Inauguration of Shri Ram Mandir by PM Narendra Modi in January last year closed the Ayodhya dispute between Hindus and Muslims forever. However, there are two other issues in Mathura and Kashi that need to be addressed to the satisfaction of the parties to the dispute. Though cases relating to both the sites have been pending in various courts of law for a long time now, there is no bar on negotiations between the parties to the dispute. Hindu community recognises the two disputed sites at these two places in Mathura and Kashi as the original sites of their deities, Shri Krishna and Bhagwan Shiva.
Historical documents, centuries old tradition, Archeological reports and a strong belief of Hindu community establish the fact that there were age-old temples at these two sites which were destroyed by the king Aurangzeb during the medieval times. The barbaric king converted the sites into mosques which Muslims deem as their places of worship. There has been a long standing demand of the Hindu community to get back these two places of worship for them as these are the two most sacred places for them dedicated to their cherished gods. Since the land of these two sites are important for the Hindus, they argue that the mosques could be shifted to some other places brick by brick and the land be handed over back to the Hindu community.
A number of public figures among the Hindu community have appealed to the Muslims to hand over these two most sacred places of Hindus to them and work out a settlement through negotiations outside the court. Keeping in view that this gesture of Muslims would create a great goodwill between the two communities in India, some Muslims have also come out in support of the idea. However, a large and an overwhelming section of the Muslim community disagree with this proposal. Thus they have expressed the opinion to fight the cases at legal and political level in all circumstances.
Political & religious leaders, intellectuals and influencers among Muslims in India, in context of these two issues, are by and large divided into three kinds of categories. All the three sections have their own point of view and they have been expressing them freely and frankly. In order to arrive at a logical position, it would be important to summarise the opinions of all these three categories of Muslims in India one by one.
The first category consists of moderate and rational Muslims. KK Mohammad & Arif Mohammad Khan belong to this category. KK Mohammad who made some important findings regarding the Ram Janmabhoomi site and who was a member of the then excavation team in ASI said that “here were (other) Hindu scriptures also on the pillars and the walls of the mosque in Ayodhya. Normally, such images get defaced, but they were quite visible there. In fact, the presence of these images was mentioned by some Jesuit travellers who had come to India many, many, years ago.
Then, we also excavated some terracotta idols which you would find exclusively in temples and not in mosques. As you know, idols cannot be seen in mosques. There were also many structures of women, men and animals. Had this not been a Hindu majority country, India would not have been a secular country. I am of the opinion that Muslims should appreciate this aspect.
Yes, we have the Places of Worship Act. Still, the Muslims should give two more places to Hindus voluntarily, Gyanvapi and Mathura. If you go to Gyanvapi, you will feel sorry to see a Nandi looking at the mosque. There is also evidence to show that the original temple was destroyed. I have always said that Muslims should give three places to the Hindus, one is Sri Ramji’s birthplace and the other two are Mathura and Gyanvapi. As these places are as important (to Hindus) as Mecca and Madina, Muslims should hand them over willingly, or you can transplant them to some other place. Such an act will be healing for the Muslim community also. A number of things were destroyed earlier, and today’s Muslims are not responsible for that. At the same time, Muslims will become responsible when they try to defend the barbaric acts of the Muslims who had invaded India. They should stop that. You go to Goa, you will see that the Portuguese had committed greater atrocities than the British and the Muslims. But they never justify what their ancestors had done. The British of today also do not justify. That should be the attitude of the Muslims also.”
Second category is those who accept the truth of demolitions but want to fight it out in the courts of law. Prof. Irfan Habib & Assahudin Owaisi type belong to this category. Renowned left oriented historian Irfan Habib says that “there were temples in Varanasi-Mathura, they were demolished, it is absolutely correct. This has been mentioned in many history books. There is no need for any survey or court to prove this. But their present form is protected under the Places of Worship Act of 1991. According to this, the situation of 1947 will have to be maintained. If any change has to be made then the law will have to be changed. What is the justification for repairing them after three hundred, four hundred years?” In 1990, this same Marxist oriented historian, Irfan Habib at the time of the release of the excavation report on Ramjanambhumi site said that the “team under Prof. B.B.Lal did not excavate anything associated with a temple. So, there was no need for the Muslim community to hand over the site to the Hindus.”
As the dispute over Varanasi’s Gyanvapi complex heated up, AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi said “the Muslim side would not concede any mosque to Hindus and that they would fight the legal battle in courts. Gyanvapi mosque is located next to Varanasi’s ancient Kashi Vishwanath Temple. Hindus claim the mosque is built on a temple. Some Hindu groups believe that Muslims should give up control of Gyanvapi and Mathura’s temple as these are important sacred places for them. We are not going to give any masjid, enough. We will fight in courts of law”. When asked about the possibilities of reaching some kind of settlement in the Gyanvapi case, Owaisi said, “I am categorically saying that it will not end. We will fight it legally, and we will show the courts what documents and title suits we have”. When told that the ASI report suggests the presence of Hindu structures discovered beneath the Gyanvapi complex, Owaisi said, “If tomorrow, we start digging Rashtrapati Bhavan, we are bound to find something. We have been offering namaz at the site for hundreds of years.”
Then there is also the third type of category which recognizes the truth but persists to live in the denial mode. Maulana Tauqeer Raza and Maulana Syed Arshad Madani type of Muslims comprise this category. In December 2023, Madani stated that he had declared decades ago that the Babri Masjid was not constructed on the remains of any temple……In February 2024, Madani claimed that the idols currently being worshipped at the Ganvapi mosque complex were brought from outside and were not discovered during the Archaeological Survey of India’s survey. He questioned the legitimacy of the ASI’s findings, arguing that if a temple had existed there before, idols would have already been present. Madani maintained that neither the Gyanvapi mosque nor the Mathura site had ever been temples, asserting that such claims conflict with Islamic beliefs. On 5 November, 2023, the same Madani praised Hamas for their courage, calling them ‘freedom fighters’ rather than terrorists. He argued that the Palestinian struggle, including Hamas’s actions, is a legitimate fight against Israeli aggression.
In such a scenario, where legal, political and social tussle between the communities is inevitable, it would be highly advisable for the Muslim community to come forward for an amicable settlement outside the court. It will surely enhance the image and future of the community forever. The biggest gain for the community, in such a scenario, would be that it can take a guarantee from the Hindu community and the government of India to stop raising any such issue in future. In case the Muslim community won’t like to adopt this route and would instead go for the legal solution of the issues, it will surely forfeit its moral right to ask the Hindu community to stop their campaign for liberation of the other places of worship throughout the length and breadth of the country.
Hindus and Muslims alike are natives of this land and have the same ancestry barring a meagre percentage of our population. Besides having the same DNA, we all have a common history, common heritage and civilization. Shri Ram and Shri Krishna are our great civilizational icons, besides being the centre of faith. India is on the path of advancement in all fields, and in the emerging scenario, it is highly painful to carry the unwanted baggage of the past. It would be desirable that we come to a broader understanding and pave the way for the negotiated settlement of the sacred places of Mathura and Kashi too.
This would be a historic step in case the Muslim community comes forward in this context in consequence of an open appeal for an amicable settlement of the issue. This would be a great gift of the current generation to the generations to come in future and would thus create opportunities for everlasting peace, tranquility and co-existence. It would further add grace to our nation and nationhood in the eyes of the world at large.
Comments