Ram Janmabhoomi Temple Construction

RamKiSeeta thumbnail
Anniversary 15 Thumbnail Group Promotion 8 Thumbnail + 6
Posted: 15 years ago

Ram Janmabhoomi (??? ????????) refers to a tract of land in the North Indian city of Ayodhya which is claimed by Hindus as the birthplace of Rama. It is believed[weasel words] that, prior to 1528, a temple stood at this site and that in 1528 the temple was demolished on the orders of Mughal invader Babur and a mosque was built on its ruins. This mosque came to be known as the Babri Masjid. A movement was launched in 1984 by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) eventually leading to the destruction of the masjid on the morning of December 6 1992 by radical Hindu Kar Sevaks. The VHP wants to erect a temple dedicated to Ram (infant Rama) at this spot. Many Muslim organizations, on the other hand strongly oppose the building of the temple.

References such as the 1986 edition of the Encyclopdia Britannica reported that "Rama's birthplace is marked by a mosque, erected by the Moghul emperor Babar in 1528 on the site of an earlier temple".[1] According to the Hindu view, the ancient temple could have been destroyed on the orders of Mughal emperor Babur. This view has been challenged by Romila Thapar and other historians it has been concluded as incorrect[2].

In his slim yet insightful booklet, Communal History and Rama's Ayodhya, Professor Ram Sharan Sharma writes, "Ayodhya seems to have emerged as a place of religious pilgrimage in medieval times. Although chapter 85 of the Vishnu Smriti lists as many as fifty-two places of pilgrimage, including towns, lakes, rivers, mountains, etc., it does not include Ayodhya in this list."[3] Sharma also notes that Tulsidas, who wrote the Ramcharitmanas in 1574 at Ayodhya, does not mention it as a place of pilgrimage.[3] After the demolition of Babri Masjid, Professor Ram Sharan Sharma along with Historians Suraj Bhan, M.Athar Ali and Dwijendra Narayan Jha came up with a one-sided story Historian's report to the nation on how the communalists were mistaken in their assumption that there was a temple at the disputed site and how it was sheer vandalism in bringing down the mosque and the book has been translated into all the Indian languages.[4]

Chronology of events
Main article: Timeline of the Ayodhya debate

In 12th century, a temple complex is built in honour of Lord Ram

In 1528, the Babri Masjid is constructed on the orders of the Mughal leader Babur post destruction of existing ram mandir.

In 1949, icons of Lord Ram appeared in the Babri Masjid. The semi-governmental Wakf Board, an Indian Muslim trust owned the land on which the mosque stood. Both Hindu and Muslim parties launch civil suits and the Indian government, declaring the site "disputed", locks the gates to the mosque.[5]

In 1984, a movement is started for the creation of Ram Janmabhoomi temple by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bharatiya Janata Party, under the leadership of L K Advani.[5]

In 1986, a district judge of Uttar Pradesh, orders the opening of the disputed structure to Hindus. This, allegedly, came from the Congress government which tried to balance the favour shown to the Muslims in Shah Bano controversy.[5]

In 1989- 1990, the VHP intensifies its activities by laying foundations of the Ram temple on the adjacent property. Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar proposes negotiations which only intensify the crisis.

In 1992, on December 6, the Structure is forcibly demolished by Kar Sevaks.[5][6] The then Narasimha Rao led Congress government let a makeshift temple appear in its place before moving the courts for status quo.[7] The demolition of the mosque triggered large-scale rioting.

In 2005 Kashmiri terrorists attacked the structure and were gunned down by security forces (for more information see Ram Mandir Attack). On April 3rd, 2009 the Bhartiya Janta Party - BJP released their Manifesto again promising to construct Ram Mandir -[5] -[6]

19th century

Claims have been made that worship took place on a platform called "Ram Chabutara" prior to Independence. According to British sources, Hindus and Muslims used to worship together in the Disputed Structure in the 19th century until about 1855. P. Carnegy wrote in 1870:

"It is said that up to that time, the Hindus and Mohamedans alike used to worship in the mosquetemple. Since the British rule a railing has been put up to prevent dispute, within which, in the mosque the Mohamedans pray, while outside the fence the Hindus have raised a platform on which they make their offerings."[8]

This platform was outside the disputed structure but within its precincts. Hindu protagonists say that they have been demanding the return of the site for centuries, and cite accounts from several western travellers to India during the Mughal rule in India.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramjanmabhoomi
 
Edited by _LalithaJanaki_ - 15 years ago

Created

Last reply

Replies

423

Views

27281

Users

25

Likes

2

Frequent Posters

RamKiSeeta thumbnail
Anniversary 15 Thumbnail Group Promotion 8 Thumbnail + 6
Posted: 15 years ago

What are your opinions on this subject?

souro thumbnail
Anniversary 17 Thumbnail Group Promotion 5 Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 15 years ago
If you want here are is an old debate where you'll get some more views including mine:
https://www.indiaforums.com/forum/topic/592489
Edited by souro - 14 years ago
return_to_hades thumbnail
Anniversary 18 Thumbnail Group Promotion 7 Thumbnail + 6
Posted: 15 years ago
Dirt is Dirt. Thats that. Nothing magical about it.
jagdu thumbnail
Anniversary 16 Thumbnail Group Promotion 4 Thumbnail
Posted: 14 years ago
Ram existed only in mythology. Why build a temple? Instead let's have a university that can be attennded by all walks of life.
Posted: 14 years ago
Originally posted by: jagdu

Ram existed only in mythology. Why build a temple? Instead let's have a university that can be attennded by all walks of life.

http://www.india-forums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=941252&TPN=36

i dont think its mythology. i think its history. and existance or not when the temple was there then it was there.
anuradhasharma thumbnail
Anniversary 17 Thumbnail Group Promotion 3 Thumbnail
Posted: 14 years ago

well in my view....

 
dont build any temple dere...cozz it will hurt sentiments of muslims...
 
dont build any mosque dee cozz it will hurt sentiments of hindus....
 
building temple or mosque can lead to voilence....and only innocents will get hurt or lost dere lives......in the name of religion!......
 
 
i think govt shud take action...by building a medical college/hospital...or university.......
atlest ppl will either be cured or will be saved or will gain knowledge .............atlest its better den building temple or mosque and creating voilence.Afterall religion shows us the way to peace not violence...den why going towards violence........
 
if we know the 2 options will cost lost of lives ...den we can hav third way...and i guess ...building hospital or university or college will be supported by all ppl regardless of religion.......cozz dis solution is in favour of humanity!
 
😊
 
Posted: 14 years ago
i think temple should be built.
karandel_2008 thumbnail
Anniversary 15 Thumbnail Group Promotion 5 Thumbnail
Posted: 14 years ago
What about building both, a temple and a mosque, side by side?

If this can happen in Singapore, where a temple, a mosque and a church are built side by side, then it can happen in India as well.
Edited by karandel_2008 - 14 years ago
souro thumbnail
Anniversary 17 Thumbnail Group Promotion 5 Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 14 years ago
Originally posted by: karandel_2008

What about building both, a temple and a mosque, side by side?

If this can happen in Singapore, where a temple, a mosque and a church are built side by side, then it can happen in India as well.



When were they built?? Was there already one existing structure that was destroyed and the other two built??
If not then don't try to draw parallel between two dissimilar cases.