Why shout for a Ram Temple

Why shout for a Ram Temple

Enough is enough. No one should test the patience of the people of the country, for whom Maryada Purushottam Bhagwan Ram is an ideal for good character, good governance, and symbol of justice to all. Unfortunately, Lord Ram himself is under a tent house, guarded by police forces, for having a temple. Where would crores of believers offer puja? Lord Ram, who gives justice to all, is himself in corridors of courts.  Hindus all over the world are unhappy as their sentiments are hurt, as their own God is facing crisis for a temple. We believe that ‘Ram Naam’ is more powerful than Lord Ram. People all over the world are surprised that Lord Ram is facing a long battle at the court of law for a grand temple at Ayodhya for Himself ! It is high time to build the grand temple for Lord Ram at his birthplace Ayodhya and settle the issue amicably at least to respect our culture and traditions. Otherwise, there may be outburst of the devotees that would lead to indiscipline in the society.  But the Supreme Court, which was supposed to hear the case on daily basis from November 2018, postponing the hearing till January 2019, the hopes of crores of Hindus crashed.  It cannot be gainsaid that in the Hindu view, the piece of land is sacred. And it was unanimously concurred by the three-judge bench of Allahabad Court in 2010 that the sanctum-sanctorum is Lord Ram’s Janamsthan. It is, therefore, in the fitness of thing to discuss the past of Ram Janmabhoomi. The Babri ‘Masjid’ was built by Babur in 1527 on what was believed to be Lord Ram’s birthplace. This was substantiated by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), which excavated the mosque site at the direction of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court in 2003. At the same time, it is apt to mention that one should also not forget the precious contribution of Ashok Singhal. An engineer by education and a trained classical singer, Ashok Singhal metamorphosed into a true nationalist par excellence, who played the central role in the Ram Janmabhoomi movement. He became a nationally known figure for spearheading an emotive campaign against the 16th century Babri structure in Ayodhya that was eventually razed in 1992. Furthermore, the transformation of the BJP from a weakling to a political force could not have been possible had Singhal’s six years of effort not gone into making Advani’s rath yatra a success.

However, the negationist version of Indian history means accepting the Islamic view of history–that the history of any place begins with its Muslim takeover; nothing that happened before is of any account. This is how Muslims view the history of all the conquered lands–from Egypt to Iran and even Pakistan. But they have been defeated in their purpose to impose this version of history on India. The struggle over Ayodhya is but a facet of this larger struggle. This is in the interests of all concerned–not just the Hindus. Communal harmony in India is an unattainable goal as long as one side keeps insisting on whitewashing its own record, while blaming the victims for all the problems. And the victims of such propaganda will never rest in content until they feel their case has been justly treated. Here is where the ‘secularists’ have done immense harm to the cause of communal harmony in the name of ‘secularism’–whitewashing jihad negationism, while heaping abuse and blame on the victims. Furthermore, people should be wary of leaders who are bent on creating disturbances. The judiciary has always played an important role as the watchdog of our Constitution. Its role in upholding the rule of law, human rights and democratic values has been significant. It is expected that the justice will be expedited as soon as possible. But justice cannot be done at the expense of communal harmony. This is exactly what the long-awaited Ayodhya verdict is all about. The court should pave the way for reconciliation. And the electronic media should refrain from poking its nose in this issue and leave the nation in peace. It should not prod ‘experts’ and force them into saying something that is unnecessary and provocative. To sum up, Ayodhya represents a struggle by Indians to recover their true history from the grip of imperial surrogates–the Islamist fundamentalist and the secularist. These are the residue of defunct imperial movements. They are now partners in negation trying to preserve their privileges and positions as representatives of imperialisms’ past. Negationism has been their main tactic, but it is doomed to failure, as the verdict on Ayodhya will call their bluff.

 

By Deepak Kumar Rath

(editor@udayindia.in)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.