In Yogi Adityanath's UP, Muslims put out banners to build Ram temple

[Hindustani78]

Says without Lord Ram, the path of public welfare will not be complete

Stirring the Ram Mandir pot once again, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on Friday exhorted his supporters to start preparing for the construction of a mandir in Ayodhya with the same zeal with which they celebrated Ram Leela.

Delivering his annual Vijayadashami speech in Gorakhpur, Mr. Adityanath said: "Along with the grandeur of the Ram Leelas, we should all also start preparing to build a grand temple in the same way in which grand Ram Leelas have been organised in the form of the Mandir,” Mr. Adityanath said. He, however, did not explain or clarify his remark, which was delivered in a winding sentence in Hindi.

“I would appeal to all of you that along with the Leelas (enactment of the life) of Bhagwan Shri Ram, we must also incorporate his values into our lives and propagate it in the society,” said Mr. Adityanath.

The CM said without Bhagwan Shri Ram, the path of public welfare would not be complete and hoped that his “grand ideal character” would inspire everyone.

Mr. Adityanath, who is also the head priest of the Gorakhnath temple, participated in the customary Vijay Shobha Yatra from the Mandir.

 

[Hindustani78]

https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...v-thackeray/article25278988.ece?homepage=true

Pune , October 21, 2018 17:12 IST
Updated: October 21, 2018 17:12 IST

The rally marks Mr. Thackeray’s start of campaigning for the 2019 Lok Sabha election.

Needling his saffron ally, the ruling BJP on the Ram temple issue yet again, Sena president Uddhav Thackeray on Sunday dared the BJP to come clean and confess before the public that building the Ram Mandir at Ayodhya was not possible for them.

“Since 1989, the party has been giving slogans for erecting a Ram temple at Ayodhya. Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray had helped the BJP by evoking enthusiasm for the temple in Maharashtra. Yet, after all these years, why is the project still in limbo?” Mr. Thackeray said, addressing a rally of Shiv Sainiks in the temple town of Shirdi in Ahmednagar district, 200 km from Pune.

The Sena chief’s visit comes on the heels of Prime Minister Modi’s Shirdi tour last week. The rally marks Mr. Thackeray’s start of campaigning for the 2019 Lok Sabha election.

“Why keep deceiving people on the Ram Mandir issue? Like all false assurance of the Modi government, it ought to finally acknowledge that the Ram temple construction assurance, too, was false,” remarked the Sena chief, speaking with an eye to steal the hardliner Hindu votes from the BJP.

In the same vein, Mr. Thackeray flayed Mr. Modi’s Shirdi visit, remarking that the Prime Minister only sought the blessings of Saint Sai Baba to stay in power for the next five years.

“I have no craving for any position…I have prayed for the welfare of the public ...Before me, someone else [Mr. Modi] had come to seek Sai Baba’s blessings, but what has he done with that? There has no improvement in the situation of the common people and the poor in this country” Mr. Thackeray said, administering a sharp jibe to the Prime Minister and his Shirdi trip.

Mr. Modi had offered worship at the Sai Baba Temple during the closing ceremony of the Sai Baba Samadhi centenary celebrations last week. He had also handed over keys of houses to nearly 40,000 beneficiaries of the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana — Gramin (PMAY- G) while speaking to some of the beneficiaries.

Mocking Mr. Modi’s conversations with PMAY beneficiaries, Mr. Thackeray said the PM’s attempts to win hearts and minds by interacting with villagers in the vernacular language was a sham as the people in the State had not benefited by the schemes of the BJP government.

“In many cases, beneficiaries are being tutored by the BJP government. The point is, has the situation improved from what it was during earlier governments?” he said, stating that the BJP government had been hoodwinking people in the State with its farm loan waiver proposal.

The Sena president defended the Sena’s actions in criticizing the BJP despite being part of the ruling coalition in the State and Central government.

“There are those who criticize why we [the Sena] do not pull out of this coalition in Maharashtra. To them I say that if I can stay within the government and force the BJP to work for the public’s benefit, then why should the Sena exit?” Mr. Thackeray said, remarking that “weakness was not in his blood”.

“The people have voted for us as well as the BJP and I’m not going to turn tail and run…The Sena is going to make this government accountable to the people of Maharashtra,” he said.

Mr. Thackeray also addressed a rally in Ahmednagar district and is slated to speak to workers and party bearers in the Marathwada region on Monday.

 

[Hindustani78]

NEW DELHI, October 27, 2018 22:10 IST
Updated: October 27, 2018 22:15 IST

Chief Justice of India and Justices to hear pleas.

The Ayodhya title suit appeals are scheduled for hearing on October 29 before a completely new Bench.

The appeals are listed for Monday under the head “directions matter” before a new composition of judges, who, besides the CJI, are his regular companion judges, Justices.

It is not clear what nature of “directions” the new Bench would pass.

The Ayodhya appeals were so far heard by the three-judge Bench of the previous Chief Justice and Justices.

Majority opinion
On September 27, the Bench, in a majority opinion of 2:1, decided against referring a question of law — whether offering prayers in a masjid is an essential practice of Islam — which arose in the Ayodhya appeals hearings to a Constitution Bench.


The majority opinion, authored by Justice and supported by Justice , had ordered the Ayodhya appeals “which are awaiting consideration by this Court for quite a long period, to be now listed in week commencing 29th October, 2018 for hearing”.

Usually, this would entail the appeals returning to the Bench comprising Justices and a new third judge, replacing Justice who retired on October 2.

However, the appeals have been posted on Monday before a Bench which neither Justice nor Justice are a part of.

Nevertheless, experts say that not much ground had anyway been covered by the earlier Bench on the appeals.

The hearings had got deflected on the question of reference to a Constitution Bench.

Unusual decision
Experts also point out that it was rather unusual for Justice a puisne judge on the Bench, to fix the date of hearing of the appeals as October 29.



They say it should have been ideally left to Chief Justice as the master of roster to decide the next date of hearing.

September 27 had also witnessed the stinging dissent penned by Justice who observed in a separate opinion that the question of what is essential or not in a religion cannot be hastily decided. He held that the question raised on the essentiality of offering prayers in masjid should indeed be examined by a seven-judge Bench, before the Ayodhya suit appeals are heard further.

He had concluded that questions raised during the Ayodhya appeals hearing about the comment made in the judgment of 1994 require a “comprehensive examination” by a seven-judge Bench.

Speaking for himself and the Chief Justice, Justice had said that references cannot be made to a larger Bench merely because of “questionable observations” made in an earlier judgment.

 

[Hindustani78]

Mahant Dharam Das, chief Mahant of Nirmohi Akhara, outside the Supreme court after the Ayodhya title suit case hearing in New Delhi on Monday. | Photo Credit: R.V. Moorthy


When parties indicate urgency and an early hearing, CJI-led Bench clarifies that it cannot really say when hearing will begin.

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice of India on Monday posted the Ayodhya title suit appeals in January before an appropriate Bench to fix a date for hearing the case.

When parties indicated urgency and an early hearing, the Chief Justice of India-led Bench clarified that it cannot really say when hearing would begin. It left it to the discretion of the "appropriate Bench" before which the matter would come up on January.

"We have our own priorities... whether hearing would take place in January, March or April would be decided by an appropriate Bench," the Chief Justice of India said.

The Chief Justice of India repeated that all the court was ordering was that the appeals would come up in January first week before a Bench "not for hearing but for fixing the date of hearing".

On September 27, a three-judge Bench of the court led by then Chief Justice in a majority opinion decided against referring the question ‘whether offering prayers in a masjid is an essential part of Islam’ to a seven-judge Constitution Bench.

With this, the court had signalled that it would decide the appeals like any other civil suit, based on evidence, and pay little heed to arguments about the “religious significance” of the Ayodhya issue and the communal strife it has led to over the past many years.

The Bench's judgment, authored by Justice on the Bench, directed the hearing in the appeals to start from October 29. This last paragraph in the September 27 judgment led to questions whether the court would deliver a judgment in the appeals before the May 2019 general election.

These appeals are against the September 30,. 2010 verdict of the Allahabad High Court to divide the disputed 2.77 acre area among the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla. The Bench had relied on Hindu faith, belief and folklore.

Lord Ram’s birthplace
The High Court concluded that Bhagwan Shree Ram, son of King Dashrath, was born within the 1,482.5 square yards of the disputed Ramjanmabhoomi premises during the Treta Yuga. One of the judges said the "world knows" where Bhagwan Shree Ram's birthplace is while another said his finding was an “informed guess” based on “oral evidences of several Hindus and some Muslims” that the precise birthplace of Bhagwan Shree Ram was under the central dome.

The final hearings in the Ayodhya appeals began before the Bench, also comprising Justice on December 5 last.

The day happened to be the eve of the 25th anniversary of the demolition of the 15th century Babri Masjid by kar sevaks on December 6, 1992. The appeals were taken up after a delay of almost eight years. They remained shelved through the tenures of eight Chief Justices of India from 2010.

However, the Muslim appellants, a cross-section of Islamic bodies like the Sunni Wakf Board and individuals, had drawn the Bench’s attention to certain paragraphs in a 1994 five-judge Constitution Bench judgment in the case. One of these paragraphs stated that “a masjid is not an essential part of the practice of the religion of Islam and namaz [prayer] by Muslims can be offered anywhere, even in open”.

Mosque and Islam
“So is the masjid not an essential part of Islam? Muslims cannot go to the garden and pray," their lawyer and senior advocate had asked the court. He asked the Bench to freeze the Ayodhya appeals’ hearing till this question is referred and decided by a seven-judge Bench.

In their majority view, Chief Justice (retired) and Justice refused to send the question to a seven-judge Bench. Their opinion said the observations were made in the context of the 1994 case which was about public acquisition of places of religious worship. It should not be dragged into the Ayodhya appeals. The minority decision authored by Justice dissented with the majority on the Bench, and said this observation about offering prayer in a masjid influenced the Allahabad High Court in 2010. He questioned the haste of the court.

During the maiden Supreme Court hearing of the Ayodhya appeals last year, senior advocate suggested to the court to post the Ayodhya hearings after July 15, 2019.

Along with senior advocate two other senior advocates argued that the Ayodhya dispute was not just another civil suit. The case covered religion and faith and dates back to the era of King Vikramaditya. It is probably the most important case in the history of India which would "decide the future of the polity". The appeals would have the court decide “whether this is a country where a mosque can be destroyed”.

“These appeals go to the very heart of our secular and democratic fabric," senior advocate had submitted.

senior advocate had alleged the government was using the judiciary to realise its agenda for a Bhagwan Shree Ram mandir assured in the ruling BJP's 2014 election manifesto.

 

[Hindustani78]

Mumbai, November 01, 2018 01:42 IST
Updated: November 01, 2018 01:42 IST

This issue is not about Aryan-Arab or Masjid issue but its Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir issue in Ayodhya, says Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh joint general secretary.


The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh on Wednesday said the Central should now acquire the land and start building Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir to restore the nation’s pride.

“Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir is the issue of nation’s pride and prestige. Former President of India Rajendra Prasad had personally visited Somanath Mandir which was rebuilt by Sardar Patel. The Central should acquire the land to build the mandir and even enact a law,” said Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh joint general secretary. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh joint general secretary was addressing a press conference on the first day of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh all-India working committee meeting at Keshav Srushti, near Mumbai.

“This issue is not about Aryan-Arab issue or Masjid issue but Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir issue in Ayodhya. When Mongol King Babar invaded North India and conquered a substantial part of northern India. One of his generals, Baki came to Ayodhya in 1528 and after reportedly destroying a pre-existing temple of Rama at the site, built a mosque, which has come to be called Masjid-i-janmasthan (mosque at the birthplace) as well as Babri Masjid (Babur's mosque). Mongol King Babar had plenty of land and could have built a masjid anywhere. But Mongol King Babar and one of his generals, Baki demolished the mandir, which has been proven in the study by archeaologists. The Monumental Antiquities and Inscriptions in the North-Western Provinces and Oudh, Archaeological Survey of India Report, 1891, pp 296-297 records: "Mongol General Baki built a masjid during the reign of Mongol King Babar, which still bears his name. This old Mandir must have been a fine one, for many of its columns have been utilized by the Mongol General in the construction of Mongol King Babar's Masjid." Barabanki District Gazetteer, Lucknow, 1905, pp 168-169, writes that the Janmasthan temple "was destroyed by Mongol King Babar and replaced by a Masjid."Fyzabad District Gazetteer, Lucknow, 1905, pp 172-177 further tells us; "The Janmasthan was in Ramkot and marked the birthplace of Rama. In 1528 A.D. Mongol King Babar came to Ayodhya and halted here for a week. Mongol General Baki destroyed the ancient temple and on its site built a masjid, still known as Babar's mosque. The materials of the old structure [i.e., the temple] were largely employed, and many of the columns were in good preservation."Courts too have said that Masjid at Ayodhya is not important for Muslim prayers. Islamic scholars have said that prayers in Masjid which has been conquered is of no use,” even the accounts attributed to Guru Nanak Dev Sahab. Guru Nanak Dev Sahab was a contemporary of Mongol King Babar, and an eyewitness to his vandalism. Guru Nanak Dev Sahab condemned Mongol King Babur in the strongest terms. .Focus on Muslim Sources, writes: "Guru Nanak Dev Sahab, according to Bhai Man Singh's Pothi Janam Sakhi, said to have been composed in 1787 Anno Vikrami/1730 A.D., visited Ayodhya and said to his Muslim disciple Mardana: 'Mardania! eh Ajudhia nagari Sri Ramachandraji ki hai. So, chal, iska darsan kari'e. Translation: 'Mardana! this Ayodhya city belongs to Sri Ramachandra Ji. So let us have its darsana.'" This indicates that Guru Nanak Dev Sahab visited Ayodhya shortly before the destruction of the Rama temple by Mongol King Babar. Barabanki district is one of four districts of Faizabad division, lies at the very heart of Awadh region, With its most northern point it impinges on the Sitapur district, while its north-eastern boundary is washed by the waters of the Ghagra, beyond which lie the districts of Bahraich district and Gonda district. Its eastern frontier marches with Faizabad district, and the Gomti forms a natural boundary to the south, dividing it from the Sultanpur district. On the west it adjoins the Lucknow district. The district was known before the Muslim conquest as Jasnaul, from Jas, a raja of the Bhar tribe, who is said to have founded it before 1000 AD. The battle in which Bhar chief Sohil Deo (or Sohel Dal) of Sahet-Mahet a small northern kingdom (he was the conqueror of Sayyed Salar Masood) was subversed by Sri Chandradeo, the Rathor monarch of Kannauj was fought in Satrikh village of the district. Saiyyad Salar Masud or Ghazi Miyan (1014 – 1034 CE) was a Muslim saint from India. By the 12th century, Salar Masud had become reputed as a warrior-saint, and his tomb (dargah) at Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh, India. Saiyyad Salar Masud had become a well-known figure in Delhi Sultanate by the 12th century, when the pilgrimage to his tomb in Bahraich appears to have started, during the Ghurid rule. In 1250, the Delhi Sultan Nasir ud din Mahmud constructed an architectural complex around the tomb, during his stay in Bahraich. The 13th century poet Amir Khusro appears to mention Masud's tomb (dargah) in a 1290 CE letter. According to this letter, the "fragrant tomb of martyred commander" at Bahraich spread the "perfume of odorous wood" throughout Hindustan. Saiyyad Salar Masud established his headquarters at Satrikh, and dispatched separate forces to capture Bahraich, Gopamau and Benares. The local rulers, including the Raja of Bahraich, formed an alliance against the Mongol army. His father Salar Sahu then arrived at Bahraich and defeated the enemies. His father Salar Sahu died at Satrikh on 4 October 1032. Masud continued his expeditions. In 1341, the Delhi Sultan Muhammad bin Tughluq and the Moroccon traveler Ibn Battuta visited the Bahraich dargah.

Muslim sources also 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 Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir at Ayodhya which at that time was in the possession of British. This Jihad took place during the reign of Nawab Wajid Ali Shah of Oudh. It ended in failure for the British. A Muslim writer was a participant in that Jihad. His book Hadiqah-i-Shuhada was published in 1856, i.e. the year following the Jihad against British.

The working committee meeting of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh is organised twice every year, first in March and second before Diwali. A total of 350 Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh working committee members will be participating in the meeting.

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh joint general secretary said that the meeting apart from discussing pressing national issues, will also hold talks on organisation’s work in the recent past as well as its strategy for the future.

55,000 shakhas

“At present, we have a total of 55,000 shakhas running across the country at more than 31,000 places. Out of these 82% are running in rural areas while rest in urban parts. We have formed 56,000 mandals whereby each mandal connects 10 to 12 villages,” he said.

Replying to a question about the criticism of Indian National Congress president Rahul Gandhi’s on BJP, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh joint general secretary said, “BJP is making such allegation since many years. Let them allege. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh is growing despite all the criticism.”

Among the issues highlighted include Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh work on protection of Indian (desi) breed cows..

It has formed over 1,500 cow shelters across the country.

“The nuclear family structure is also a cause of concern and this meeting will discuss various measures that needs to be taken on this issue,” Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh joint general secretary said.

 

[Hindustani78]

Lucknow , November 01, 2018 13:19 IST
Updated: November 01, 2018 13:19 IST

Asked if she was with the BJP Aparna Yadav who lost the 2017 Assembly polls as an Samajwadi Party candidate, said, “I am not with the BJP, but with Bhagwan Shree Ram.”

Joining the chorus for a Ram temple, Samajwadi Party founder daughter-in-law says she is in favour of a Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir in Ayodhya and has full faith in the judiciary.

Aparna Yadav, who contested the 2017 assembly polls as an SP candidate and lost, is backing ‘chacha’ Shivpal Singh’s Pragatisheel Samajwadi Party Lohia (PSPL).

“A Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir should be built,” Ms. Aparna said Wednesday during a visit to the Saiyyad Salar Masud Dargah in Barabanki.
In 977 he marched against Toghan, who had opposed his succession. Toghan fled to Bost, so Sebuktigin marched upon it and captured Kandahar and its surrounding area. This prompted the Shahi King Jayapala to launch an attack on Ghazna. Despite the fact that Jayapala amassed about 100,000 troops for the battle, The battle was fought near Kabul, Shahi King Jayapala imprisoned Sebuktigin's collectors, and assembled a yet larger army consisting of 100,000 horse and an innumerable host foot, allied with forces from the kingdoms of Delhi, Ajmer, Kalinjar, and Kannauj, which was defeated in battle with Sebuktigin's Ghaznavids at the banks of the Neelum River in Kashmir. Sebuktegin then annexed the regions of Afghanistan, Peshawar, and all the lands west of the Neelum River.

The Afghans and Khiljies who resided among the mountains having taken the oath of allegiance against Mongol King Sabuktigin many of them were enlisted in Shahi King Jayapala army, after which he returned in triumph to Ghazni.Mongol King Sebuktigin had increased upon Alptigin's domains by extending his domain to cover the area south of the Hindu Kush in Afghanistan and east to the Indus River in what is today Pakistan.

Mongol King Mahmud Ghaznavi, who raided India 17 times and is believed to have sacked the famous Somnath Temple among many others,Mongol King Mahmud Ghaznavi father Sebük Tigin was founded the Ghaznavid dynasty and was thus the first Mongol King Sebüktigin.First of numerous invasion of North India. On 28 November 1001, his army fought and defeated the army of Raja Jayapala of the Kabul Shahis at the battle of Peshawar. In 1002 Mahmud invaded Sistan and dethroned Khalaf ibn Ahmad, . Famous for his valour and chivalry, Salar Masud died in 1034 at the age of only 19 in Bahraich, Salar Masud left his wedding, went to protect them, died unwed and became a martyr.

“I have full faith in process of the respected court,” she added.

The Supreme Court has declined an urgent hearing on the Ayodhya land dispute case and said an appropriate bench will decide in January when to hear the politically sensitive case.

According to the Ramayana, Ayodhya is the birthplace of Bhagwan Shree Ram and a Mandir should be built there, Aparna said.

Asked if she was with the BJP, she said, “I am not with the BJP, but with Bhagwan Shree Ram.”

Ms. Aparna, who is married to Mulayam Singh’s son Prateek, said she would be contesting the 2019 elections from the PSPL but her father-in-law’s blessings are with her.

Speaking on the SC’s decision to move the Ayodhya hearing to January, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath had said the apex court should fast track the proceedings in the case as “justice delayed can sometimes be called justice denied”.

 

[Hindustani78]

NEW DELHI , November 01, 2018 22:45 IST
Updated: November 01, 2018 22:45 IST
Lok Sabha Member to seek help from Opposition parties

A private member’s Bill urging the construction of a Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir in Ayodhya by Lok Sabha Member is in the works to be pushed for the winter session of Parliament.

Lok Sabha Member close to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and author of a well-regarded biography of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh founder also declared, in a series of tweets, that Lok Sabha Member would be canvassing support for his Bill from Opposition leaders including Indian National Congress president Rahul Gandhi.

“Will Lok Sabha Members support a private member Bill on Ayodhya? They frequently ask the date of Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir construction from Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, now onus is on them to answer,” Lok Sabha Member tweeted.

‘Not a priority for SC’

Lok Sabha Member said it was time to separate “truth from lies”. Lok Sabha Member added that the Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir issue did not appear to be a priority for the Supreme Court and questioned how many days the apex court took to give the verdict. “But Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir issue is a top priority for Hindu society,” Lok Sabha Member said.

The apex Court has not postponed land dispute case to the first week of January next year when an appropriate Bench will decide the schedule of hearing.

Following the court’s order, there has been a rising demand for an ordinance on the construction of Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir in Ayodhya from Sangh Parivar affiliates including the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and endorsed by Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief Mohan Bhagwat.

The BJP on its part said, via spokesperson Sambit Patra, that it stood by its 1989 resolution at its national executive at Palampur that it would strive to construct the Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir through constitutional measures.

 

[Hindustani78]

Uttan, November 02, 2018 17:09 IST
Updated: November 02, 2018 22:28 IST
Asks the court to reconsider decision to adjourn Ayodhya hearing till January.

Asking the Supreme Court to reconsider its decision to adjourn the hearing on the construction at Ram Janmabhoomi in Ayodhya till January, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh on Friday said Hindus were feeling insulted as the Supreme court was not considering it a “priority”. It appealed to the Apex court to take note of their sentiments and arrive at a decision soon.

“The Construction of Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir is connected to the emotions of crores of Hindus and the Supreme court must resolve it at the earliest. They have been carrying on the agitation for the past 30 years and the wait does not seem to end,” Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh General secretary said at a press conference on the concluding day of the organisation’s all-India working committee meeting at Keshav Srushti, near Mumbai. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh would not hesitate to launch an agitation for the Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir, if needed, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh General secretary said.

“Since the matter was listed on October 29, we felt Hindus would get good news before Deepavali. But the Supreme Court has deferred the hearing,” Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh General secretary said.

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh General secretary said the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh was not putting pressure on the government, but added that those who had demanded the ordinance on this issue had their right to do so. “The government should consider this option if all others run out,” Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh General secretary said. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh General secretary said that unless the Supreme Court took a decision on the title suit, it was difficult for the government to take any decision.

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh General secretary said the Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir Construction was among the various matters discussed when BJP president Amit Shah met Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief Mohan Bhagwat earlier in the day.

On October 29, the apex court fixed the land dispute case for the first week of January before an appropriate Bench, which will decide the schedule of hearing.

A three-judge Bench, headed by Chief Justice said the appropriate Bench would decide the course of hearing in January on the appeals filed against the Allahabad High Court verdict.

On the Sabarimala row, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh said the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh General secretary supported the restriction on the entry of women into the Mandir. “We don’t support discrimination against women at Hindu places of worship, but some mandir have certain restrictions. One has to consider the rules of the temple as people’s faith is supreme.”

 

[Hindustani78]

Hindu outfit demands law for Ram temple in Ayodhya
Special Correspondent
NEW DELHI , November 04, 2018 23:16 IST
Updated: November 04, 2018 23:16 IST
https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...or-ram-temple-in-ayodhya/article25420174.ece#

Akhil Bharatiya Sant Samiti announces nationwide stir

The meeting in New Delhi of the Akhil Bharatiya Sant Samiti — an umbrella organisation of over 3,000 Hindu monks and ascetics from 127 sects — on Sunday passed a resolution demanding that the government bring in a law or an ordinance for the construction of a Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir in Ayodhya.

A statement issued by the Akhil Bharatiya Sant Samiti considered close to the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, said three large rallies would be held in Ayodhya, Nagpur and Bengaluru on November 25, culminating in a fourth in New Delhi on December 9 in support of a new law. “After this, meetings will be held in over 500 districts across the country,” the statement said.

”On Deepavali this year, faithful devotees of Bhagwan Shree Ram should light lamps for the successful construction of a Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir,” said the statement.

Among those who spoke at the two-day meeting was former Bharatiya Janata Party MP Ram Vilas Vedanti, Sri Sri Ravishankar of the Art of Living foundation, Shankaracharya Vasudevanand Saraswati, Ramanandacharya Hans- devacharya Maharaj of the Shri Jagannath Dham Ashram and Avichaldas Maharaj of the Kaival Gyanpith.

Endorses govt.
The statement endorsed the work of the Narendra Modi government over the issues of Dharma, tradition, national security and self respect, while at the same time saying that the monks are “upset” over the obstacles in the way of construction of a Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir.

“Our expectations are with this government only and we feel that it is this government that will fulfil our wishes,” said the statement.

In a strong political undertone, Akhil Bharatiya Sant Samiti statement called for voting-in a government that fulfils ideological goals like Ganga (cleaning of the river) and promotion of the Gita, Gayatri, and those who believe in “Govind”.

NOTA not an option
“We feel that None Of The Above (NOTA) is an insult to democracy. Such inertia in exercising your democratic rights is dangerous to its health. Therefore, do vote in a positive way for the leaders of your choice,” urged the statement.

The resolution made it clear that while the demand was for a Bhagwan Shree Ram from this government, there was no major quarrel with it, reinforcing the view that it was only the Narendra Modi government that could complete the ideological agenda.

Many BJP leaders, including Union Minister Giriraj Singh, Deputy Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh Keshav Prasad Maurya supported the call for a Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir..

Minister of State for Law P.P. Choudhary said that while the Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir. case was being heard in court, his “personal opinion” was that “in case there is a judicial delay then a law can be made”.

‘Replicate NRC’
The Akhil Bharatiya Sant Samiti resolution also demanded that the National Register of Citizens (NRC) exercise, currently underway in Assam, be replicated across the country, with 1947 as a cut off date.

However, the issue of holding an National Register of Citizens exercise in other States is tricky.

Tripura Chief Minister and BJP leader Biplab Deb has already declared that there was no need for one in his State, which also has a large population of Bengali speaking people.

************
https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...esh-deputy-chief-minister/article25420030.ece
Lakhimpur Kheri , November 04, 2018 22:42 IST
Updated: November 04, 2018 22:42 IST

Keshav Prasad Maurya underlines party stand.

Uttar Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Keshav Prasad Maurya said here on Sunday that “no power can stop” the construction of a grand Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir at Ayodhya.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) “was, is and will always” favour the construction of the Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, Mr. Maurya said.

Even as he said, “The issue is pending with the Supreme Court, hence, I cannot comment,” Mr Maurya added that, “We can tell for certain in one line that a grand Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir would be constructed whenever time comes.”

The Deputy CM was responding to queries about a congregation of monks in Delhi calling for the construction of a Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir through an ordinance by the Union government.

Mr. Maurya said he respected the sentiments of the monks regarding the Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir. He reiterated his party’s stand on the issue and said, “No power can stop construction of grand Bhagwan Shree Ram Mandir at the birthplace of Ramlala.”

“As on date, the matter is pending with the Supreme Court and its verdict is awaited,” he said, adding, “What we can firmly assure (people) is that not even a brick in the name of Babar would be laid or allowed to be laid at the birthplace of Ram Lala.”