The Landmark Ayodhya Hearing

"नो" No verdict can ever condone the Hindu activist’s action of destruction of the mosque despite the commitment given to the Supreme Court by the political rally that the mosque will not be harmed and in the absence of any strong evidence supporting their faith at that point in time.

Concomitantly, the Hindu activists’ cannot be hanged to death for their action as Ayodhya, with reference to the Hindu Mythology, happens to be one of the seven most holy places for Hindus in India. As Mr. K Advani said  “If Muslims are entitled to an Islamic atmosphere in Mecca, and if Christians are entitled to a Christian atmosphere in the Vatican, why is it wrong for the Hindus to expect a Hindu atmosphere in Ayodhya “.

It is most unfortunate that a Masjid should have been built on a land specially held sacred by the Hindus, but as that event occurred 356 years ago, it is too late now to agree with the grievances.

The existence of a massive temple structure was confirmed only in the year 2003 by the archaeological department. The findings clearly establish the authenticity, that the site where the mosque was constructed is the birthplace of Lord Rama, the legendary King of Kosala, who is also worshiped by millions as an avatar of Vishnu.

Following are few of the findings -

• The Skandh Puraan, an over 2000 year old work of reference for ancient pilgrimage sites in India, narrates in detail the different temples in Ayodhya, including the one commemorating the birthplace of Rama.
• In 1767, Jesuit priest Joseph Tieffenthaler recorded Hindus worshiping and celebrating Ramanavami at the site of the mosque.

• In 1858, the Muazzin of the Babri Mosque said in a petition to the British government that the courtyard had been used by Hindus for hundreds of years.

• The ASI report summary indicated that ‘stone and decorated bricks as well as mutilated sculpture of a divine couple and carved architectural features, including foliage patterns, amalaka, kapotapali, doorjamb with semi-circular shrine pilaster, broke octagonal shaft of black schist pillar, lotus motif, circular shrine having pranjala (watershute) in the north and 50 pillar bases in association with a huge structure’.

• References such as the 1986 edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica reported that "Rama’s birthplace is marked by a mosque, erected by the Mughal emperor Babur in 1528 on the site of an earlier temple.

According to the verdict released by the Allahabad High Court on September 30th ,2010 in response to the land title case lodged in the year 1992 after  the Babri mosque was destroyed by the Hindu activists’ during a political rally, it has been pronounced that the the 2.77 acres of Ayodhya land be divided into 3 parts with -

           I.1/3rd going to construction of the Ram temple,

          II.1/3rd going to the Islamic Sunni Waqf Board

          III.the remaining 1/3 going to the Hindu religious denomination Nirmohi Akhara*.

 *Nirmohi Akhara is a Hindu religious denomination comprising of ardent devotees of Lord Hanuman belonging to the Vaishnava caste.This denomination is a group of Sadhus and the term implies- ‘group without attachment';.They had filed a case in the year 1949 to seek the consent to build a Ram temple adjacent to the Babri mosque in an area called ‘Ram Chabutara’. Hence as per the verdict the remaining 1/3rd land been given to Nirmohi Akhara consists of ‘Ram Chabutara’ and ‘Sita Rasoi’

Not surprisingly, the Sunni Waqf Board completely dissatisfied with the verdict has decided to challenge the same in the Supreme Court .Their discontentment is based on the following beliefs-

• The history of the site in dispute mentions that the mosque was constructed, only over the remains of a Hindu temple by one of the generals of the Mughal invader Babur -Mir Baki Khan in 1528 and no temple was ever demolished to construct the mosque, which is also one of the findings of the Allahabad High Court.
• The ASI report points out the presence of animal bones throughout as well as of the use of ‘surkhi' and lime mortar that rule out the possibility of a Hindu temple having been there beneath the mosque
• The ASI failed to mention any evidence of a temple in its interim reports and only revealed it in the final report which was submitted during a time of national tension, making the report a high suspect.
• The feeling unfairness towards them from the years of 1853 when the first incident of violence over the issue between Hindus and Muslims was recorded, continuing its trend in the year 1949 when the idol of Lord Rama and Sita was forcefully kept inside the mosque. No subsequent action has been ever taken in favor of the Muslims as far as this issue is concerned.

In my opinion, the verdict is just a ‘balancing approach’ taken -

    A) To destrengthen the Bharathiya Janata Party’s strong conviction of being winners

    B) To discourage the Muslim sections’ growing negativity.

   C) To lessen the animosity between the two sections and create an atmosphere of peace & aid  
        prosperity of India without wasting effort in solving indifferences arising out of religious issues.

For once there has been some benefit in the verdict coming after 16 good years from the time the case was filed! In the last few years, there has been a radical transformation in the thought process of the people. The contemporary age has started to analyze and evaluate each issue at hand more practically rather than blindly jumping into the fire of unnecessary hatred and anger.

Not quite sure if the following lines by  Nobel Laureate V.S. Naipaul “the destruction of Babri mosque was an act of historical balancing and the repatriation of the Ramjanmabhoomi was a welcome sign that Hindu pride was re-asserting itself” might open up yet another discussion but then the hearing was for sure one such case where faith has been upheld by law.

 I am glad it’s all over for the time being and hope this entire issue remains merely as pages of our history books, never to be ever talked about again!

References

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayodhya_debate

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/ayodhya-verdict-sunni-waqf-board-to-appeal-in-supreme-court-56080

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babri_Mosque

Enthiran - The Robot

"Enthiran" for sure is a must watch movie for all the Indians.First half of the movie is a real entertainer loaded with some good comedy will make all of us jump of our seats and laugh.Second half of the movie is where the difference lies .For all of us who have appreciated 'Matrix' & 'I ,Robot', this part of the movie requires a standing ovation to the entire team for their immense creativity, beautiful cinematography & powerful background score.


Rajnikanth's hardwork really shows in the movie. No doubt, he is a universal superstar but then never knew he has so much fan following in places like Melbourne, Singapore etc.If there is one Rajni movie all of us must watch ,then this is it , this it ! 


I have a feeling that the initial favorites of Shankar for the role -Kamalhassan and Shahrukh have just missed out on an awesome opportunity to create history in Indian cinema.Though original favorites would have been an ideal fit for the script but hats off to Rajni who made it look really easy in the end.


Things I felt could have been better in the movie 'Enthiran'-

• Few songs could have been cut short in the second half(first few minutes) though from a director's perspective he might have wanted to make it as commercial as possible .
• Aishwarya could have concentrated more on acting rather than being too artificial and self obsessed with her own looks.
• The final scene needed that 'Indian tadka' -the emotional equation was completely missing.Indian movie fails to create an impact until you have a  drop of tear in your eyes while you are leaving the cinema theatre.

Tamil version definitely is very impressive .. 


Not sure if it might create the same magic in other languages as I feel comedy dialogues in Tamil cannot be translated as it is, in other languages which implies that the essence of the good humor is lost.


Original is always the best! (DOT)