Babri Masjid Case: Is it more prudent to settle it outside the court?

vstol Jockey

Professional
Dec 1, 2017
5,460
9,611
New Delhi
I will be honest, there is no clear cut solution for this problem. SC works under framework of law. How can you decide for something that was done even before the legal system in India as we know it today was introduced?
Plus what kind of precedence will it set?

Also finding of ASI only proves that an old temple existed on the site. You cann't be sure if that was the alledged Ram's Birth Place temple? Does Ram even has a historical existence or was he a part of subcontinents legend? If he is a legend and a myth then what that temple is all about? IIRC analysis of Ramayan suggest the entire epic was based in modern day Afghanistan. So how can you decide to build a temple in modern Ayodhya, which is not even the suggested birthplace of Ram if you take the epic at face value!

Also, before anyone answers the questions above systematically, lemme put the upshot behind those. I am not seeking the answers for them, it is mainly to drive the point that the entire proposition to establish a temple there is to honor sentiments of majority. Now in the framework of law it is hard to argue base on faith and sentiments and not fact. The only fact are the following:-
1. ASI's analysis suggest existance of an ancient temple but NOT a conclusive proof of birth place of Ram. Existance of Rama and proof of his birth place there is a matter of myth and legends.
2. A Mosque there was existing which was demolished.
3. There were people who were responsible for this and they broke laws.

With this, what decision can any court make under framework of law? Reconstruct a temple which was broken in 16th century or so? And if yes then which temple?

how to distribute land, then on which basis? A claim based on faith? A claim based on a historic event about 4 to 5 century back?

This is why this cann't be decided in SC. ASI has already given their analysis. If its not SC then who can decide? Last resort is to ask people of the country with some moderation in due process. Thats all I am suggesting.
To the contrary, There is more than enough proof that a ram temple existed there much before the mosques was built. Even the muslim organisation who are opposed to temple construction have cheated and gone back on their word that if excavations confirmed the existance of a temple, they will give up their claim. ASI under supervision of Allahabad HC and with members of both sides present did the excavations and a complete foundation of the temple was excavated exactly under the debris of the mosque.
There have been over 50 battles to regain that piece of land by hindus and its control has see-sawed between hindus and muslims in last 450 yrs. Hindus have never ever given up on it and nor will we ever even if it means killing billions. Kasam Raam kee khatay hain, Mandir wahin banayengay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aravind

Shajida Khan

Senior member
Dec 27, 2017
1,524
1,579
Seattle
To the contrary, There is more than enough proof that a ram temple existed there much before the mosques was built. Even the muslim organisation who are opposed to temple construction have cheated and gone back on their word that if excavations confirmed the existance of a temple, they will give up their claim. ASI under supervision of Allahabad HC and with members of both sides present did the excavations and a complete foundation of the temple was excavated exactly under the debris of the mosque.
The reports I read mentioned a temple and not whom it was venerating. I am more than happy to read the source you have read. However, even if we concede that the temple was Ram temple it does not prove that it was birthplace of Ram. Even if you interpret the epics like Ramayana, it is not conclusive that the place of birth --as narrated-- is the town we call Ayodhya in UP. The description seems to look like referring to a town by the river in Afghanistan, west of Indus.

Ultimately, it will come to this: We have sentiments and faith of around 1 billion or so Hindus which says that Ram was born in that place. How can you take this decision in a legal framework? Can a court take decision on matters of sentiments or faith? What you need is a way for both the communities to come to a compromise. What kind of compromise it will be? I don't know! But it should be validated by people of the country. Its not a legal case and SC is totally right about it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: bonobashi

bonobashi

Well-Known member
Dec 3, 2017
889
410
One group or another is going to constantly create problems to prevent a proper out of court settlement (AIMPLB, AIMIM etc etc), so there's no point wasting time in that attempt. And there is no question there was a temple there. So that's it, either the Supreme Court delivers the correct verdict or this Government must step up to the plate and do what it was put in power to do. Ayodhya today, Kashi and Mathura tomorrow.
Evidently, according to this legal luminary, the Supreme Court doesn't have a choice; it can either deliver the correct verdict, or others will ensure that what has to be will be.

Marvellous; this is the rule of law.
 

RATHORE

Lion of Rajputana
Dec 2, 2017
1,656
1,948
USA
Evidently, according to this legal luminary, the Supreme Court doesn't have a choice; it can either deliver the correct verdict, or others will ensure that what has to be will be.

Marvellous; this is the rule of law.
Go tell that to Rajiv Gandhi. What did great legal minds like you achieve when he spat in the face of the SC and justice by overturning Shah Bano?

Please do tell, Chief Justice Joe Shearer.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Aravind

bonobashi

Well-Known member
Dec 3, 2017
889
410
To the contrary, There is more than enough proof that a ram temple existed there much before the mosques was built. Even the muslim organisation who are opposed to temple construction have cheated and gone back on their word that if excavations confirmed the existance of a temple, they will give up their claim. ASI under supervision of Allahabad HC and with members of both sides present did the excavations and a complete foundation of the temple was excavated exactly under the debris of the mosque.
There have been over 50 battles to regain that piece of land by hindus and its control has see-sawed between hindus and muslims in last 450 yrs. Hindus have never ever given up on it and nor will we ever even if it means killing billions. Kasam Raam kee khatay hain, Mandir wahin banayengay.
You miss the point: it was a temple, not a temple dedicated to Rama. There is also NO record of any battle fought over it, only occasional communal clashes.
 

bonobashi

Well-Known member
Dec 3, 2017
889
410
I'm a *censored*ing nair LOOL. We don't need lessons in wrcraft. Mere baap ne jitna jang jeeta hai utna tere sare pardada milke nahi jeetey chutiye. Lose all wars, lead all wars incompetently and sit and talk big big things. This is a standard response from people living in old glory.

If we can send you to Pakistan at least all future wars we will win instead of fighting sissy battles for 'piece of land in court'. after losing the big wars. You never succeeded in protecting precedding generations of hindus from getting plundered and somehow will protect today's hindus? The real issue is that the leadership for protecting hindus went into the hands of chutiyas like you.
You ARE aware, when you write this, that there are more Rajputs in Pakistan than in India?
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
11,891
7,451
Mumbai
You ARE aware, when you write this, that there are more Rajputs in Pakistan than in India?
Since when does Islam recognise the caste system . If the Muslims do , they're going against the tenets of Islam and the teachings of the Prophet . Why , even the Prophet never sought kingship for himself or a privileged position for his family . Isn't that the root of the first schism in Islam ?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Aravind and RATHORE

RATHORE

Lion of Rajputana
Dec 2, 2017
1,656
1,948
USA
See this LOOL, THIS is what winning looks like. CONQUERING HEROS who unified the Tamizhagam for 1600 years.
'Geographical lottery' my LOOL instead of being a whiny little clown we sailed the oceans and conquered territories 1000s of miles away from Indonesia to Ceeylon and Java, Malaya and Burma.
You didn't do half of what we but lecturing, talking big big things etc. right up front.

See that, this is balls of brass and cock made of concrete. This is why Tamilians/malyalis never whine. We accept our history as it is.



Says the Nair....I had almost forgotten for a bit that you've already established yourself as a Keralite on several occasions, thanks to @_Anonymous_ for reminding me about that hilarious little fact. Stop inflating your sense of pride and self worth on another Empire's achievements. You have nothing to do with the Cholas (who as I have mentioned, have my respect for actually being warriors unlike @Guynextdoor 's gutless, spineless, cowardly ancestors).

I've seen a lot of pathetic people, including you, but faking ties to an Empire to try and win a long lost argument? Way to set new lows Piddi Next Door.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aravind

RATHORE

Lion of Rajputana
Dec 2, 2017
1,656
1,948
USA
Fist time I'm seeing a "Nair " bask in reflected glory . Ok , pappachan , what happened to you when Tipu Sultan attacked the Malabar ?
Mr. Chola-Nair here defeated Tipu sultan obviously. It's a different matter that now he celebrates Tipu Jayanti and will next likely claim to be descended from Haidar Ali :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 

bonobashi

Well-Known member
Dec 3, 2017
889
410
Since when does Islam recognise the caste system . If the Muslims do , they're going against the tenets of Islam and the teachings of the Prophet . Why , even the Prophet never sought kingship for himself or a privileged position for his family . Isn't that the root between the first schism in Islam ?
  1. Islam doesn't; there is still one. Even in India.
  2. The Muslims do, they are going against the tenets of Islam and the teachings of the Prophet, from one point of view, and acknowledging their 'tribal' affiliations from their own point of view.
  3. Not the root 'between', but the root of. And yes, it was.
Try not to be supercilious and speak with ab initio arguments. Look up the reality; there is sufficient information and research done on it. Especially on 'pasmanda'; or, on PDF, on Rajputs.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
11,891
7,451
Mumbai
  1. Islam doesn't; there is still one. Even in India.
  2. The Muslims do, they are going against the tenets of Islam and the teachings of the Prophet, from one point of view, and acknowledging their 'tribal' affiliations from their own point of view.
  3. Not the root 'between', but the root of. And yes, it was.
Try not to be supercilious and speak with ab initio arguments. Look up the reality; there is sufficient information and research done on it. Especially on 'pasmanda'; or, on PDF, on Rajputs.
Yes , the root of . I stand corrected . Typed it in my cell in between meetings . Meanwhile you can continue deflecting so that you can bail out your buddy - the troll . See the truth about trolling is most trolls don't take it well . That also includes baiting , skullduggery and other such examples of moral rectitude that you offer yourself to be out here .

Have a good one .:LOL:
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Aravind and RATHORE

bonobashi

Well-Known member
Dec 3, 2017
889
410
@Guynextdoor

If you recall, there were instances on PDF when you got yourself into a great deal of hot water, and found every hand against you. jbgt90 used to come to your rescue; I think he dragged me in as well a couple of times.

Quite honestly, if you take up the cudgels against a foulmouth and a guttersnipe, you will land up taking a lot of personal abuse. On this forum, I do not feel energetic enough to fight these little wars, and want peace and quiet. So you will have to fight your fights alone. Against others, such as @_Anonymous_ you are simply outgunned; whoever he is, if he wishes, he can make life hell for you. While I feel that he should not pick on you, I said, or wrote as much, hoping that he would feel embarrassed at the unequal match. But if he persists, even I am no match for him, and do not want to provoke him.

My suggestion; avoid tangling with him, at least.

I think the moderators should shut down this thread. The amount of personal abuse in every single post by one member is really sickening to read.
 
  • Like
Reactions: _Anonymous_

Vicky

Rajaraja Chola
Dec 1, 2017
337
369
Canada
I will be honest, there is no clear cut solution for this problem. SC works under framework of law. How can you decide for something that was done even before the legal system in India as we know it today was introduced?
Plus what kind of precedence will it set?

Also finding of ASI only proves that an old temple existed on the site. You cann't be sure if that was the alledged Ram's Birth Place temple? Does Ram even has a historical existence or was he a part of subcontinents legend? If he is a legend and a myth then what that temple is all about? IIRC analysis of Ramayan suggest the entire epic was based in modern day Afghanistan. So how can you decide to build a temple in modern Ayodhya, which is not even the suggested birthplace of Ram if you take the epic at face value!

Also, before anyone answers the questions above systematically, lemme put the upshot behind those. I am not seeking the answers for them, it is mainly to drive the point that the entire proposition to establish a temple there is to honor sentiments of majority. Now in the framework of law it is hard to argue base on faith and sentiments and not fact. The only fact are the following:-
1. ASI's analysis suggest existance of an ancient temple but NOT a conclusive proof of birth place of Ram. Existance of Rama and proof of his birth place there is a matter of myth and legends.
2. A Mosque there was existing which was demolished.
3. There were people who were responsible for this and they broke laws.

With this, what decision can any court make under framework of law? Reconstruct a temple which was broken in 16th century or so? And if yes then which temple?

how to distribute land, then on which basis? A claim based on faith? A claim based on a historic event about 4 to 5 century back?

This is why this cann't be decided in SC. ASI has already given their analysis. If its not SC then who can decide? Last resort is to ask people of the country with some moderation in due process. Thats all I am suggesting.
The basis on which the Constitution works is it cannot question the faith. Even SC nor Parliament can question Ram's existence. The move backfired for INC in SC when they stated there is historical evidence of Ram ever born in Ayodhya or his presence only to change their stance in next hearing.

Let's say even if INC rules for next 100 years. It cannot build a mosque nor question his Ram's existence. This is simple politics. They will lose elections and people support. If this is supposed to be, how can even a referendum work? I have never crossed Tirupathi in north and only transited through Mumbai and not sure if I will get to Ram temple if its built in my lifetime. But its dear to the people in the locality.

I believe Muslims can gain peace by giving up their claim on the land and in effect get an assurance from govt that an mosque, a grand one will be built with a bill along with Ram temple (Another grey area as BJP has promised to build a temple and a mosque if SC agrees through a bill in Parliament when state shouldnt spend on religious structures). Ayodhya can result in long lasting peace between 2 communities in the North.

One can never know if Ram was born in that particular land, but a temple was there, most likely a ram temple(considering its Ayodhya) which was demolished. Some issues are too complicated to be decided by mutual consensus and SC is handling the most difficult case in India. Faith has always been respected, but strongly factored by faith of the majority,sadly, true in every country, from Turkey to old Palestine to new Israel.

PS: I find the existence of Ram true. A mythological character can never leave such hard impact impression in Indian polity and beyond (Thai, Indonesia and Malaysia). A true character mould with mythology over generations. Emerging evidence of Ram Sethu is man made is one such dimension.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aravind

bonobashi

Well-Known member
Dec 3, 2017
889
410
Yes , the root of . I stand corrected . Typed it in my cell in between meetings . Meanwhile you can continue deflecting so that you can bail out your buddy - the troll . See the truth about trolling is most trolls don't take it well . That also includes baiting , skullduggery and other such examples of moral rectitude that you offer yourself to be out here .

Have a good one .:LOL:
He is NOT my buddy. He was a protege of a friend, and I reluctantly intervened considering the amount of foul abuse that he received (not from you). As for you, I wish you would pick someone your own size.

I don't know what you meant by baiting, skulduggery and other such examples of moral rectitude that you have ascribed to me. These are not traits I aim to acquire, and do not want to respond when accused of possessing them.
 

Shajida Khan

Senior member
Dec 27, 2017
1,524
1,579
Seattle
The basis on which the Constitution works is it cannot question the faith. Even SC nor Parliament can question Ram's existence. The move backfired for INC in SC when they stated there is historical evidence of Ram ever born in Ayodhya or his presence only to change their stance in next hearing.

Let's say even if INC rules for next 100 years. It cannot build a mosque nor question his Ram's existence. This is simple politics. They will lose elections and people support. If this is supposed to be, how can even a referendum work? I have never crossed Tirupathi in north and only transited through Mumbai and not sure if I will get to Ram temple if its built in my lifetime. But its dear to the people in the locality.

I believe Muslims can gain peace by giving up their claim on the land and in effect get an assurance from govt that an mosque, a grand one will be built with a bill along with Ram temple (Another grey area as BJP has promised to build a temple and a mosque if SC agrees through a bill in Parliament when state shouldnt spend on religious structures). Ayodhya can result in long lasting peace between 2 communities in the North.

One can never know if Ram was born in that particular land, but a temple was there, most likely a ram temple(considering its Ayodhya) which was demolished. Some issues are too complicated to be decided by mutual consensus and SC is handling the most difficult case in India. Faith has always been respected, but strongly factored by faith of the majority,sadly, true in every country, from Turkey to old Palestine to new Israel.

PS: I find the existence of Ram true. A mythological character can never leave such hard impact impression in Indian polity and beyond (Thai, Indonesia and Malaysia). A true character mould with mythology over generations. Emerging evidence of Ram Sethu is man made is one such dimension.
I never said that referendum WILL work. I only claim referendum can validate if your solution or bunch of solutions are acceptable to majority. It can result in a universal bycott of referrendum too. All depends upon who and what solutions are provided and how it was presented to the country. I propose referendum as a process which can let this issue to rest finally, so it is much harder to raise again and again. There is a massive feeling among Hindus, IMHO, that they had no say in the direction of country in the matter of faith. Referrendum will help to quell that.

BTW, I don't believe this will ever to settled because it is beneficial for political parties.

About existance of Ram. Well, debating that is not exactly helpful to this discussion. I mentioned him to highlight why a court is not going to help.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: bonobashi