Above: Guarding the Babri Mosque on September 30, 2010. Below: The Babri Mosque being torn down unhindered by Hindu thugs on December 7, 1992.
Roundtable
Tyranny of The Majority:
The Roundtable Open Forum # 46, October 1- 7
EDITOR
The following is this week's (October 1 - 7) topic for discussion.
TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY
The Babri Masjid is - or, more correctly, was - a mosque located in Ayodhya, a Hindu holy city that legend has it was the birthplace of the mythical king Ram, who is depicted in the Ramayana epic poem of the subontinent.
The mosque was built in 1527.
Tradition has it that it stood on the rumoured birth-site of Ram. History, however, has no record of this man, his birth or birth-place, his life, his achievements - or of his very existence in anything but mythology.
In 1992 - contravening court orders and the very undertakings given to the Court by the leaders of Hindu right-wing extremists - a 150,000 strong mob of hooligans and thugs, beaten into a frenzy and then egged on by petty Hindu politicians - stormed the Muslim place of worship. In full view of the Indian police and military, which had already cordoned off the area - not to protect the mosque but to protect the mob from any interference to their nefarious mission.
The mob then clawed through the mosque, tore down the five-century-old site, brick-by-brick, and reduced it to rubble - in broad daylight, as the world watched in horror - and the Indian government silently stood by.
2000 innocent citizens - mostly Muslims - were then murdered in the streets of India as Hindu extremists celebrated their "victory".
The government authorities did nothing in response to this Hindu terrorism, and thus turned it into state terrorism.
A lone and brave Muslim resident of Ayodhya nevertheless pursued the matter in the courts.
The High Court released its verdict yesterday - Thursday, September 30, 2010 - and offered its full support to Hindu terrorism.
Against all principles of human decency - and in direct contravention of all norms, laws, conventions and precedents - the Court ordered the property to be divided - in plain mockery of the wise Solomon parable of old - with two-thirds going to the Hindus, one-third to the Muslims.
POINTS TO PONDER
The blind arrogance of the majority - earlier displayed in insultingly and incorrectly declaring the Sikh people as "hindus" in the Indian Constitution in 1950; the storming of the Golden Temple in 1984; and the pogroms against the Sikhs later that year (these are but three examples) - thus continues unhindered in usurping the places of worship of the minorities.
It is not difficult to dig out far-fetched stories of the pre-use of the land where the Golden Temple stands today, for example.
The Taj Mahal, too. The Jama Masjid in Delhi. Budhh Gaya. The Christian churches, the Jain mandirs, the Parsi fire temples ...
What are YOUR thoughts on this latest development in India?
October 1, 2010
Conversation about this article
1: Ranjan Narayan Dheer (Jaipur, Rajasthan, India), October 01, 2010, 9:34 AM.
Here lies the problem: Hindus have failed to differentiate between the legendary man-king Ram, who was the son of King Dashrath of Ayodhya, from "Ram", a common term used for God on the sub-continent. The blurring of the two completely disparate entities has led a whole population of Hindus astray, many of them behaving like bufoons, I'm sorry to say.
2: Harman (Amritsar, Punjab), October 01, 2010, 9:38 AM.
A most biased verdict by the Court! A stupid development!
3: I.J. Singh (New York, U.S.A.), October 01, 2010, 10:46 AM.
A democracy, unless closely watched by its institutions - the framers of the legal structure and the courts that interpret it - can quickly turn into the tyranny of the majority. In the classic example, a lynch mob would then be an example of democracy in action, but that should be summarily rejected by all. Notwithstanding this, democracy remains the most transparent form of participatory government and, therefore, the best. Yet, it needs close monitoring and nurturing, or else it quickly turns messy.
4: Sandeep Singh Brar (Canada), October 01, 2010, 11:42 AM.
The destruction of the 500-year old mosque by a mob for any reason was totally unacceptable. Nothing can ever justify that kind of mob violence. From a historical perspective, the issue bears many striking similarities with the on-going tensions over the Dome of the Rock Mosque built in Jerusalem on the site of the Second Jewish Temple. Thankfully, the Israeli people have shown more restraint over the issue than the Indians, since Israel conquered the Muslim holy site in 1967. Although we cannot condone the destruction, it's important to understand the Hindu historical claim to the sacredness of the site. Mir Baqi, Babur's general allegedly destroyed the older Hindu temple at Ayodhya in the earely 1500s: it had reportedly been built to commemorate Rama's birthplace. The Babri Masjid was built in it's place. This story is corroborated by the contemporary Mughal accounts in Tarikh-i-Babari which records that Babur's troops "demolished many Hindu temples at Chanderi". Remember, the Mughals, Persians and Afghans demolished thousands of other sacred Hindu, Buddhist and Jain Temples across South Asia to build their mosques and palaces and to show the apparent supremacy of Islam over the infidels. The Darbar Sahib (Golden Temple) too was blown up and destroyed twice. Old records tell us that as late as 1855, Hindus and Muslims used to worship in the same building at different altars, with the Hindus finally being forbidden access to the inner courtyard of the mosque for worship in 1857. Interestingly, up to the 1930s, the mosque was called Masjid-i-Janmasthan ("mosque of the birthplace"), thus acknowledging the site's traditional connection with the birthplace of the Hindu king/deity, Ram. A couple of related interesting Sikh side notes: During the reign of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the magnificent Badshahi Mosque in Lahore was turned into a horse stable for Sikh troops and Muslims were forbidden entry for worship. In the early 1920s, when Sikhs got administrative control of the Darbar Sahib complex in Amritsar, one of the first things they did was demolish the huge gothic church-like clock tower that the British had built in the 1870s on the parkarma overlooking the Darbar Sahib. The British had built their gothic tower on that spot by first demolishing the magnificent haveli that had belonged to Maharaja Ranjit Singh's family and which had been one of the most beautiful and grand structures on the parkarma.
5: Rajni Sahai (Orissa, India), October 01, 2010, 1:36 PM.
I've just read the decisions from yesterday's verdict on the Babri outrage of 1992. All I can say is that our judiciary has proved itself to be as corrupt as its counterpart from the British rule days - no more than an instrument of the government, with no deference to the law of the land whatsoever. It doesn't bode well for the future of this nation. Just as the Commonwealth Games have shown the world how inept we are, this verdict has confirmed to the world how thoroughly corrupt our highest institutions have become. May God help us.
6: Harvind Singh (U.S.A.), October 01, 2010, 2:31 PM.
One question: where are the educated and responsible citizens of this "democracy"? There are only lone voices that stand up to these things. The majority agrees with what the government is doing. And therein lies the problem. Even the educated do not see the tyranny in this, otherwise wouldn't India face a revolution?
7: N, Singh (Canada), October 01, 2010, 2:56 PM.
Sandeep Singh ji: Agreed that the Persians and Afghans demolished hundreds of temples! But let us also not forget that Buddhism was virtually eradicated from India by the Hindus. Buddhist priests were hunted down and butchered and their temples systematically demolished so much so that even today there are many people who believe Buddhism originated in China. Yes, the Darbar Sahib was destroyed by the Muslims but likewise by the Hindus in 1984. Even the Sikh reference library, which is far removed from the scene of fighting, was not spared! [Actually, it was looted and burned long after the "operation" was completed.] I just wanted to provide a balance ... it gets a bit tiring hearing the same-old, same-old story of the Hindus as victims of the Mughals ... the Hindus are equally adept at tyranny and violation of human rights as recent history bears witness.
8: Baljit Singh Pelia (Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.), October 01, 2010, 8:03 PM.
So much fuss over a silly story - pun intended.
9: R. Singh (Canada), October 01, 2010, 10:38 PM.
As the Court pointed out, there were some ruins there on which the mosque was built. But nothing was demolished by Babur. Therefore one does not understand the logic behind giving any portion to those who pulled down a historical structure to get even for other past things, in a barbaric fashion. This is like giving a license to pull down other buildings they can frivolously connect with other mythological figures. If we condone this, how do we hold them accountable for destroying gurdwaras in 1984, i.e at Hardwar?
10: Taran (London, United Kingdom), October 02, 2010, 5:57 AM.
I am sorry to ask, Sandeep ji, but which records are you talking about re the Hindu temple? I have never heard about any records. Yes, the stories are there about Ram. But this verdict has been a slap on the face not just for Muslims but for all the other minorities - Sikhs, Christians, Jains and Buddhists. Our institutions - including the judiciary - are all under the control of a network of Hindus who only want to implement the majority's agenda and discriminate against the rest. I fear that it is only a matter of time before India will erupt. History repeats itself. Forget about Sikhs, Christians or Buddhists, but the Muslims, though a minority, are still in significant numbers. I know that sooner or later they will repel this draconian treatment meted out to them.
11: Dr. Birinder Singh Ahluwalia (Toronto, Ontario, Canada), October 02, 2010, 8:48 AM.
As a voluminous debate unfolds around this topic, I would only emphasize that judicial verdicts in a democracy, no matter to what degree they may seem unpalatable to many, shall always be respected - being mindful that verdicts that one finds flawed can be appealed to the higher courts of the land (backed by facts, applicable law and evidence). India's democracy and institutions should be given a chance to foster and carve a clear and honest path for it's citizenry - and in the same spirit, I urge India and Indians to retain the constructive attitude to learn from (positive) criticism and not cringe from it. All successful nations have had to acquire the ability of learning from their mistakes (USA, UK, France, Germany, Canada, Japan ...
12: Gurteg Singh (New York, U.S.A.), October 02, 2010, 8:21 PM.
Ram Puniyani's headline regarding the Ayodhya verdict - "Commit Crime And Be Rewarded" - sums up the High court judgment which seems politically correct rather than legally correct. Those who say that the Indian courts are functioning and we should respect them are rather naive and disingenuous. Have we not learnt anything from our own experience at the hands of the Indian courts, where mass murderers of tens of thousands of innocent Sikhs are roaming freely with Z security provided by the Government while hundreds of innocent Sikhs are still locked up without any trial in Indian dungeons? All with the continuing connivance of these very Courts!
13: R. Singh (Canada), October 03, 2010, 1:39 PM.
Many of the temples in olden times were used as treasuries, and power centres of kings and rulers with precious stuff hidden in idols. That would have been the reason for interest in them by invaders. Secondly, look at the records of Ranjit Singh's endowments to all religious places, including temples and mosques. Would a ruler who had Muslims and people of all faiths in important positions of his government - even in charge of his gunnery and treasury - forbid their co-religionists from entering their most prominent place of worship? It does not tally up.
14: Aryeh Leib (Israel), October 07, 2010, 5:35 PM.
Sandeep Singh ji and others: The Dome of the Rock is not a mosque at all, but a shrine of pilgrimage. Its site is something precious to Jews as well as Muslims, being the place of the first and second Temples, as well as the place where Abraham was commanded by God to bring his son Isaac (the Muslims contend that it was Ishmael, the Father of the Arab people) as a sacrifice. I have even seen the image of the Dome of the Rock embroidered on the corners of a talit (Jewish prayer shawl. To Jews, it also represents the rock from which the entire Earth was formed, as well as the meeting point between the Upper and Lower Worlds.