The Supreme
Court of India has very amicably settled the all (in)famous Ram Janmabhoomi
Dispute. In essentiality it was a dispute which has been going on for centuries.
The apex court, and in particular CJI Gogoi has been praised widely for
settling this dispute, especially by his current and former colleagues in
judiciary. The apex court has awarded the 2.77 acre of disputed land to Ram
Lalla Virajman. The struggles of millions of Indians, including my own
family has been vindicated. It is equally
reassuring that the entire country has accepted this judgment. There is no
discord or hostility on the ground and a rare amity, brotherhood and
understanding has been witnessed. Most Muslims
have welcomed the Ayodhya verdict as it is a balanced scorecard. This dispute
was impeding the growth of the Muslim community in several ways. Gratitude is
due to Chief Justice who led the Supreme Court bench which relieved India of
this problem. This issue which was
contentious, full of competing claims and interests many times giving rise to
conflicts and hostility, has been resolved in a perfectly lawful manner
consistent with the Maryada of our constitutional polity.
The judgment as well as conduct of people is very symbolic of Ram
Lalla himself. Lord Ram is also known as Maryada Purushottam.
Dignity and ethics are central to his conduct and philosophy. His story for the
last five thousand years continues to animate and inspire the psyche of
ordinary Indians and remains a proud narrative of our civilizational,
cultural and spiritual heritage. Significantly the court observed the
practice of religion, Islam being no exception, varies according to the
cultural and social context. Cultural assimilation is a significant factor
which shaped the manner in which religion is practised, because
cultural assimilation cannot be construed as a feature destructive of religious
doctrine. Surely the heritage of Kabir, Rahim and Raskhan stands vindicated
today.
Joseph Tiefenthaler was
a Jesuit missionary who visited India in 1740. He notes the sacred character
of Ayodhya, which he called Adjudea. In particular, he
mentions a “Bedi” – a cradle – where Beschan (Vishnu) was born in the form of
Ram. Alexander Cunningham, director general of Archaeological Survey of India,
refers to Ayodhya in his 1862 report as the birthplace of Lord Ram. P
Carnegie, commissioner and settlement officer of Faizabad, mentions in his 1870
report that “Ajudhia is to Hindus what Mecca is to
Mohammedans”. The court concluded vide para 786 that travelogues of
foreigners provide a detailed account both of the faith and belief of
Hindus based on the sanctity which they ascribe to
the birthplace of Lord Ram and to the actual worship
by Hindus of the Janm-Sthan. Very significantly, the
court further noted that for a period of 325 years from the date of the
construction of the mosque until installation of a grill wall by the
British, no evidence has been adduced by the Muslims to establish the
exercise of possessory control over the disputed site. The court held
that the oral and documentary evidence shows that the devotees of Lord Ram hold
a genuine longstanding and profound belief in the religious merit attained by
offering prayer to Lord Ram at the site they believe to be his birthplace.
Significantly the court mentioned the acknowledgments by Muslim witnesses
about the presence of Hindu religious symbols like Varah, Jai-Vijay
and Garud outside the three-dome structure. The court further
held, “They are suggestive not merely of the existence of faith and belief but
of actual worship down the centuries.” Quite clearly, what was brought down was
not just brick and mortar but a vibrant and active symbol and place of worship
for millions of Hindus through centuries.
While decreeing the
suit in favour of Ram Lalla plaintiff of the Hindus in substance, the court
also decided to provide restitution to the Muslim community by directing the
government to allocate five acres of land to the Sunni Waqf Board. The central
government has been directed to formulate a scheme envisaging the setting up of
a trust for the management as also construction of a temple. It has also been
given the liberty to hand over the rest of the acquired land for development in
terms of the scheme.
It would have been much
better if this dispute had been settled out of court, as suggested in 2017 by
the then CJI J S Khehar or, recently, by the constitution bench led by CJI
Ranjan Gogoi. As a matter of fact, the Muslims should have offered this patch
of land to the Hindus, stating that they are doing so as a goodwill gesture for
Lord Ram, while leaving the rest to Allah and Prophet Muhammad. Certainly, the
magic would have worked, and the animosity of Partition would have been
history. No doubt, after this gesture, the Hindus
would have built not one but many mosques. Besides, this humane gesture would
have obviated all scope for converting any other mosque —any monument, in fact
— into a temple. However, owing to the actions of some self-appointed leaders
of the community, the Muslims have missed the bus.
Some of the baggage Indian Muslims carry is due to the perception
they believe the majority community has of them. That perception is, in fact,
inaccurate, made up of half-truths and cooked-up charges. The other burden is a
result of their own inaction, which has led to the emergence of opportunistic
interlocutors — clerics and personal law boards. Muslims must come out of the
control of these hypocritical, rigid clerics who lead them astray. If Muslims want to
progress educationally, socially and economically, they must now try to get out
of the clutches of the rabble-rousing representatives or faux secularists —
these are the very people responsible for their misery since Partition. PM
Modi, who tells them to hold the Quran in one hand and a computer in the other,
has been their well-wisher. However, Opposition leaders have been misleading
them. It is time Muslims stopped being misled by such leaders who keep
instigating the community against the RSS and the BJP. Around 200 million
Muslims have to exist in India with their non-Muslim brethren; they have to
live in amity with them to take India towards success and glory.
