Mandir-Masjid tangle

 With the Supreme Court likely to pronounce its judgment on the Ram Mandir issue in Ayodhya by the second week of November, it remains to be seen whether the Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha/Nirmohi AKhara(Hindu)  or Sunni Waqf Board of Uttar Pradesh(Muslim) would accept the eventuality if it went against either. The Supreme Court has to decide who owns the disputed piece of land. It depends on the answer to this question: Was Babri Masjid built over an earlier temple dedicated to Lord Ram? The Supreme Court’s decision to hold day-to-day hearing of the Ayodhya dispute has given rise to speculation that a seven-decade-old legal case will reach its conclusion by November 17. This is the date when CJI Ranjan Gogoi retires. The court had earlier set an October 18, 2019, deadline for completing arguments in the case but has been unable to stick to its scheduled hearings. The Ayodhya case is a title suit meaning the ownership of land where Babri Masjid existed and what is believed to be the birthplace of Lord Ram is disputed. In 2003, a team of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) said it found structures below the mosque site. The findings were contested by independent archaeologists, both Hindus, who accused the ASI of procedural lapses in carrying out excavations. After the demolition in 1992, the case was split into two- one, a criminal case against the BJP leaders who led the mob; and two, a civil case on the rightful ownership of the 2.77 acres of land on which the mosque stood. The Allahabad high court had ruled for a tripartite division of the land among three parties – the Sunni Waqf Board of Uttar Pradesh that claims to represent the Muslims, the Nirmohi Akhara that claims to represent the Hindus and Ram Lalla, the idol which is considered as the child form of Lord Ram – equally. The Ram Mandir saga was flung to political arena the day the then Rajiv Gandhi Congress government virtually unlocked the gates of  the disputed site in 1987 to allow shilaniyas and in the process, also opened up the  Pandora box which culminated in the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992.Mandir issue is a reflection of national sentiment is therefore debatable. It is not a matter of percentage of votes polled since the truth is that India being a secular democratic country, the national sentiments cannot be equated with communal sentiments. In addition, the vast majority of Hindus especially almost all sections of backward classes of Hindu religion do not subscribe to the ideology of Hindutva and to the conception of Hindu Rashtra. No one can deny that secularism in India has been possible because the Hindu majority do not regard other religions as un-Indian or unpatriotic but regard all religions as sacred. It is a tragedy that religious matters are being taken up by vested interested politicians only to spread apprehension among the citizens and create communal divide for the sake of votes.If the Mandir-Masjid case eventually results in a judgment, it is hoped that the rest of India, that includes people of both communities will learn a future lesson not to allow  elements who thrive in dividing the nation.