Truckloads Of Stones In Ayodhya Put Focus Back On Ram Temple

[Cookie Monster]

Yes, I think so too. The expectation that Muslims and non Muslims will live happily together did not work out very well here. True, many Muslims (and non Muslims) can, but the faith often comes in conflict (lets be honest here). That creates an identity crisis. This could have been avoided.

Congress should ideally have accepted the Partition immediately post the 1946 elections and mobilized to properly and peacefully exchange populations. Muslims to Pakistan (West and East), and non Muslims to what remained of India/Dom. of India. The massacres could have been prevented, Direct Action Day would never have been called. Property could also be exchanged slowly to resettle people with least damage.

But all this we understand now in hindsight. At that time this was not clear. Nehru genuinely though that Pakistan will collapse because a state ONLY on the basis of religion had never existed in history before.

Even today a proper exchange of populations can help to some extent. I know many people who would love to go to Pakistan but travelling and getting citizenship there is difficult. Plus there is anxiety about leaving, getting jobs, etc etc. But with a more unified management, these problems can be overcome.

I agree with u. Had the leaders during the freedom movement realized this and agreed on a two nation theory...all the massacre could've been avoided. Moreover India and Pak will have no hostilities and dare I say even be friends due to shared culture/language/etc.

What I don't agree with is that last part. I don't think that ppl can be moved across borders now based on religion. There is too much deep-seated hatred on both sides. Additionally the Muslims of Pakistan felt betrayed by the Muslims that chose India(at least at the time. I don't know if that's still a thing). The window where all of this could've worked out well was small and is long past.

In a perfect world, I agree.

A case can not go on for 150 years and when the obvious is staring in the face for everyone to see.

Masjid was destroyed because the law, Politics, Politicians & Muslims have collectively failed the Hindus. My single question is, how long is too long to wait for justice?
Do you think Hindus waiting for 150 years for courts to decide is too long?!

The case was in the court for 150 years? India hasn't even existed for a 150 years. Please show me when such a case was filed.

 

[DineshS]

The case was in the court for 150 years? India hasn't even existed for a 150 years. Please show me when such a case was filed.

Sir, this case has been going on from 1855.
First petition was filed at that time.
The same case, the descendants of the same people/organizations are fighting the case even now.

You can google and u will get to read numerous articles detailing the time line.

How does it matter whether India has existed or not? There were courts pre-independent India. Justice at some level was being dispensed even then.

Let us for a moment forget the pre-independent India time of this case. India is now 70 years old. Let me know if 70 years is too little time to solve a case when proofs are staring everyone in the face?

 

[Cookie Monster]

Sir, this case has been going on from 1855.
First petition was filed at that time.
The same case, the descendants of the same people/organizations are fighting the case even now.

You can google and u will get to read numerous articles detailing the time line.

How does it matter whether India has existed or not? There were courts pre-independent India. Justice at some level was being dispensed even then.

Let us for a moment forget the pre-independent India time of this case. India is now 70 years old. Let me know if 70 years is too little time to solve a case when proofs are staring everyone in the face?

A colonial India didn't champion/represent the secular democratic idealisms that the likes of Nehru promised...so that's irrelevant and no parallels can be drawn there.

My only parallels were between Babur's India(Monarchy...might is right kinda rule) and the current India(Secular/Democratic/protect the rights of ALL its citizens).

If the same thing is happening in both(forcefully tearing down one religion's temple to build another religion's temple)...
then perhaps it was too idealistic to think that Hindus/Muslims can coexist peacefully and practice their religions freely.

I don't think it would've been an issue if India was entirely hindu(partition executed right...all Muslims in Pakistan...and all Hindus in India). U guys could've torn down as many Masjids as u want and erected Mandirs in its place without worrying about ur other subjects getting offended/protesting/rioting. So perhaps the problem isn't with tearing down the Masjid and building a Mandir but instead the idealism of Nehru and others.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Additionally the Muslims of Pakistan felt betrayed by the Muslims that chose India(at least at the time

Roughly 70 to 85% of the Muslims voted for AIML.

There were very Muslims who chose India.

All did not migrate though. I still think, if both countries ease their restrictions - a more equitable transfer can still be made - may be not all, but some. At least the option should be there. I am including Bangladesh here as well, of course.

 

[mirage]

is islam the dominant religion in india? What ideology stops india right now from again mounting same statues everywhere in their temples to presidential palaces? And also on their house facades? It will be fun to see hindu kids trying to emulate same kama sutra postures with their sisters and siblings at home, because kids ape everything they see.

Or you still see yourselves as slaves to muslims as 1000 years long effects are hard to erase off the memory

oh bhai ther jaa , kithe ? kithe chale toosi /?? limit me reh ke baat kar MC converted hindu descendant ki aulad warna teri religion ki itni pol kholunga with f a c t s and evidence , fir report karte firo ge mojhe aur ban kar do ge , dont stop this off topic $hit here , if you dont have anything to say about the matter in discussion . aur 1000 sal ki khush fehmi paal pa al ke yaha tak pohunch gaya hai too , there is nothing like 1000 sal wall wali kinder garden story in reality . can debate on that topic too , but in appropriate post . chal aab thand rakh

 

[DineshS]

I don't think it would've been an issue if India was entirely hindu(partition executed right...all Muslims in Pakistan...and all Hindus in India). U guys could've torn down as many Masjids as u want and erected Mandirs in its place without worrying about ur other subjects getting offended/protesting/rioting. So perhaps the problem isn't with tearing down the Masjid and building a Mandir but instead the idealism of Nehru and others.

https://twitter.com/x/status/883943028037226496

Look at the picture and tell me what do u think Hindus should do when we are staring at the obvious.

 

[Cookie Monster]

https://twitter.com/x/status/883943028037226496

Look at the picture and tell me what do u think Hindus should do when we are staring at the obvious.

Go right ahead and build it.

The point I was trying to make wasn't whether Mandir should or should not be built. It went beyond that...addressing the visions of India's forefathers(during the independence movement).

 

[DineshS]

addressing the visions of India's forefathers

Which forefather?

Gandhi - Who asked Hindus to just lie down & die
Nehru - Who hated Hindus & Hinduism

The larger point I am making is to the collective conscience of Muslims - Do Indian muslims have any empathy left?

 

[Cookie Monster]

Dear cookie monster this is a civil responce for you.

Good attempt at trying to keep it civil but if u read my post u will see that it wasnt about if u will make a Mandir or not...

It was about the why it must be made there...in the context of democracy/religious harmony/the secular views of ur forefathers like Nehru/etc.

Anyways I can see that it either
1) escaped u entirely
or
2) u simply didn't wanna answer.

If it's the first case I feel sorry for u, if it's the latter then there was no need whatsoever to respond to me.

Which forefather?

Gandhi - Who asked Hindus to just lie down & die
Nehru - Who hated Hindus & Hinduism

The larger point I am making is to the collective conscience of Muslims - Do Indian muslims have any empathy left?

So u don't agree with the vision of ur forefathers(Gandhi/Nehru) either...though what u r listing here as their "wish/goal/vision"(I don't know what to call that) isn't true.

Gandhi merely appealed to Hindus to stop the massacre. Such calls were also given by Muslim leaders to Muslims. It doesn't mean u lie down and die. It was just an appeal to both sides to stop the senseless bloodshed.

Nehru wasn't particularly religious...it doesn't mean he hated Hindus/Hinduism.

As for ur larger point regarding the conscience of Indian Muslims...I can't answer that bcuz I'm not an Indian Muslim. U should ask them.

I was merely looking at the pattern of things such as beef ban/Babri Masjid/mob attacks over beef consumption/etc...seeing the vision of ur forefathers fail. They thought everyone would live in harmony regardless of their differing religions and the state would protect everyone's rights. It's looking more and more like it didn't work out that way...quite the opposite actually.

 

[DineshS]

So u don't agree with the vision of ur forefathers(Gandhi/Nehru) either...though what u r listing here as their "wish/goal/vision"(I don't know what to call that) isn't true.

Gandhi merely appealed to Hindus to stop the massacre. Such calls were also given by Muslim leaders to Muslims. It doesn't mean u lie down and die. It was just an appeal to both sides to stop the senseless bloodshed.

Nehru wasn't particularly religious...it doesn't mean he hated Hindus/Hinduism.

As for ur larger point regarding the conscience of Indian Muslims...I can't answer that bcuz I'm not an Indian Muslim. U should ask them.

I was merely looking at the pattern of things such as beef ban/Babri Masjid/mob attacks over beef consumption/etc...seeing the vision of ur forefathers fail. They thought everyone would live in harmony regardless of their differing religions and the state would protect everyone's rights. It's looking more and more like it didn't work out that way...quite the opposite actually.

And look at what these 2 "fore-fathers" have given us?
We Hindus are living in our nation like second class citizens, trying to defend our culture & religion. Being apologetic to being Hindu. Begging every one to give our holy places back.

no thanks. These 2 people are no fake fore-fathers.

You are only partially right in your assessment. What these two people did to India is unpardonable. I sincerely hope few decades from now some one would do an impartial analysis of our Freedom Struggle and write the correct history.

Gandhi did not want armed Freedom struggle, Yet, the same guy wanted Indian's to fight for British (our occupiers) in WW2. Can you even imagine something more twisted or ironic?!

 

[Kaushika]

Good attempt at trying to keep it civil but if u read my post u will see that it wasnt about if u will make a Mandir or not...

It was about the why it must be made there...in the context of democracy/religious harmony/the secular views of ur forefathers like Nehru/etc.

Anyways I can see that it either
1) escaped u entirely
or
2) u simply didn't wanna answer.

If it's the first case I feel sorry for u, if it's the latter then there was no need whatsoever to respond to me.


So u don't agree with the vision of ur forefathers(Gandhi/Nehru) either...though what u r listing here as their "wish/goal/vision"(I don't know what to call that) isn't true.

Gandhi merely appealed to Hindus to stop the massacre. Such calls were also given by Muslim leaders to Muslims. It doesn't mean u lie down and die. It was just an appeal to both sides to stop the senseless bloodshed.

Nehru wasn't particularly religious...it doesn't mean he hated Hindus/Hinduism.

As for ur larger point regarding the conscience of Indian Muslims...I can't answer that bcuz I'm not an Indian Muslim. U should ask them.

I was merely looking at the pattern of things such as beef ban/Babri Masjid/mob attacks over beef consumption/etc...seeing the vision of ur forefathers fail. They thought everyone would live in harmony regardless of their differing religions and the state would protect everyone's rights. It's looking more and more like it didn't work out that way...quite the opposite actually.

Dude i am a kshatriya, we get whatever we want, We dont care if its right or wrong.

 

[Jackdaws]

This must be a secularist approach to the problem.

In that case, neither the Hindu nor the Muslim will visit the places - except may be to destroy the other.

That's why the idea is to take the leadership in confidence and not provoke the followers. Wait and watch.

Then that would be epicentre of religious riots.
Nothing less than a temple on that land is acceptable, if this democracy can't provide the rightful justice to our aspirations then " To hell with Demon-cracy ".

Jai shree Ram

You do realize, the Court has to look at facts. Ideally, the Muslim leadership should cede claim to that land and agree to build a mosque elsewhere. Everyone and their uncle knows that building a mosque in one of the holiest spots of Hinduism was meant to be a historical snub and an affront to Hindus. But they will not. And Constitutionally, the mosque which existed before 1992 was broken in contravention of the law.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

@Kuru @Kaushika @Rajaraja Chola I'm curious to know as why u guys r so hell bent on making the Ram Mandir in the exact same spot as the Babri Masjid.

To clarify, I'm not saying whether it's the right thing to do or the wrong thing to do. Personally I don't care.

U have the right to make a Ram Mandir anywhere u please but why must it be by hurting the sentiments of ur fellow countrymen(Indian Muslims)?

...and please don't bother citing that a Ram Mandir used to exist there before Babri Masjid. Bcuz this was during the time of a ruler(King/Monarch) and not a democracy. It was more of a might is right kinda time. If there was a Hindu monarch destroying a Masjid and erecting a Mandir then I wouldn't ask.

India claims to be a democracy and that's what the whole partition was about. The one nation vs two nation thing. Congress and its leaders were of the view that religion has no part in state matters and all the subjects will be free to practice their religion and their rights will be protected. The Muslims that stayed behind and sided with India were of that view that ur forefathers like Nehru held...so by destroying Babri Masjid and erecting a Mandir in its place...isn't that like saying "u were wrong Indian Muslims and so was Nehru and his folks...we r gonna do whatever we damn well please bcuz we r the majority"?

I'm hoping for a civil response...if u guys feel like u can't do that...just don't bother replying

To be honest if you had asked me this question 2-3 years back I would have said I dont care. If the Masjid hadnt been demolished, then I would have never asked for a temple there in the same spot.

But it had been demolished, and ASI have submitted in SC, that an temple structure existed before the Masjid, and the current Masjid pillars have carvings and stones older than the Masjid itself. Moreover I sincerely believe that if Muslims can give up their claim, it can buy peace among Hindus and Muslims in North India. That's my original intention now. However it should not be forced. Rather negotiated to buy land and convince Muslims.
And SC judgement must be followed to spirit in either case.

India is the last haven of Hinduism man. Its one of the holiest spot and evidence have clinched Hindus arguments. How will someone feel if some other religious structure is built over a mosque?

Actually.

One Ayodhya Ram temple still stands here.

Ayutthya, Thailand


The temple should be built without further delay.

All political parties should not use this single issue to polarize voters for eternity.
BJP says banayengay - so they should build it quickly. Every five years ek hi promise kar ke collecting votes is hypocrisy.

I think India should negotiate with SE asian countries to take over Hindu religious structure for rituals and prayers. We have a lot and lot of Hindu temples lying unused which can be made glorious again.

 

[Cookie Monster]

To be honest if you had asked me this question 2-3 years back I would have said I dont care. If the Masjid hadnt been demolished, then I would have never asked for a temple there in the same spot.

But it had been demolished, and ASI have submitted in SC, that an temple structure existed before the Masjid, and the current Masjid pillars have carvings and stones older than the Masjid itself. Moreover I sincerely believe that if Muslims can give up their claim, it can buy peace among Hindus and Muslims in North India. That's my original intention now. However it should not be forced. Rather negotiated to buy land and convince Muslims.
And SC judgement must be followed to spirit in either case.

India is the last haven of Hinduism man. Its one of the holiest spot and evidence have clinched Hindus arguments. How will someone feel if some other religious structure is built over a mosque?



I think India should negotiate with SE asian countries to take over Hindu religious structure for rituals and prayers. We have a lot and lot of Hindu temples lying unused which can be made glorious again.

I totally agree with the bold part. However I don't think that the Masjid should've been demolished by angry mobs taking the law into their own hands. This negotiation to relocate the Masjid and a court case showing evidence should have been the approach from the start. It would've totally avoided all the communal hostilities and tensions.

 

[Bossman]

My family members countributed in babri and i think its now or never. BJP will never get this majority in future.

Mandir wahi banega.

Jai shree Ram


Religious and cultural Slave of other people cant hurt our feelings

If you ever see me and my family we don't look like any Indians including your half breed Italian leaders. Your ancestors might have been my slaves but I am nobody's slave.

If Macca was destroyed and a Ram Temple is built - Would muslims after hundred years support new Ram Temple build there or the older Macca that was originally present there?

If anybody touches Mecca, including the biggest world powers, let alone destroy it just wait and see what happens and how quickly it happens. Muslims will not wait a thousand years and file a court case and then bring a truckload of stones. Every Muslim Men Women and Child will rise up and it will change the world forever. You guys are just too weak. All false bravado and talk, even that in anonymity of the internet.