by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
By Mohit Dubey,
Ayodhya : It is a rainbow of hope and faith outside the sprawling 67 acres of the Ram Janmabhoomi (RJB) in the temple town of Ayodhya as hundreds of people from different parts of India queued up for a darshan of ‘Ram Lalla’ on a sunny Thursday afternoon.
Under the vigilant eyes of gun-toting security personnel from the UP Police and the paramilitary forces, including an all-women’s unit, people in bright turbans, women young and old with veils covering their faces, others with their foreheads smeared with vermillion, walked up the pathway leading to the makeshift temple.
The serpentine iron-grilled corridors fenced by barbed wire were choked with devotees finding their way from one side to the other of the 3-km stretch for ‘darshan’ of ‘Ram Lalla’ installed under a tent since December 6, 1992 when thousands of ‘kar sevaks’ razed the 16-the century Babri mosque.
Bhishmasen Bassoi from Naurangpur in Odisha waited anxiously for his turn. He said in broken Hindi that there was no way that construction of the temple could now be delayed.
The 62-year-old said he was sure that the next time he was in Ayodhya, work would have started on the grand Ram temple and that he would live to see its completion.
Kanhaiyya Lal Sharma, who runs a ‘locker room’ for the devotees to keep their wallets, phones and other items barred from the premises, said the footfall “of late has increased considerably”. While the 28-year-old partly credits this to the ongoing Kumbh in Prayagraj, he says the “recent buzz around the Ram temple construction” has also created interest among the people.
Sixty-five-year-old Mast Ram from Barwa Tola locality of Ayodhya was selling guavas outside the ‘isolated zone’ of the RJB and his eyes brimmed with confidence at the mention of a Ram temple.
“Ram Mandir to banbaiy kari,” he said in Avadhi dialect, adding that his hopes are pinned on the “recent developments” narrated to him by his college-going grandson.
With the Centre moving an application in the Supreme Court for handing over the 67 acre acquired land minus the disputed 2.22 acre, the locals and the visitors are certainly pepped up with the prospect of an early solution to the long-simmering imbroglio.
Sporting a burly moustache, Nawal Das from Vidisha in Madhya Pradesh was certain that this time round “Mantri ji will settle the issue”. Prodded to tell more, he coyly refused to answer and melted into the bustling crowd.
Yagnesh, a priest from Vadodara, who was part of a 12-member contingent from the Gujarat, said that though he has been to Ayodhya thrice in the past, this time was “different”. “I am sure the prospects of a grand Ram temple are brighter than ever”.
Hemant Mishra, a local who is a regular to the ‘Ram Kachehri’ temple near the RJB, threw up his hands in despair at the “politics being played on the sensitive matter”. Pointing at the heavy security around and the tall fences, he said this was a “sad situation” that “broke his heart”.
Chinta Devi, a village woman from Nalanda, was equally sad at the fact that “Ram Lalla has fallen on bad times (is durdasha)”. She, like many other pilgrims coming to Ayodhya, hope that “Ram Mandir ka Nirman sheeghra hoga” (the temple construction will be soon).
(Mohit Dubey can be reached at mohit.d@ians.in)
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | Interviews
Sri Sri Ravi Shankar
By Kushagra Dixit and V.S. Chandrasekar,
New Delhi : Art of Living founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, who is of late involved in mediation on the Ayodhya issue, says the best solution to the festering Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute is an out-of-court settlement under which the Muslims gift the land to the Hindus for building a grand Ram Temple.
The 61-year-old spiritual leader, who met leaders of both Sunni and Shia sects of the Muslim community recently, also says that he is not in touch with the government — and that it has nothing to do with his efforts.
Ravi Shankar, who has a global following, denies vehemently that he talked of “bloodshed” in case the Supreme Court rules the title dispute in favour of one community or the other.
“Because it’s Lord Ram’s birthplace, there is such a strong feeling connected with the place. And since it is not that important place for Muslims and (is) also in a place where there is conflict, namaaz is not acceptable. Anyway, it is not going to serve the purpose; and when it is not serving the purpose of the other community (Muslims), then, it should be gifted,” he told IANS in an interview.
Ravi Shankar said that if the Supreme Court rules in favour of the Mandir then there will be heartburn. If it rules for the Masjid, there will agian be heartburn.
“So, in either case, there will be discord in society. I want to create a win-win situation, where both communities come together and respect for each is restored, where respect of each is honoured. That is the formula we are suggesting… why not do it?” he said.
The spiritual leader said he was hopeful that an out-of-court settlement could be reached because he has been talking to people in both the communities, and they both agree that there should be a settlement.
“On that only (was) the initiative mooted. It’s not that I jumped into it suddenly,” he said.
Asked if there were any deadlines for finding an amicable solution ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, he said, “No such deadline. I am just saying what would be the best for both communities. Nothing to do with elections, not at all. Only an amicable solution.”
Ravi Shankar acknowledged that the temple dispute was a polarising factor all over India and that is why there was a need for all communities to come together.
“It is more relevant to come together and build bridges — and this initiative will build bridges,” he said.
Asked about his meetings with leaders of the Shia and Sunni sects of the Muslim community, Ravi Shankar said that both the sects agree that they should settle the matter outside court.
“There is already a Shri Ram Temple existing there (at the disputed site). They all know that it cannot be removed. So, we should sit and talk,” he said.
Sunni scholar Maulana Salman Nadwi was expelled from the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on February 10 after he backed Ravi Shankar’s formula following a meeting with him — along with Uttar Pradesh Sunni Waqf Board chief Zufar Farooqui — at the Art of Living Bengaluru ashram. Ravi Shankar met Nadwi again in February in Lucknow.
On March 6, Ravi Shankar wrote to AIMPLB proposing an amicable solution where Muslims would gift the entire 2.77 acres of the disputed site to Hindus as a goodwill gesture and, in turn, Hindus would gift five acres of land near the site, to build a bigger mosque. The AIMPLB, however, had rejected Ravi Shankar’s proposal.
In a letter to the president and members of AIMPLB on March 6, Ravi Shankar spoke of “four options before the country” to resolve the dispute and discussed the possible outcomes of the Supreme Court’s verdict favouring one community over the other.
Referring to the first possibility of the court declaring that the site be given to the Hindus based on archaeological evidence that the temple existed long before the Masjid, Ravi Shankar said Muslims would have serious apprehensions about the legal system and lose faith in the judiciary. This could also lead to Muslim youth taking to violence.
Even though the Muslim Personal Law Board and other community leaders say that they will accept the verdict, in the long run the feeling that the court has done injustice will prevail for years.
If the Hindus lose the case and the land is gifted to Muslims for re-construction of the Babri Masjid, it would cause huge communal disturbance all over the country. “Winning this one acre of land, they would, however, permanently lose the goodwill of the majority community,” he said.
Ravi Shankar talked about the Allahabad High Court judgement allowing both a temple and mosque to be built there being upheld, and the “fourth option” of a temple through legislation, and said in the letter to AIMPLB leaders that “in all the four options, whether through the court or through the government, the results will be devastating for the nation at large and the Muslim community in particular”.
“The best solution, according to me, is an out-of-court settlement in which Muslim bodies come forward and gift one acre of land to the Hindus who, in turn, gift acres of land nearby to the Muslims, to build a better mosque. It is a win-win situation in which Muslims will not only gain the goodwill of 1,000 million Hindus, but it will also put this issue to rest once and for all.
“A palak nama (plaque) will recognise that this temple has been built with the cooperation of both the Hindus and Muslims. It will put to rest the issue for future generations and coming centuries,” he said in the letter.
Asked about his reported remarks on bloodshed, Ravi Shankar said, “I have never said that. It’s a distortion. I said that we don’t want a conflict in this country like what I have seen in Syria.”
(Kushagra Dixit can be reached at kushagra.d@ians.in and V.S Chandrasekar at chandru.v@ians.in)
—IANS
