Left historians prevented resolution of Babri Masjid

[scorpionx]

Request rejected. I will milk Taj instead. I am not an Islamic imperialist. Sorry about that. It will stay.

That's generous. But you said it was not built on a temple but Mr. Muhammad disagrees.

 

[Levina]

Yes.

Not possible. Original Baburnama is in Chagtai Turki.
Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor??

 

[SarthakGanguly]

That's generous. But you said it was not built on a temple but Mr. Muhammad disagrees.

It did not replace any of the Holiest Dharmic shrines. If all replaced Masjids are torn down, India will lose most of her oldest Mosques. Nope. That is not necessary. The holiest of our places will be liberated.
Kashi. Mathura. Ayodhya.

That's generous. But you said it was not built on a temple but Mr. Muhammad disagrees.

Please don't confuse this with the present Govt. at the top. BJP is just a passing breeze. The Hindu consciousness is a more permanent one. The political party in the Center has little bearing with the tasks at hand. Even if a Congress comes to power, they will also have to sing Dharmic tunes if it has to stay in power. The Commies will never come for that reason. Too bad.

 

[scorpionx]

Not possible. Original Baburnama is in Chagtai Turki.
Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor??

Please don't confuse this with the present Govt. at the top. BJP is just a passing breeze. The Hindu consciousness is a more permanent one. The political party in the Center has little bearing with the tasks at hand. Even if a Congress comes to power, they will also have to sing Dharmic tunes if it has to stay in power. The Commies will never come for that reason. Too bad.

May be I am completely ignorant of Indian society today or else you are simply having fun in this noon.

 

[dray]

In a country that long prided itself for its traditional commitment to pluralism and religious tolerance, if all discussions ceased to exist only in the narrow lanes of religious parochialism and debate whether or not we should retain the Islamic mausoleums and monuments built on pre-Islamic structures then it is an withdrawal from its own founding principles based upon rationality and liberalism. I am quite disappointed that the very notion championed by hardcore bigots that a pre-Islamic monument built on a Hindu or Buddhist temple must have to be built by the fear of sword has become so alluring to most that they are conveniently ignoring that contemporary sources primarily Baburnama or Tulsidas (who lived quite close to Ayodhya) do not mention of any such forcible destruction of temple.

The other possibilities like Babri as a renovation of a mosque on a debris of Hindu/Buddhist temple (may be by force or may not be) built during the Turco-Afghan rule or as a mosque built completely on an already ruined structure get completely outdated or negligible. Very few are tolerant to the historical fact that Nirmohi Akharha, the militant outfit only claimed Ram Chabutra area as the exact birth place of Rama and not the main mosque premise and it was only from the surreptitious violation of the sanctity of the mosque in a newly born country that hardly knew (and still struggling) how to preserve the binding principles of its national philosophy with iron hand the ‘ticking of the bomb’ started.

It is in fact shame and hypocrisy that majority Hindus now are falling into the ranks of bigots who believe it is essential to undo a ‘wrong’ with another and destroy Islamic heritages of India to restore its ancient values while boasting in front of the world to be the world’s largest democracy and melting pot of ethnics, cultures and religions. Perhaps we can next debate whether Kutub Minar and Taj Mahal should also be demolished too!! What an improvement my friend!!

The contentions you have raised are on technicalities, and I am arguing for a debate on the principles. What will you do if tomorrow it is proved, by some new findings or anything, that the mosque was built by forcibly destroying a temple and it was the birth place of Ramlala, will you support building of the temple by destroying that mosque then? How would you defend the case of Gyanvapi mosque based on technicalities where the evidences are clearly visible by naked eyes? A debate on principles about what should be India's stand on this issue will help settle similar issues in future, and there could be many.

And I am not exactly speaking in favour of a temple there, if you thought so. For that particular case the debate should be allowed to be settled by the Supreme court, most likely with a compromise by both sides, because it has reached a point where no party can lose..

 

[Levina]

Yeah so you have not read Babur's book....and his 300,00 words.

Btw i do want to pick up Salman Rushdie's book someday.

Chill @scorpionx dont let this discussion frustrate you.

 

[scorpionx]

The contentions you have raised are on technicalities, and I am arguing for a debate on the principals. What will you do if tomorrow it is proved, by some new findings or anything, that the mosque was built by forcibly destroying a temple and it was the birth place of Ramlala, will you support building of the temple by destroying that mosque then? How would you defend the case of Gyanvapi mosque based on technicalities where the evidences are clearly visible by naked eyes? A debate on principals about what should be India's stand on this issue will help settle similar issues in future, and there could be many.

And I am not exactly speaking in favour of a temple there, if you thought so. For that particular case the debate should be allowed to be settled by the Supreme court, most likely with a compromise by both sides, because it has reached a point where no party can lose..

Principles of what? To undo one destruction with another one? A medieval practice of religious bigotry blended with political ambition reciprocated by a similar one in 21st century? A complete status quo should have been the goal of the government instead of bending knee principle in front of both Hindu and Muslim intimidation.

Yeah so you have not read Babur's book....and his 300,00 words.

You expect me to read the chaghtai turki one? And you expect Babur's bigotry may be hidden somewhere in those 300000 words?

 

[Levina]

You expect me to read the chaghtai turki one? And you expect Babur's bigotry may be hidden somewhere in those 300000 words?

Bwahahaha
Yesshhhh!
You were the one to bring Baburnama and Tulsidas into this discussion so it puts the onus on you to prove that Babur did not destroy any temple to construct Babri masjid.
Why did you not consider SC's judgement? It clearly says that mosque was built against the tenets of Islam so it can not have the character of mosque.

Btw I am sure you know about the controversial character Babri in Baburnama. I am just wondering why was the mosque named after a teenage boy on whom Babur had a crush(ostensibly!)?

 

[SarthakGanguly]

A medieval practice of religious bigotry blended with political ambition reciprocated by a similar one in 21st century?

Undoing an injustice. Yours are words. The mosques will be undone and Temples erected. Purely on the basis of the Laws that are already in place. We will do it slow. Over may be two generations. We have all the time.

The present mosques on the holiest of our shrines can be shifted. The Left wingers can volunteer to donate land for the sites. I will welcome such a gesture. But mandir wahi banayengay.

Bwahahaha
Yesshhhh!
You were the one to bring Baburnama and Tulsidas into this discussion so it puts the onus on you to prove that Babur did not destroy any temple to construct Babri masjid.
Why did you not consider SC's judgement? It clearly says that mosque was built against the tenets of Islam so it can not have the character of mosque.

Btw I am sure you know about the controversial character Babri in Baburnama. I am just wondering why was the mosque named after a teenage boy on whom Babur had a crush(ostensibly!)?

Babri 'Masjid' was just an illegal structure as per our law.

No, seriously. It was. The other two are mosques. But one at a time.

 

[scorpionx]

Bwahahaha
Yesshhhh!
You were the one to bring Baburnama and Tulsidas into this discussion so it puts the onus on you to prove that Babur did not destroy any temple to construct Babri masjid.

If it was mentioned in the actual text it would have been revealed long ago. Scholars, as you presumed are not sleeping. You are still making it frustrating

Why did you not consider SC's judgement? It clearly says that mosque was built against the tenets of Islam so it can not have the character of mosque.

You mean Allahabad High court's judgement? HCs often make serious error of judgement. They can make Jaya Lalitha a saint, Salman Khan an innocent child and Vinayak Sen a rabid monster. Do you agree with them every time.

Btw I am sure you know about the controversial character Babri in Baburnama. I am just wondering why was the mosque named after a teenage boy on whom Babur had a crush(ostensibly!)?

Do you find it crime to have a homo sexual leaning? Do you have anything to say against Sikander?

Undoing an injustice. Yours are words. The mosques will be undone and Temples erected. Purely on the basis of the Laws that are already in place. We will do it slow. Over may be two generations. We have all the time.

The present mosques on the holiest of our shrines can be shifted. The Left wingers can volunteer to donate land for the sites. I will welcome such a gesture. But mandir wahi banayengay.

Thik hai, mullahji.

 

[Levina]

If it was mentioned in the actual text it would have been revealed long ago.

Scholars, as you presumed are not sleeping.

You are forgetting the fact that the part of the Memoir describing Babar's stay at Ayodhya is missing from all the (translated) copies of the Baburnama, may because it was insignificant to many authors. Ergo the claim that Baburnama does not record the destruction of the Ramjanmabhumi Temple is entirely fradulent, as it is based on a non-existent source.

For a moment let's assume that even if the part did exist, and did not mention the destruction, it still does not imply that the temple was not destroyed but only that he failed to mention it. Human error- may be?
Or the fact that he didn't want to mention trivial things. For a man like Babar destroying a temple would be an event of no great consequence.
Baburnama is a voluminous text and only 1/3rd of it is about India, a country he loathed.

You are still making it frustrating

Trust me...I am not.
my first post on PDF was about BABRI masjid. Ofcourse I am against the demolition of mosque, but back then many members here misunderstood my stance and ganged up against me. To them, not supporting demolition= not supporting construction of Ram temple.

 

[scorpionx]

You are forgetting the fact that the part of the Memoir describing Babar's stay at Ayodhya is missing from all the (translated) copies of the Baburnama, may because it was insignificant to many authors. Ergo the claim that Baburnama does not record the destruction of the Ramjanmabhumi Temple is entirely fradulent, as it is based on a non-existent source.

Trust me...I am not.
my first post on PDF was about BABRI masjid. Ofcourse I am against the demolition of mosque, but back then many members here misunderstood my stance and ganged up against me. To them, not supporting demolition= not supporting construction of Ram temple.

Sorry. I can't argue with assumptions in my sleeves only. It is waste of time. Rudimentary arguments like the translator MAY have omitted or Babur MAY have forgot does not at all convincing to me. You are free to believe it though.

my first post on PDF was about BABRI masjid. Ofcourse I am against the demolition of mosque, but back then many members here misunderstood my stance and ganged up against me. To them, not supporting demolition= not supporting construction of Ram temple

I am not against temple, either. But not at that place by treachery and moral bankruptcy.

 

[Levina]

Sorry. I can't argue with assumptions in my sleeves only. It is waste of time. Rudimentary arguments like the translator MAY have omitted or Babur MAY have forgot does not at all convincing to me. You are free to believe it though.

1) you have not read Baburnama(original).
2) you find it hard to believe that Babur who loathed India could have destroyed temples.
3) Do you think Guru Nanak called him a butcher for no reason?
Let's not forget he beheaded even those who surrendered to him. And those were unarmed men.

From Baburnama, about the afghan prisoners (from Memoir)...
Those who were brought in alive [having surrendered] were ordered beheaded, after which a tower of skulls was erected in the camp.(p 188)

This is what he had to say about Hindus...

Chanderi had been in the daru'l-harb [Hindu rule] for some years and held by Sanga's highest-ranking officer Meidini Rao, with four or five thousand infidels, but in 934 [1527-28], through the grace of God, I took it by force within a ghari or two, massacred the infidels, and brought it into the bosom of Islam ... (p 331)

4) So you really want to believe Babur was an angel?

 

[scorpionx]

1) you have not read Baburnama(original).
2) you find it hard to believe that Babur who loathed India could have destroyed temples.
3) Do you think Guru Nanak called him a butcher for no reason?
Let's not forget he beheaded even those who surrendered to him. And those were unarmed men.

From Baburnama, about the afghan prisoners (from Memoir)...
Those who were brought in alive [having surrendered] were ordered beheaded, after which a tower of skulls was erected in the camp.(p 188)

This is what he had to say about Hindus...

Chanderi had been in the daru'l-harb [Hindu rule] for some years and held by Sanga's highest-ranking officer Meidini Rao, with four or five thousand infidels, but in 934 [1527-28], through the grace of God, I took it by force within a ghari or two, massacred the infidels, and brought it into the bosom of Islam ... (p 331)

4) So you really want to believe Babur was an angel?

1. There is no need to read Chaghtai Turc version to be assured that Ram temple at Ayodhya was destroyed by Babur. There are enough experts in the world in that language who would have by now revealed that if it really happened. Why it is so difficult to understand? Your stressing on the prerequisite to read the original version for me is quite funny.

2. He loathed India, its people, climate and geography. He may have destroyed temples. But that does not necessarily confirms he destroyed the temple beneath Babri Mosque.

3 and 4. We were never discussing if he was angel or not, or were we?

 

[Eminent Mainstream Media]

This is YOUR opinion but commitment to pluralism and religious tolerance were the two founding stone of Indian national philosophy that mobilized and united billions Indians under one flag.

How ?- Lets leave India- consider Bengal and Punjab-