Author: N.S. Rajaram
Publication: Organiser
Date: June 29, 2002
As at Godhra and the Gujarat elections,
the secularist media is engaged in systematic misrepresentation at Ayodhya
Godhra to Ayodhya
The media, at least the 'secularist'
media, it seems doesn't want to learn. Following the Godhra carnage we
were bombarded with stories and theories about how a minor altercation
with a tea vendor led to a spontaneous gathering of a mob of nearly 2000
men with weapons and incendiary materials within minutes who burnt down
the Sabarmati Express killing scores of mostly women and children. Of course,
even a trained commando unit cannot be mobilized at such short notice,
but somehow this untrained mob managed it. The idea of course was to put
the blame for the massacre on the victims. The same thing happened on the
way to the Gujarat elections: "there was no saffron wave." In fact, a few
national publications went so far as to claim that Sonia had stopped the
saffron wave and the Congress would emerge victorious. Some very creative
arithmetic was used in all this- the same kind used by Enron accountants
now in prison.
We are now seeing the pattern repeating
at Ayodhya. There is an attempt to shift the debate from the evidence for
the temple destruction to a temple "under the mosque"- as if mosques were
built on temple sites by pushing them into the ground instead of demolishing
them! A similar semantic trick was employed earlier by demanding evidence
for proof of Rama's birth at the site rather than evidence of temple destruction.
Now the argument, presented at that great center of learning SAHMAT, is
that a pre-existing mosque, not temple was destroyed when Babri Masjid
was built! This is progress, for at least there is admission that a pre-existing
place of worship was destroyed. Why not next claim that a church was destroyed
and bring Christians also into
the fold?
The media is indulging in all this
sophistry, crude as is, even as the excavators have requested more time
to complete their investigation. Even worse, some are already proclaiming
that the ASI has already submitted a report that no temple existed. Why
then the request for more time? The truth is that there was ample evidence
for the temple destruction even before the court ordered excavation. I
have written about it before, but here is a summary. (For more details,
visit the website http://ayodhya2000.tripod.com. See also my book Profiles
in Deception: Ayodhya and the Dead Sea Scrolls, Voice of India, New Delhi.)
Literary evidence
When we survey even a small part
of the vast literature on Ayodhya, we find that until recently, until the
secularists created the so-called 'controversy', no author-Hindu, Muslim,
European or British official-questioned that a temple existed on the spot,
which had been destroyed to erect the mosque. We may begin with a couple
of references from European writers from published sources that are widely
available.
A. Führer in his The Monumental
Antiquities and Inscriptions in the North-Western Provinces and Oudh, Archaeological
Survey of India Report, 1891, pp 296-297 records: "Mir Khan built a masjid
in A.H. 930 during the reign of Babar, which still bears his name. This
old temple must have been a fine one, for many of its columns have been
utilized by the Musalmans in the construction of Babar's Masjid." H.R.
Neville in the Barabanki District Gazetteer, Lucknow, 1905, pp 168-169,
writes that the Janmasthan temple "was destroyed by Babar and replaced
by a mosque." One could cite many more in similar vein, but these should
suffice for recent European records.
Muslim sources give a similar account.
In 1855, Amir Ali Amethawi led a Jihad for the recapture of Hanuman Garhi,
situated a few hundred yards from the Babri Masjid, which at that time
was in the possession of Hindus. This took place during the reign of Nawab
Wajid Ali Shah of Oudh. It ended in failure. A Muslim writer, one Mirza
Jan, was a participant in the Jihad. His book Hadiqah-i-Shuhada was published
in 1856, i.e. the year following the failed Jihad. Miza Jan tells us:
".wherever they found magnificent
temples of the Hindus ever since the establishment of Sayyid Salar Mas'ud
Ghazi's rule, the Muslim rulers in India built mosques, monasteries, and
inns, appointed mu'azzins, teachers and store-stewards, spread Islam vigorously,
and vanquished the Kafirs. Likewise they cleared up Faizabad and Avadh,
too from the filth of reprobation (infidelity), because it was a great
centre of worship and capital of Rama's father. Where there stood a great
temple (of Ramajanmasthan), there they built a big mosque, ... Hence what
a lofty mosque was built there by king Babar in 923 A.H. (1528 A.D.), under
the patronage of Musa Ashiqqan!"
Even more impressive is a Persian
text known as Sahifah-i-Chihal Nasa'ih Bahadurshahi written in 1707 by
a granddaughter of the Moghul emperor Aurangazeb, and noted by Mirza Jan
in his Urdu work Hadiqah-i Shuhada just cited. Mirza Jan quotes several
lines from her work which tell us: "...keeping the triumph of Islam in
view, devout Muslim rulers should keep all idolaters in subjection to Islam,
brook no laxity in realization of Jizyah, grant no exceptions to Hindu
Rajahs from dancing attendance on 'Id days and waiting on foot outside
mosques till end of prayer ... and 'keep in constant use for Friday and
congregational prayer the mosques built up after demolishing the temples
of the idolatrous Hindus situated at Mathura, Banaras and Avadh."
Other Muslim authors than Mirza
Jan also cite the work, which appears to have been widely available in
the 18th and 19th centuries. Then there is the evidence of the three inscriptions
at the site of the mosque itself, at least two of which mention its construction
by Mir Baqi (or Mir Khan) on the orders of Babar. Babar's Memoir mentions
Mir Baqi as his governor of Ayodhya. Some parts of the inscription were
damaged during a riot in 1934, but later pieced together with minor loss.
In any event, it was well known long before that, recorded for instance
in Mrs. Beveridge's translation of Babur-Nama published in 1926.
Archaeological evidence
Here is what archaeologist S.P.
Gupta (former director of the Allahabad Museum), has to say about recent
excavations at Ayodhya: "At Ayodhya, Professor Lal [B.B. Lal. Former Director
General of ASI] took as many as 14 trenches at different places to ascertain
the antiquity of the site. It was then found that the history of the township
was at least three thousand years old, if not more... When seen in the
light of 20 black stone pillars, 16 of which were found re-used and standing
in position as corner stones of piers for the disputed domed structure
of the 'mosque', Prof. Lal felt that the pillar bases may have belonged
to a Hindu temple built on archaeological levels formed prior to 13th century
AD..." What this means is that Lal had found evidence for possibly two
temples, one that existed before the 13th century, and another between
the 13th and the 16th centuries. This corresponds well with history and
tradition. We know that this area was ravaged by Muslim invaders following
Muhammad of Ghor's defeat of Prithviraj Chauhan in the second battle of
Tarain in 1192 AD. This was apparently rebuilt and remained in use until
destroyed again in the 16th century by Babar.
The demolition on December 6, 1992
changed the picture dramatically, providing inscriptional support to the
traditional accounts- both Hindu and Muslim. The most important of these
is the Hari-Vishnu inscription. It is written in 12th century AD Devanagari
script and belongs therefore to the period before the onslaught of the
Ghorids (1192 AD and later). It was later examined by Ajay Mitra Shastri,
Chairman of the Epigraphical Society of India who gave the following summary.
"The inscription is composed in
high-flown Sanskrit verse, except for a very small portion in prose, and
is engraved in chaste and classical Nagari script of the eleventh-twelfth
century AD. It was evidently put up on the wall of the temple, the construction
of which is recorded in the text inscribed on it. Line 15 of this inscription,
for example, clearly tells us that a beautiful temple of Vishnu-Hari, built
with heaps of stones ... , and beautified with a golden spire ... unparalleled
by any other temple built by earlier kings ... This wonderful temple ...
was built in the temple-city of Ayodhya situated in Saketamandala. ...
Line 19 describes god Vishnu as destroying king Bali ... and the ten headed
personage (Dashanana, i.e., Ravana)."
The inscription confirms what archaeologists
Lal and Gupta had earlier found about the existence of a temple complex.
New archaeological finds following the court ordered excavations are supplying
more details, they but are unlikely to change the historical picture provided
by earlier excavations. And this is precisely what the secularists and
their media colleagues are worried about.
