|
Correcting a medieval wrong cannot necessarily
be considered wrong. The people of India fought for their independence,
often being forced to resort to violence, to get rid of the foreign rulers
who were entrenched for two centuries. If this wrong was not to be corrected,
then we should not have initiated and fought for our country's independence.
The manner in which the medieval wrong
is sought to be corrected is also important. Hindus have not followed
the example of Christians in Spain, when in the 16th century they drove
out the Moors who had conquered the country some 400 years earlier. The
Moors had forcibly Islamised Spain in the process of their conquest. The
Christians, also by force, re-Christianised Spain when the Moors were
defeated.
The Hindus, whenever they defeated the
Islamic rulers in India, took a benign stand towards those who had converted
to Islam, either by force or inducements. Shivaji and the Marathas stand
out as a shining example of this tolerance of the Hindus.
In case of the Shri Rama Janmabhoomi,
Hindus have made serious attempts to get the site back peacefully - through
negotiations and the judiciary. These attempts were frustrated for no
fault of the Hindus.
Finally, if the barbaric behaviour during
the medieval period was a norm of the time, correcting the medieval wrongs
becomes even more important. This is the best way to tell the future generations
that such behaviour is not accepted and should not be repeated. |