idol of Ram or for a Hindu priest to help renovate an old mosque.
As India approaches 25 years of the apocalyptic demolition of the 16th century Babri Masjid on December 6, citizens of Ayodhya take pains to talk about their age-old heritage of cultural collaboration and free participation in inter-religious activities which has kept the secular fabric of the twin intact — despite the dragging temple-mosque politico-legal dispute over 2.7 acres of prime land whose ownership is contested by both Hindus and Muslims.
Locals, both Hindus and Muslims, say they were “outsiders” who came to Ayodhya in 1992 and stirred trouble while locals were busy saving each other — irrespective of their religious faiths — from the brunt of the riots that ensued. Out of the town’s total population of around 60,000, Muslims account for only six per cent. But they never felt any discrimination from Hindus, says Mohammed Chand Qaziana, priest at the Dargah of Sayyed Mohammad Ibrahim.
Qaziana said that the dargah was protected by local Hindus when the kar sevaks, or Hindu religious activists who came from outside the town, demolished the Babri mosque on December 6, 1992, on the ground that it was erected there by invading Mughal emperor Babar after razing a temple dedicated to Ram, the revered warrior-god of Hindus.
“This 900-year-old dargah has followers from the Hindu community as well, many of whom regularly pay a visit here. It is a symbol of our centuries-old harmonious existence. When it was attacked, our Hindu brothers formed a human shield around it and saved it,” Qaziana recalled to IANS.
Faizabad district, in which Ayodhya falls, has about 30 per cent Muslim population. Qaziana said there is an unannounced understanding among the people here not to fall prey to hate speeches of politicians and outsiders.
What makes communal harmony special here is the participation in inter-faith events and rituals — Muslims stitching clothes for Hindu deities, participating in Ramleela (religious theatre based on the life of Ram) or doing namaz (prayers) in Hindu religious places; and Hindus similarly contributing to mosque renovation or helping Muslim fellow townspeople in times of need.
Echoing Qaziana’s views, Barfi Maharaj, who identifies himself as a Hindu social worker, said the Masjid was razed on December 6 by Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) hotheads and locals had no role in it.
“We were neither influenced by hate speeches nor did we participate in the demolition drive. It was VHP that brought outsiders to demolish the Masjid. How can people from the birthplace of Ram, who is known for his secular teachings, commit such a sinful act?” asked Barfi Maharaj.
Giving examples of inter-faith harmony in the town, he said that a mosque near Hanumangadhi in Ayodhya was being renovated by a Hindu mahant (priest) while a Muslim tailor had been stitching clothes for the idol of Ram that is installed in the makeshift temple at the disputed site of Babri Masjid.
Sadik Ali, alias Babu Khan, said he had stitched seven to eight sets of clothes for the Hindu gods so far. Sadik, who is said to be a stakeholder in the negotiations in the issue, called Babri Masjid demolition “unfortunate” but said he had no problem in the construction of Ram Mandir on the disputed land.
“We do have faith in Ram. We had offered namaz at Hanuman Gadhi. If Hindus want big temples for their beloved god, we do not have a problem. We just want a piece of land nearby for a mosque,” Ali said.
Mohammed Salim has been making ‘khadav’ (wooden sandal), which were traditionally used by sadhus and priests but are now largely used in temples.
Salim said his family had been selling khadavs since generations which are usually bought by temple priests. “I have never witnessed any tension between the two communities here. We depend on each other for our needs and we respect each other,” he said.
The mutual understanding and respect for Hindus and Muslims here — revealing to an outsider — figure prominently in the region as one talks to the locals who, irrespective of their religion, slammed political leaders for vitiating the issue in an attempt to get electoral mileage.
A local contractor, Shailendra Pandey, said the people of Ayodhya were hardly consulted on what has come to be known as the Mandir-Masjid issue and politicians used Ram and the temple issue for their personal gains.
“You go anywhere in the city and talk to anyone. You will not find an iota of communal hatred among them. The unholy politics by outsiders has given our city a negative image,” Pandey said.
Mohammed Naeem, who is the president of Naugaja Dargah, said politicians were now creating hurdles in the way of the temple construction.
“This town is a perfect example of religious harmony and secularism, thanks to its rich culture and history. Everyone would be happy if the contentious issue is resolved amicably. However, we feel the politicians have kept this issue pending for their selfish motives,” Naeem said.
Whatever be the difficulties and complexities in the Mandir-Masjid issue, there will not be any negative impact in the socio-religious fabric of the city, feel the people of Ayodhya, once the kingdom of Ram, known for being a model of good governance in that era.
(This feature is part of a special series that seeks to bring unique and extraordinary stories of ordinary people, groups and communities from across a diverse, plural and inclusive India, and has been made possible by a collaboration between IANS and the Frank Islam Foundation. Saurabh Katkurwar can be contacted at saurabh.k@ians.in)
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | Interviews
Mahant Satyendra Das
By Saurabh Katkurwar,
Ayodhya : Politics over the Babri dispute, including the hate campaign by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), has only complicated a possible amicable solution, contends Mahant Satyendra Das of the makeshift Ram Mandir at the disputed site here, saying there was no enmity here between the two communities over the issue.
He said the apex court’s verdict was likely to be in favour of constructing the Ram Mandir at the disputed site — where once stood the 16th century Babri Masjid that was demolished by Hindu fundamentalists in 1992 — as evidence “clearly showed” the existence of a temple at the spot in the past.
Satyendra Das said the court’s decision was expected soon, thus facilitating the construction of the “long-cherished” grand mandir at the birthplace of Lord Ram in a year’s time.
“The court’s decision is expected soon. All things are in place and all evidence has been presented by the Hindu side to prove that the Ram Mandir existed before it was demolished to build the Babri Masjid,” Das told IANS in an interview.
“On other hand, Muslims could not produce any evidence. They have sought time from the court till December for translation of some documents into English. So, the decision is expected early next year,” he said.
Citing good relations among people from both communities, he said they would sit together and try to find a solution in case the court’s decision was not acceptable to both sides. “We will find a solution through mutual understanding and talks, but no political party will be allowed to interfere as they have their political motives,” he said.
Satyendra Das slammed the VHP for spreading hatred by using foul language against Muslims when it started its agitation for the temple.
“The VHP used the language that made Muslims sad, angry and distressed. Slogans were like ‘Hindi Hindu Hindustan, Mullah Bhago Pakistan (Hindi Hindu India, Muslims go to Pakistan) or ‘Jo kahega Babri, usko samjho akhri (Whoever says Babri will meet his end). It only worsened the matter,” he said.
At the same time, he said such campaigns did not have any adverse impact on the communal harmony in the city.
“There was not such feeling of hatred towards Muslims among local Hindus. Politicians from both sides abused each other. However, common people did not harbour any such hatred.
“I have been the priest of the temple for 26 years, even during the period of demolition. Despite the pressure from the government, I declined any kind of personal security. I never felt scared of Muslims. There is no feeling of enmity between the people over Mandir-Masjid issues,” he said.
Also, if they fight, it will have negative repercussions on tourism and business here, he added.
Holding that the Allahabad High Court had erred in its order to divide the disputed land into three parts when no one had asked for this, he said: “It is clear that there will not be any division of land (by the Supreme Court).”
The priest said many Muslims had understood that the Ram Mandir once existed at the disputed site and they now had no problem with the construction of the temple, provided land was given for the masjid.
“Many Muslims understand that the masjid was built by demolishing the Ram Mandir in the past. It is proven now. Muslims have started thinking that it (the dispute) should be left in such circumstances. We have asked them to get land for a masjid anywhere they want. The size of the land is a point of contention,” he said.
Satyendra Das said the opponents of Ram Mandir have become less aggressive after the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) came to power at the Centre and in Uttar Pradesh.
However, the saffron party would not play a proactive role in the matter such as bringing legislation for the temple to avoid any blot on its image and damage to its electoral calculations, he asserted.
“If the BJP takes up the issue, it will meet with opposition from other parties. They will be called being against Muslims. So the BJP government will never attempt to bring legislation under any circumstances,” he said.
“So the best way to solve the issue is through the court. It would be more suitable,” Satyendra Das concluded.
(Saurabh Katkurwar can be contacted at saurabh.k@ians.in)
—IANS
