The agenda of the 'cultural nationalists' threatens to maim not only the minority communities but the majority community as well, by damaging the national collective. Their contention is that the Ram temple must come up at Ayodhya because it rightfully belongs there. A supplementary argument is that, of the many thousands of Hindu shrines desecrated by 'mediaeval marauders', Ayodhya is only one of the three sites that are being sought to be restored to ... Hindu community. This argument is misconceived. The crusade to restore shrines is all about identity politics, not one, two , three or a thousand shrines. Even if the Muslims agree to give up a number of shrines, the Hindutva crusade would not be over. This is not a numbers game, but a project to establish the Hindu identity as superior to the rest in this country.
The identity politics being pursued by the Sangh Parivar would destroy the ... equality that the Indian Constitution offers to citizens belonging to all communities. Violence is immanent in the process (of) a transition form a situation in which the legitimate norm -if not quite the reality - is that all communities are equal, to another in which the norm accepts one community as dominant and the rest as subservient. And this violence will claim not only individual lives but also the energies of a growing nation.
Sectarian Identity
We have witnessed such mobilisation in the past decade and it has only created schisms in our society and polity ... The recently initiated practice in UP of paying obeisance to Bharat Mata in schools has resulted in Muslims taking their children out of government schools to send them back to the madarsas. Such segregation at the level of schools impedes the emergence of a national mainstream and reinforces sectarian identity. This sets back the ... process of modernisation ...
... If we seek to be respected all over the world as a nation where every community as the freedom of religion, we have to put a stop to religious mobilisation in politics. Just recently, an honourable minister - who is an accused in the demolition of the Babari Masjid – argued for a religious settlement of the issue rather than a judicial one. Then why have a modern democratic state? We may as well call for an ecclesiastical order in 21st century India.
Only Agenda
... The tragedy is that some sections today prefer to construct a political identity based on ideas of a 'golden past', making for a politics of exclusion and religious revivalism. And have thereby closed their minds to the complex cultural requirements of a diverse society such as ours.
Who decides that the advocates of a Ram temple speak for the Hindu? There is tremendous ambiguity in the Hindu tradition and there are a variety of Hindu practices. It seems today that all this is being conflated to the desire and will of the sangh parivar which is seeking to whip up the sentiments of the Hindu community all over the country to just one agenda - the redefining of Indian identity as Hindutva through mobilisation around the temple .. (Source: The Times of India, 21 July, 1998)
Bharat Gupt on VHP's Threat
... The Congress, licking its wounds but unwilling to admit the chinks in its secular armour, hopes to revive itself by maligning the BJP as a communal party with a hidden agenda. The BJP is equally pathetic in its needless denials. It is unable to state clear policies of national benefit derived from ideals of the Hindu way of life which is acceptable to all and is non-contentious.
The furore over carving of stones for a temple now shows that the Congress has done little rethinking on the Ayodhya imbroglio. It is harping along the old line heaping all the blame on the BJP without admitting that the Muslim voter fully blames the Congress for opening of locks in 1986 and the shilanyas in 1989, both of which were done under its rule. They also know fully well that only the dome of the Babari Masjid was destroyed during Kalyan Singh's time but the removal of its walls and the rubble were permitted after 6 pm on Dec. 6, 1992, under Central rule. The Congress lives under the grand illusion that having tendered an "apology", it has made amends.
... In any case, the Ayodhya issue has always been a double-edged sword. If it brings some Muslim votes, it does so at the expense of Hindu votes.
Why have the Congress or the Left parties not impelled somebody to move the court on this issue? Why should it not be left to the wisdom of the adjudicating court to determine whether such carvings for the proposed shrine can be done or not? It is one thing to declare that till such time the legal sanction to raise the temple on the disputed site is not given, nobody has the right to even sculpt the structural stones. But it is another thing for a court to rule that the right to plan and prepare for a temple structure cannot be exercised till the site for it has been made legally available. What if the planners assure the court that in the event of not getting a particular site, they will agree to install the temple elsewhere? But the Congress does not have the courage to forfeit some Hindu votes if the carving is banned on court orders. On the Mandir-issue they are.caught in a perpetual dilemma ... The fear that the temple might be constructed overnight borders on hysteria. But this can only be countered by the VHP which must repeatedly and unambiguously pledge to honour the legal process and assure the nation of their faith in the rule of law ... (Source: The Pioneer, 19 August, 1998)
Shahabuddin's Letter to Advani, 20 July, 1998
There is a clear distinction between the "disputed area" and the "disputed site". However, your letter refers to maintenance of status quo by the Central Govt. only at the disputed site. I wonder whether the wording is deliberate. I would be grateful for your clarification and confirmation that the Central Govt. shall maintain the status quo, in accordance with the SC Order, in the whole of the disputed area and not only at the disputed site.
Thackeray's Changing Stand On Ayodhya
On the eve of the Lok Sabha polls, Thackeray announced that instead of building either a temple or a mosque at Ayodhya, a way out would be to construct a national monument, in the memory of Mangal Pandey. As this was that the Left has been saying all along, they listened stupefied. So did the BJP, for it thought the Shiv Sena was its friend. But Thackeray was playing a deeper game. Unfortunately for him, this backfired. Few Muslims feel for his secular credentials. In the ensuing elections, they voted for the Congress.
A deeply disappointed Thackeray then addressed an election rally in western Maharashtra during the by- elections. There he said that though he had done so much for the Muslims, they didn't believe that he was not anti-Muslim. So what followed was a historical reversal: "Let Vajpayee go ahead and build his temple", Thackeray said. He would not stop him now. The difference of opinion was over. Both Thackeray and the BJP were back to a role they're most comfortable with: the strident Hindutva hardline. (Source: The Statesman, 2 August, 1998)
P.M. Mammen on Ayodhya Dispute
It is absolutely necessary for the stability and integrity of the country that we develop an all-party approach for a national consensus to build a common place of worship at the site of the demolished Babari Masjid. ... Let us rise aboye this national vilification and construct a national symbol with which we all can identify ourselves. Let us have a place of worship with several gates - one for each major religions represented in India and leading into its own place of sanctuary, within this one single building. ... One hopes this proposal will be considered by our political and religious leaders. (Source: The Hindu, 21 July, 1998)
Shahabuddin's Letter to The Hindu, 20 July, 1998
Shri P.M. Mammen's suggestion for the construction of a multi-denominational place of worship on the Babari Masjid site deserves consideration but the Babari Masjid site is too small to accommodate such a complex. The most appropriate manner of implementation would be to rebuild the Masjid on its original site and then construct the Temple, The Gurudwara and the Church on adjacent sites, so as to form a single complex.