A Matter of grace and goodwill

Author: M V Kamath
Publication: Organiser
Date: March 3, 2002

Let it be said straightaway: the tussle over the Ramjanmabhoomi in Ayodhya is not something connected with law or property rights. Plainly it arises out of human emotions, anger, sorrow, humiliation and pride. It cannot be solved in a court of law. If that were the case it wouldn't have required ten long years for a decision to be handed down. Even today it won't require ten minutes for any court to deliver a verdict. All the arguments for and against, all the evidence necessary, are there for the asking. The matter has been deliberately postponed for fear of a backlash. Even if all the par-ties concerned promise to abide by any judgement given by a court, the fear growing in every heart is that the party which feels aggrieved will cause trouble. On January 29 the Vishwa Hindu Parishad repeated its intention of going ahead with its plan to start work on the building of a mandir dedicated to Shri Ram at the predetermined site. If VHP Secretary General (International) Pravin Togadia is to be believed, his organisation will mobilise about ten lakh sevaks from all over the country at the time of the launch of the construction work after March 12. There was, he said, no question of postponement of the deadline. And what has been the Babri Masjid Coordination Committee's reaction? It says that Prime Minister Vajpayee has given respectability to the VHP. It wants a ban on the entry of the outfit's leaders and activists into Ayodhya. The BMCC shows no inclination to make any kind of compromise. And it seems ready for a showdown. The truth is that a section of the Muslim community will just not accept the fact that a masjid in Ayodhya had indeed been built on a site where once stood a temple dedicated to Shri Ram. It singularly lacks in grace. The issue is not one of right and wrong: plainly it is a matter of pride. It wouldn't occur to this section that a Muslim would consider it sacrilege for a temple to be built in Mecca. And for millions of Hindus in Ayodhya has about the same sanctity as Mecca has for Muslims. Even if no temple had been demolished in Ayodhya to build a masjid there, it was very unbefitting of any Islamic ruler to raise a masjid, there. That was done to tell the Hindus that those who ruled in Delhi had little regard for the feeling of the idol-worshippers. Building a masjid in Ayodhya or, for that matter, in Varanasi or Mathura, was a way of telling the vanquished and defeated, who ruled the country. The BMCC would do a great service to Indian Muslims if only it would realise how deep and strong Hindu-not just VHP-feelings are and show some grace. According to reports, gone are the days when only the VHP was agitated over the issue. A poll taken by India Today-ORG-MARG notes that there has been in recent times "a dramatic surge in support of the VHP demand to begin construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya". A year ago, only 20 per cent favoured this drastic step. Now, says India Today (February 4, 2002) that number has shot up to 43 per cent. Among Hindus it is 48 per cent. It adds that the hardening of positions is visible in the Hindi heartland and western India. In Gujarat, support for immediate temple building has risen from 26 per cent to 73 per cent, in Rajasthan from 23 to 60 per cent, in Maharashtra from 23 to 51 per cent. Says the journal: "There seems to be a definite convergence between support for temple building in Ayodhya and endorsement of the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO)." Surely, not all those who want the immediate building of the temple are members of the VHP or even the BJP? On February 4 The Hindustan Times published results of a poll it had on its own carried out on whether the Government should ban the VHP if it forcibly tries to construct the Ram mandir in Ayodhya. Surprisingly as many as 63.66 per cent voted "no". That is quite in line with the India Today--ORG-MARG poll and shows a disturbing trend of rising anger in the Hindu community. To dismiss the VHP as unrepresentative of the larger Hindu community would be, to say the least, naive. The average Hindu may not necessarily vote for-the- 131p, but in the matter of the dispute over the Ramjanmabhoomi, it seems evident that he appreciates the VHP position. The Babri Masjid Co-ordination Committee would be well-advised to take this into consideration. What stops it from being accommodative to the hurt pride of the Hindus is a determination not to face up to history. It is not that the VHP had started the agitation in a confrontationist mode. It had several sittings with the BMCC. But as the BMCC apparently saw it, making any concessions to the Hindus was tantamount to accepting that a grave injustice indeed had been done to them by past Muslim rulers. That the BMCC obviously does not want to face. Even now, if only the BMCC would graciously concede all the land, disputed and undisputed, to the VHP in an act of unprecedented generosity and nobility of spirit, overnight the Hindu-Muslim equation will change, winning for the Muslims not only the applause but the eternal gratitude of all Hindus everywhere. "Ideally" said Shri George Fernandes, who recently met the VHP leaders, "the matter should be resolved through a dialogue which would be a meeting of minds and hearts". If that happened, he added, "it will be the finest thing which can happen to a nation" which goes without saying. One can imagine an upsurge in favour of Muslims that no one can even dream of Politics would then take on an entirely new turn. The Muslim community would be hailed as generous, noble, far-sighted and as full partners in the great task of building a newer, better, stronger India. Practically overnight. But does the community have the right leaders, the right vision, the courage and true nobility? For the Union Government to refer the matter to the Law Ministry for it to examine the legal and constitutional aspects of handing over the undisputed plots of land around the disputed site, is ducking the issue. The appeal should be to the good sense of the community of Muslims across the country. That appeal should come from the heart-and should be made in all humility. Perhaps-just perhaps - the Muslim community may then respond in a positive manner. It would then be adequate recompense for all the humiliation that Hindus underwent over five centuries of Muslim rule when literally thousands of temples were erased. An English merchant of the East India Company who travelled in the eighteenth century from Surat to Delhi has recorded that throughout his long journey he never saw a single temple. Let the BMCC make one great and noble gesture in the matter of the Ram Janmabhoomi mandir to erase an unhappy past and put Hindu-Muslim fellowship on a high pedestal. Is the Muslim community so lacking in statesmanship that it is incapable of making one positive gesture, for its own sake-and for the greater good of the country? What have we come to?
 

Back                          Top