[Reader-list] Ayodhya, a simple matter of adjudication and courts and judiciary has failed the nation.

[Pawan Durani]

Under the orders of the Allahabad High Court, the excavation at the disputed
site of Ayodhya to ascertain whether ther was any temple structure in the
Babri structure area. The report has since been opened and the contents
revealed (The HINDU, August 25, 2003). According to the report, a massive
structure of 10th century, of stone and brick lies buried beneath the site
in addition to a carved sculpture and motifs. A large number of pillar bases
were found in the excavation conducted under the supervision of the Special
Officer appointed by the court. The ASI in its first part of the report has
expressed its opinion and the second carries technical data like drawings,
sketches, etc.

Even as the excavation was under way, the contesting parties were giving
contradictory views and reports. Predictably, the pro-Mosque party has
instantaneously dubbed the present ASI report vague and self-contradictory.
The High Court has given six weeks time for both the parties to give their
opinion. As evident, both the parties were approaching the subject from a
preconceived conclusion but as the Ayodhya issue is of national importance,
it may be legitimate for non-committed scholars also to study the report in
detail together with stratigraphic evidence and photographs of the sculpture
and pillar bases.

No one need to doubt the report of the highly competent department like ASI
but it would help public opinion from a neutral stand to understand the
intricacies of the result. The ASI needs to facilitate this study by
publishing immediately, the reports with drawings, photograp[hs, etc. for
public assessment, with the approval of the Court. Assuming that the ASI
opinion mentioned in the report is correct, a historic judgment in an
earlier case, regarding the legal right of a ruined temple, delivered by the
London High Court deserves attention. "As long as even a single slab
belonging to the ancient ruined temple is found in the site, the temple
continues to exist in the eye of law and has its right to claim its
possession." It was with reference to an ancient Hindu temple that had been
ruined and remained without worship for long.

The Appeal Court in London, presided over by three senior judges, to which
the case was taken upheld this judgement. But the case taken to the Privy
Council and the apex court also upheld the judgement. Thus, three foreign
courts that command greatest respect in the world of judiciary held that the
presence of even one slab in the site empowers the ancient temple to be
treated as an existing entity in the eye of law, irrespective of whether the
temple was in ruins or was not under worship. This decision of the London
High Court was delivered hardly fifteen years ago when the then Congress
Government headed by late Rajiv Gandhi was Prime Minister of India, who
enthusiastically supported and got the case filed in the London High Court
in the now famous London Nataraja case. The writer appeared in the case as
an expert witness on behalf of the Government of India.

One of the Pivotal arguments in the case, advanced by the Indian Government
was "once a temple, it remains always a temple". The history of the case is
as follows: A group of bronze idols including a Nataraja, was found in a
land behind a ruined Chola temple at Pattur, in Tanjore District. The idols
were found by a labourer, who sold the Nataraja to an antique dealer. The
image was smuggled out of India and was caught in London by the Scotland
Yard Police. The Government of India filed a case in the London High COurt
claiming the Nataraja as a property of the ruined temple.

Among the various legal points raised in the case, a few are relevant. What
constitutes the Hindu temple? Is it the structure, or the space around it or
the enshrined image? When the tmple has been ruined and worship ceased,
whether it coule claim ownership? The court agreed that not only the
building and the image but also the consecrated space around the religious
building constitutes the temple. The temple ritual treatises mention various
causes of ruin such as vegetation on the buildings, fire, floods,
earthquakes and the like besides destruction by enemy during invasion.
Having examined the ritual and historical position, the court came to the
decision "so long as even one stone slab belonging to the ancient temple is
found in the site, the temple continues to exist in the eye of law. Any
ruined temple could be brought back to worship at any point of time by
purificatory rites."

The ASI, which is aware of this judgement, may be expected to appraise the
Allahabad High Court while submitting the opinion and further clarifications
the opinion of other Archaeologists, who study the report from an objective
angle may also be of assistance in this case. It would also help to dispel
the view that the ASI report is "vague and contradictory" as calimed by the
other side. Whatever be the case, one thing seems to be certain that the
vexed question of this case seems to be nearing an end.

Temple or Tomb -- The CIrcular Structure Discovered at Ayodhya

A purvabhimukha (facing east), partly damaged, circular structure of burnt
bricks has been recently excavated by ASI between the trenches E8 and F8 at
Ayodhya (Vide the ASI Report 2002-2003).

The bricks used here are of two sizes 28 X 21 X 5.5 cm and 22 X 18 X 5 cm.
The bonding material was mud mortar. On its eastern side. there is a
rectangular opening, 1.32 m in length and 32.5 cm in width, which was the
entrance of the structure. A calcrete block, measuring 70 X 27 X 17 cm. has
also been found here, fixed as the doorsill.

An extremely important feature of this structure is the provision of a
gargoyle (paranala) made in its northern wall. The ASI Report records that
it is 0.04 m wide and 0.53 m long projecting 35 cm from the northern wall of
the structure. It is 'V' shaped so that water may drop a little away from
the wall.

The elevation suggests that this structure was built on a raised platform,
viz. adhishthana. The gargoyle, or the drain, was provided on the norther
side. The structure may be dated to 9th-10th century AD (The ASI carried out
C-14 determination from this level and the calibrated date ranges between
900 AD and 1030 AD).

This was an independent miniature shrine. The architectural peculiarities
suggest that, in all probability, it was a Shiva temple where a Sivalingam
was in worship, for example, the gargoyle has been provided to drain out the
milk and water offered in the abhisheka ceremony. Noticeable is the fact
that gargoyle is given on the northern side as is prescribed in the Vastu
texts.

It is amazing that, in spite of all these architectural features available
in situ, of the Sultanate Period, Irfan Habib is calling it Muslim tomb.
Nothing can be more absure than this identification because in India tombs
were never built on a circular plan. It was either a square or octagonal in
plan and there is not a single example of circular brick tomb.

Secondly, it is too small a structure for a tomb, from inside it is only 4.4
ft. square. Neither could it accommodate a grabe in its interior, nor a
Qiblah-Mihrab on its western wall. Qiblah was an integral and essential part
of tomb-structure during the Sultanate Period (1192-1526 AD) as is
illustrated by numerous examples all over northern India. Thirdly, there is
no trace of an arch required for sonstructing dome over the tomb. There are
no nook shafts to bear them and no structural trace to suggest any lateral
thrust of the mihrab. It may be noted that the sub-structure of the mihrab
is built massively on the edges and the four corners, to counter the lateral
thrust. One wonders, if it was a tomb without any arch or dome, and without
even a grave.

Thus, on the one hand the dimensions of this structure are too small for a
tomb and on the other the gagoyle was never used in tombs, while it was an
integral feature of the sanctum of Siva temples to drain out the water
poured on the Shivalinga. The gargoyle is there and to deny its existence is
to cast aspersions not only on 25 excavatyors, both Hindus and Muslims, of
the ASI, 2 judges, and 500 policemen but also on a dozen nominees of the
concerned parties, who were constantly present during the excavations.

It may be mentioned in this connection that a similar brick temple, circular
in plan of the 8th-9th century AD has been recently excavated by the writer
at Govisana (Kashipur, Uttaranchal). It also has a similar gargoyle in the
north and it has also a rectangular projection on the east.

Irfan Habib will do well, therefore, to substantiate his claim by citing a
single example of a circular brick tomb of the Sultanate Period in India.
Otherwise, his identification will remain bogus and completely rejected on
academic grounds.

(Dr. R. Nagaswamy, Former Director of Archaeology, Tamil Nadu)


On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Venugopalan K M <kmvenuannur at gmail.com>wrote:

> What dispute? Who told you that Babrai Masjid belonged to Mr.Advani &Co?
> Who's he to be the (criminal )demolisher of the masid and the builder of
> ram
> temp le in the name of "all hindus" of India?
>
> Who told you that you and me should have any real stakes in  the
> destruction
> of that humble masjid(which had to stop namaz owing to the handiwork of few
> communalists and certain secularists like Nehru, who just wanted to stop
> trouble)?
>
> Actually, a Malayali Nair( K.K.Nair) who had been the dist magistratre of
> Faizabad in 1948 and a sympathizer of the anti-national RSS and killers of
> M.K.Gandhi is believed to have conspired to smuggle idols of Ram,Seetha and
> Hanuman in the dead of a december night..precisely on Dec 22-23,though I
> have to check the exact date, and later claiming these idols as "swayam
> bhu"(originated divinely and without human agency)!
>
> Granted that you and me have the freedom to believe any trash as history.
> But authentic historical studies have shown that nowhere in Ayodhya, Ram
> Temples were existing even in the times of Thulasidas(16th century) who
> wrote Ramcharitmanas!
>
> Go with more and more of trash..plz don't try to impose on others in your
> service (though it is welcome, because it exposes rather than conceals your
> commitment to the politics of hatred)to the hidutwa bigots!
>
> Let  the sense of refinement prevail on you  thanks to your being a member
> of this discussion forum and to your willingness to communicate to
> instantly
> whatever you "think"!
> btw, thanks for providing the  exact information on the
> measurement of the land which is pending to be handed over to ---------,
> because of "spineless judges" sitting there.
> Certainly it is not you or me who are the holders of stake,I think..
> Nor is it the entire hindus of India...
> Who could it be then you are so passionately and so blindly taking wakalat
> for?
>
>
>  Regards,
> Venu.
>
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Rajen Uppinangadi <
> rajen882uppinangadi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The issue is simply the matter of adjudication of issue of ownership of
> > land
> > of admeasuring 42 feet by 65 feet, by the court of India, judges have
> > fudged
> > for decades as spineless individuals waiting for their promotion and made
> > this an emotive issue by the plitical parties for the vote banks.
> >
> > As to Advani and his rath yathra, it should be noted that rath yathra did
> > not start the communal riots, but stoppage of Rathyathra by lalu yadav
> for
> > vote gains of community in his winning combination of MY equation started
> > the riots, the system of governance did nothing to punish those indulgig
> in
> > riots but rewarded them with MLA and MP tickets, thus criminalisation
> > became
> > history of indian politics.
> >
> > What should have been disposed off as simple property suit, of a
> scheduled
> > property, of a dilapidated structure, became masjid without prayers, to
> > become birth point of Lord rama, as if all were the midwifes at the
> time.?
> > _________________________________________
> > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> > Critiques & Collaborations
> > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> > subscribe in the subject header.
> > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://venukm.blogspot.com/
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>