| |
After Babri, a new battle
unearthed
By Ranjit Devraj
NEW DELHI - Excavations at the site where a 16th
century mosque was demolished 10 years ago by pro-Hindu
politicians reveal that the structure - today a magnet
of communal politics - was built over a pre-existing
mosque rather a Hindu temple, say Indian historians.
"The Babri masjid [mosque] structure was
superimposed on a pre-existing mosque from the sultanate
period which was constructed out of stones and plastered
over with lime mortar - plastering being an art brought
in by Muslim invaders," investigating archaeologist
Suraj Bhan told Inter Press Service in an interview. The
sultanate period in Indian history refers to more than
three centuries during which several Muslim kingdoms
held sway in northern India before the arrival of the
Moghuls from Central Asia in the early part of the 16th
century.
Bhan said that he had already conveyed
his findings to the Sunni Central Waqf Board, which
looks after Muslim religious properties in India, and is
party to a dispute pending in the India courts as to who
now owns the land in Ayodhya town in northern Uttar
Pradesh state, where the Babri masjid once stood.
The mosque was demolished on December 6, 1992 by
the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its affiliates in a
pro-Hindu campaign led by Lal Krishna Advani, now deputy
prime minister and holder of the key home ministry
portfolio. Supporters of the BJP, which first came to
power in 1998 by whipping up majority Hindu sentiment,
insist that the Babri masjid was built by Babar, founder
of the Moghul empire, over the remains of temple marking
the site where the mythical Hindu warrior deity Rama was
born some 10,000 years ago.
But the main
objective of the BJP campaign, that of rebuilding a
grand temple to Rama at the site, has been thwarted thus
far by legal disputes. The courts have ordered the
maintenance of the status quo at the site until
ownership can be decided on archaeological evidence.
The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has
failed to turn up evidence of a pre-existing temple.
Thus, Hindu extremist groups are now threatening to make
good on a plan to enlarge their campaign to include
other sites in northern India where temples were known
to have been demolished by iconoclastic Muslim invaders.
"The Ram temple is not a legal or archaeological
dispute - it is a matter of faith with Hindus. We are
now going revive our demands that the temples [at other
areas] at Kashi [Benares] and at Mathura be handed over
to us," Praveen Togadia, leader of the Vishwa Hindu
Parishad (VHP) or World Hindu Forum , a close affiliate
of the BJP, announced.
Commented Irfan Habib,
one of India's most respected historians, "The VHP and
its supporters are now falling back on faith since they
cannot produce any historical evidence to show that Rama
was born at the disputed site. But the faith they are
talking about is only faith invented by them."
The VHP is also opposing a plan mooted by the
government to throw open hundreds of mosques -
controlled and protected by the ASI because of their
archaeological value - to the Muslim community for
namaz (worship) in return for foregoing claims on
the Babri masjid site. In a statement, K S Sudershan,
leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a wing
of the BJP known for its military-style drills, said,
"The RSS fully supports the VHP stand that allowing
namaz in these mosques would only open a can of
worms."
Both the RSS and the VHP have now come
into conflict with Shankaracharya Swami Jayendra
Saraswati, a leading Hindu authority who favors opening
up mosques under the ASI to the Muslim community as part
of a compromise plan. Earlier in June, Shankaracharya
proposed a peace formula under which the Babri masjid
site would be handed over to a government-appointed
committee and a temple to Ram be built at the site, in
return for which claims by the VHP to the sites at
Mathura and Varanasi would be given up.
But the
All-India Babri Masjid Action Committee (AIBMAC) reacted
adversely to the proposal made by Shankaracharya,
believed to be acting as an emissary of Prime Minister
Atal Bihari Vajpayee. "There is no question of giving up
the Babri masjid site," said Zafarya Jilani, convener of
the committee.
The RSS and VHP leadership have
also made it known politely that Shankaracharya should
not embroil himself in the dispute. "We have already
compromised our stand because of Shankaracharya and
agreed not to disturb the disputed site until the title
suit was resolved," said VHP secretary Surendra Jain.
The respective stands taken by the VHP and the
AIBMAC have resulted in a deadlock over the Babri masjid
dispute, and hurt chances for an early settlement over
an issue that has dominated politics in northern India
over the past decade.
Meanwhile, differences
have also sprung between the BJP and its hardline
affiliates over the handling of the Babri masjid
dispute. These hardliners now openly say that Advani and
Vajpayee benefited from the campaign to build the Ram
temple, but did little for it after coming to power five
years ago. Although the BJP rules by virtue of the fact
that it leads a multi-party, National Democratic
Alliance (NDA), its partners are uncomfortable with the
temple-building plan.
For example, the Telugu
Desam Party, which rules southern Andhra Pradesh state
and is the biggest constituent of the NDA, has made it
clear that it will oppose any non-secular move by the
BJP. Last month, the Central Bureau of Investigation
(CBI) charged Advani and seven other prominent BJP and
VHP leaders for the demolition of the Babri masjid, but
exempted them from personal appearance at hearings that
began on Thursday. Advani is currently on an official
tour of the United States and Britain.
But many
believe that the CBI's move was made only to give Advani
and others, like cabinet minister Murli Manohar Joshi,
greater control over cases pending against them over the
demolition for almost a decade now. On the other hand,
demands have been raised by opposition political parties
for Advani's resignation since technically it would be
anomalous for him to continue as home minister while
facing formal charges by the CBI, which is controlled by
the ministry he heads.
(Inter Press
Service)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
