From Dispute to Harmony - Resurgence of Ayodhya

 

(Ayodhya's historic Ram temple consecration, ending a 500-year dispute, signifies India's communal harmony and economic potential.)

On January 22, 2024, the world witnessed the grand consecration ceremony and 'Pran Prathista' rituals of the Lord Sri Ram temple in Ayodhya, broadcasted through various television and digital channels. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who was observing an 11-day Vritha, was present and offered the first prayers. The entire country commemorated this 'historic' event. The Ayodhya dispute, which had lasted nearly 500 years, ended on a happy note. Soon, Muslims will also have a grand mosque in Ayodhya, transforming this town into a symbol of communal harmony.

Brief History

Ayodhya is considered one of the six holy places in India for Hindus and is believed to be the birthplace of Lord Ram. Ayodhya is mentioned in the Valmiki Ramayana and various other Indian literatures of all languages, including Kamba Ramayanam. Lord Ram is an invisible spiritual force that resonates within the minds of Hindus worldwide, similar to how Christians and Muslims each hold their spiritual beliefs in their hearts. It is reported that Babar, the first Emperor of the Mughal regime, visited Ayodhya in 1528 and constructed a mosque, 

demolishing the Ram temple that existed there. This temple is believed to be the birthplace, or Janmastan, of Lord Ram by Hindus over centuries. This triggered the Hindus in that locality to restore the temple. It is reported that 76 wars took place between 1528 and 1850 when the British started ruling the country. It is also reported that during these wars, thousands of people died on both sides. Due to the continued struggle to recapture the Janmabhoomi temple, the mosque was not completed as per Islamic tradition. At the time when Babar demolished the temple to construct the mosque, one Pandit Shyamananda Maharaj was believed to be in charge of the temple, and he removed the Ram Lalla idol from the temple and kept it in a safer place. During this period, Namaz was not held regularly in the mosque. On the other hand, during Akbar’s period, Hindus were allowed to use a portion of the area for their Bhajan.

Struggle during the British Period

In 1858, one year after the First War of Independence, Mahant Baba Ram Charan Das, a highly respected Hindu Sadhu, and Maulvi Amir Ali, another highly respected Muslim scholar, discussed and decided to end the war between Muslims and Hindus and bring communal harmony. They signed an agreement that since the mosque was not regularly used by the Muslims, both communities decided to end their fight and permit Hindus to use this site for their worship. In all the ancient records and the revenue records of the British period, this site was mentioned as 'Janmastan'. Later it was known as 'Janmastan – Babi Masjid'. Since Ram Janamastan is a sacred place for Hindus, in 1858 both communities came forward to amicably settle the issue.

Unfortunately, the British Government was not interested in allowing them to settle the issue and wanted the 'divide and rule' policy by making both communities fight against each other. The British Government arrested Mahant Ram Charan Das and Maulvi Amir Ali under false pretexts and hanged them on a tamarind tree. The tree became a symbol of communal harmony, and both communities made this tree a monument and wanted to erect statues for their revered leaders. The British Government removed the tree. Even some of the civil suits filed in the Faizabad court at that time were not taken up.

Post-Independence Era

Shah Bano

In 1949, suddenly a Ram Lalla idol was placed inside the mosque. This created a significant law and order problem in the city between Hindus and Muslims. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru advised Chief Minister GB Pant to remove the idol from the place. However, District Magistrate KK Nair refused to obey the orders.  KK Nair was suspended for his refusal to obey orders. Despite this, the idol remained in the mosque, and the site became a point of contention between Hindus and Muslims. The government declared the area as disputed and locked the gates, allowing neither Hindus nor Muslims to enter.  Only the priests were allowed to perform rituals.

Turning Points

In 1985, a Constitution bench of five judges ruled in the 'Shah Bano' case that Muslim women were entitled to maintenance from their husbands after divorce under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Although the Rajiv Gandhi Government initially welcomed the judgment in Parliament, it later diluted the judgment by limiting its maintenance through an Act under pressure from various Muslim leaders. This action was criticized as yielding to fundamentalists by amending the CrPC, a secular law, to favour religion, while the Constitution was in favour of the Uniform Civil Code.

Originally, the Ayodhya Ram Mandir movement was locally managed and confined to that district. However, after the Shah Bano case, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), a Hindu organization, took up this issue. In January 1986, Umesh Chandra Pandey, a lawyer and journalist, filed a plea before the District Magistrate to unlock the Janmasthan – Babri Masjid site for worship. The site had been under lock since 1949. Under pressure from Hindu leaders, as he had already yielded to Muslim leaders,

Umesh Chandra Pandey

Rajiv Gandhi unlocked the site. The Janmastan site was unlocked and opened to the public on February 1, 1986, through a Court order.

Meanwhile, the VHP launched a nationwide campaign in favour of building a large Ram temple on the same site. "Vaheem Banayenge" was the main slogan.

In 1987, a Ramayana serial was telecast every Sunday morning on Doordarshan. To date, that serial holds a record for the largest viewership. Every week, 650 million people used to watch that serial. At 9 am every Sunday, the whole country would come to a standstill, like our lockdown days. In many places, when Rama's character appeared on the screen, people used to perform ‘Mangala Aarthi’ and offer fruits and flowers. Readers can imagine the frenzy and check with the elders in the family on how that serial had an impact on the whole country.

The Ramayana serial also helped the VHP to create awareness about the Ram temple. Meanwhile, many suits were filed in the courts for restoring the site.

Rajiv Gandhi permits Shilanya

1989 Shilanya

The VHP wanted to conduct a 'Shilanya' (the foundation ceremony) for the new Rama Temple. The Rajiv Gandhi Government permitted the Shilanya in 1989 to be performed in the adjoining site of the disputed area. Rajiv Gandhi deputed Buta Singh, then Home Minister, to participate in the Shilanya. Rajiv Gandhi started his Parliament election campaign from Ayodhya in 1989, promising 'Ram Rajya'. Seeing the influence of Ram among the electorate, all the political parties wanted to take advantage. The BJP passed a resolution in its National Executive Meeting to involve itself in the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute.

During the 1989 elections, Rajiv Gandhi started appeasing both minorities and Hindus simultaneously without clarity. The Congress, which had more than 400 MPs in the 8th Lok Sabha, came down to 197 seats in the 1989 elections. The BJP improved its tally from 2 seats in the 8th Lok Sabha to 85 seats in the 9th Lok Sabha. The Ram temple issue was also one of the major vote catchers for the BJP.

Advani’s Rath Yatra and Demolition of Babri Mosque

In 1989, VP Singh formed the Government with the support of the BJP and the left parties. In 1991, then BJP President LK Advani started his Rath Yatra from the Somnath temple to Ayodhya to create awareness about the Ram temple at the disputed site. The Rath Yatra was stopped by Lalu Prasad Yadav, the then Chief Minister of Bihar, when it entered the State, and Advani was arrested. Narendra Modi, the present Prime Minister, was the coordinator of that Yatra. Earlier, the VP Singh Government introduced Mandal Commission reservations for backward classes. A section of the people opposed this decision, which led to clashes. Those days were turbulent days with Mandal and Masjid clashes. Advani’s arrest provoked more Hindus to enter Ayodhya in large numbers. Around 2 lakh people were reported to have entered Ayodhya. Advani’s arrest led to the withdrawal of support by the BJP to the VP Singh Government.

The Legal Battle

The legal battle for the site began in earnest in 1950 when Gopal Singh Visharad filed a suit in the Faizabad court seeking permission for Hindus to offer prayers at the site. Over the years, several other suits were filed by different parties, both Hindu and Muslim, staking claim over the site. The legal battle continued for decades, with the Allahabad High Court finally pronouncing its verdict in 2010. The court ruled that the site should be divided into three parts, with one-third going to the Sunni Waqf Board, one-third to the Nirmohi Akhara, and one-third to the party representing 'Ram Lalla'

Supreme Court Verdict

None of the parties accepted the verdict, and all appealed to the Supreme Court of India. The Constitution bench, consisting of five judges chaired by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, including a Muslim judge, heard the case in detail. In 2019, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the mosque was built after destroying a Hindu temple, relying on the ASI survey and other evidence presented by the Hindu group. The Court also observed that the Muslim side did not prove that regular Namaz was held in the Babri Mosque. However, they condemned the demolition of the Masjid by the Hindu group. Finally, the Court ordered that the disputed site be handed over to Ram Lalla, the deity. They instructed the Indian Government to create a Public Trust and hand over the site to them for the construction of the Ram temple. Simultaneously, they also ordered the Government to allot 5 acres to Muslim groups for the construction of a Mosque.

The Indian Government created a Trust and handed over the site. They also allotted 5 acres to the Sunni Waqf Board.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi laid the foundation stone in August 2020, and the Pran Prathishta was conducted on January 22, 2024, in the presence of the Prime Minister.

It is also reported that a grand mosque would be constructed shortly and inaugurated.

Political and Economic Implications

Before the 1980s, the Ram Temple movement was confined only to Ayodhya and the neighbouring districts. After the VHP and BJP took over this issue in the 1980s, it became a national movement. Ram is an invisible spiritual force behind the entire country. In North India, people used to greet ‘Ram Ram’, instead of ‘Good morning’. In the name of ‘secularism’, many political parties started ridiculing the movement and rejected the ASI findings. At one stage, during Dr Manmohan Singh's regime, the Government submitted an affidavit to the Supreme Court saying that ‘Ram was an imaginary character’, against the strong belief of Hindus. In the process, they ended up displeasing the majority of the country and embarrassed even the minorities. The Supreme Court based its verdict relying on the evidence produced by ASI and on the ‘faith’ that the people had that the site was the Janmastan of Lord Ram. The stand of the Congress to appease Muslims and Hindus alternatively did not go well with the sentiments of the people. They got reduced from 400 plus seats to less than 50 in Lok Sabha. Even now, during Pran Prathishta, the Congress boycotted the consecration ceremony of Ram Mandir, accusing the BJP was politicizing the Ram temple.  Rajiv Gandhi first started his campaign from Ayodhya in 1989 promising ‘Ram Rajya’. In a way, all the parties were politicizing this issue either in favour or against the Ram temple to suit their convenience.  Many of the Congress leaders did not like this boycott decision, as they would be facing the public for elections soon. The Ram Mandir issue was also one of the main factors for the BJP's growth from 2 seats in the 8th Lok Sabha to 303 seats in the 17th Lok Sabha.

Various economic reports indicate that Ayodhya would attract nearly 10 crore people every year as tourists. When the Mosque gets inaugurated, the numbers will grow. According to K T Jagannathan, a Senior Economics Journalist, this would boost the economy of the district and UP very well, benefiting all the communities.  According to Professor K Prabhakar, Former Vice Chancellor and senior economics professor, the temple economy in India is more than 3 lakh crores in the GDP. Ayodhya is likely to generate immediately more than 25,000 employment opportunities in different segments. He also added that Ayodhya and UP would attract more than 300 billion dollars in investment.

Lessons to be Learnt

The British regime believed in a ‘divide and rule’ policy to stabilize their rule. Unfortunately, even after Independence, many of the political parties adopt the same ‘divide and rule’ policy in the name of protecting secularism and disrespecting the invisible sentiments of the people across the nation. The Indian Constitution ensures that all citizens are treated equally. Instead of triggering a ‘divide’ through false narratives, the political parties in India should focus on unity and communal harmony with the economic development agenda. Ridiculing and hurting the sentiments of the popular faith of the people will be always counterproductive. It is to be remembered that the people who opposed the Ram temple, created more awareness among the silent majority, than the people who supported it.  They should keep in mind that our traditional mantra  "sarve janaha sukino bhavanthu" ("May all beings be happy") is always the tagline.

Conclusion

The Ayodhya dispute, which had been a source of contention for centuries, finally found its resolution. The peaceful resolution of the dispute and the subsequent construction of the Ram temple and the proposed mosque, stand as a testament to India's secular fabric and the spirit of mutual respect and harmony that characterizes its diverse society. As we move forward, it is hoped that Ayodhya will continue to symbolize unity in diversity, serving as a beacon of communal harmony for the rest of the country.

(Source: Cover story published in Jan 2024 edition of PreSense)