On September 24th the Allahabad High court bench will pronounce the Ayodhya title suit verdict after sixty years. The title suit case was first filed in December 1950 by Mahant Ramchandra Das Paramhans which was followed by several more suits filed by other parties including the Sunni Central Boards of Waqfs, UP, in December 1961. A total of four suits were clubbed together and brought before the Allahabad High Court which began recording oral evidence in July 1996.
The interesting point is that the court will decide whether Lord Ram was born at that very same disputed piece of land where the Babri mosque structure stood. The whole Ayodhya movement began as a socio religious issue in the
19th century and became a burning political issue by the late 1980’s which changed the political landscape of this nation. BJP’s LK Advani spearheaded the whole campaign via his Rath Yatra that bolstered BJP’s electoral strength.
‘Faith’ was the single most important factor on which this issue was carried forward. Many middle class average Hindus also subscribed to the belief that Lord Ram was born there and Mughal King Babar in the 16th century demolished an existing temple and constructed a mosque which was known as the Babri Masjid post independence. On 6th December 1992, the Babri mosque was demolished by Hindu activists, which led to one of the worst communal riots in different parts of the country which claimed thousands of lives.
Without getting into different versions of history advocated by either side, the real issue is that the court will decide whether Lord Ram was born there and if a temple existed before the Babri mosque was constructed on that site. An issue which never got solved through an out of court talks that will be decided in the court of law on the basis of ‘material’, evidence & documents. Though all parties involved in the case which includes the right wing Hindu groups, Muslim groups and the political parties have appealed to maintain peace and accept the court verdict, almost all of them have suggested that the legal option of going to the Supreme Court is still open to them if either side is unhappy with the verdict. The irony of the situation is also the stand of two principle political parties which have been at the heart of the problem. The BJP which captured power on the back of this issue is now in a situation where it is trying to reposition itself as a moderate right wing party in order to strike a chord with the new generation. On the other hand the Congress which has never taken a clear stand on the issue and has changed its position depending on the prevailing political environment and is now in the process of regaining the confidence of the two opposing sides in this case-the Muslims which had deserted the party after the demolition and upper cast Hindus which traditionally supported the cause of the temple. In a sense everyone wants to avoid the verdict to prevent any communal disharmony to resurface.
A majority of average Indians today are of the opinion that the verdict really doesn’t matter now. India has moved on and there are more important issues that matter rather then a mosque or temple. Faith is a matter of trust in an idea. So the response of an average Indian irrespective of the religion after the verdict is something that will shape our faith in the idea of secularism. Majority of Hindus in India are secular in their thoughts and this has been proven by the previous few general elections where they did not vote for the right wing parties like the BJP which fought elections on the Hindutva plank. It has always been politicians (even in this Ayodhya issue) that have used religion to create disharmony by mixing politics with religion. But time and again post 1992, the secular faith of Indians have stood out against hard-line religious faith. Barring the Gujarat riots of 2002, Hindus & Muslims have stood united even when fundamental groups have targeted places of worship.
The ideal solution for this particular issue would be to construct a hospital at the disputed site which would do service to the society irrespective of religion. But no matter how romantic this idea of secularism may sound, the fact remains that history has been a testimony that even though India has changed from time to time, communal violence has been a constant part of our post independence history. And that is why cynics are worried that the Ayodhya verdict might just put the lid off the volcano and destroy the communal calm & peace that has prevailed for the last one decade. The court verdict on September 24th will not decide the winner between Hindus V/s Muslims but between the ‘Hard line Religious Faith’ V/s the ‘Indian Secular Faith’. And let’s hope that Gods of all religions bat for the latter.
No comments:
Post a Comment