Kamath's 'Reclaiming Rama's Birthplace' ... is the predictable reaction of a chauvinist ...
Kamath believes that Rama's temple was demolished by Muslim invaders. He and other like-minded people have blocked themselves from all the contrary evidence which archaeological and literary sources provide ... While discussing acts of demolition by Muslim rulers, we should not miss the context and nature of the mediaeval polity. If we go on interpreting and using history for the purpose of settling scores from the past, we will be reduced to a nation of warring tribes. (Vikram Kumar's Letter in The Times of India, 9 January, 1998)
Shahabuddin's Letter to The Times of India, 1 January, 1998
M.V. Kamath's article "Reclaiming Ram's Birthplace"; (TOI, 22 Dec.,97) strikes one immediately as "deja vu". There is not an idea, not even a word, more than what Mr. Kamath has been articulating through his numerous columns in various papers over the last few years. Indeed he reminds one of two well-known proverbs "Mudda'i soost, Gawah chust" and "Uzr-e-gunah badtar uz gunah". In his euphoria he goes beyond the VHP's brief although his basic thesis remains the same. Built in Ayodhya, the city of Rama, the Babari Masjid was an insult to Hinduism, and hurt Hindu sentiments and its demolition was an act of self-respect and, therefore, necessary. He also appreciates that the demolition was done in broad day light.
Mr. Kamath wants Muslims to acknowledge the fact of "Islamic invasion of Hindu territory". Everyone acknowledges this fact. But Babar was not the first Muslim invader. Oudh was under reported invasion since the 11th Century. Babar took Ayodhya from the Pathans, not from the Hindus.
There is no record of any Muslim conqueror constructing a victory memorial in Ayodhya or elsewhere. But in every age, places of worship have been constructed and other religious acts have been performed as thanksgiving. An element of political assertion may also be present. So it is today when the Sangh Parivar seeks to destroy Masjids, but on a false premise. Post-1947 India belongs to all Indians and not to the Hindus alone.
It is surprising that Mr. Kamath sees nothing demeaning in blatant violation of the assurances given to the Parliament, the Allahabad High Court, Supreme Court, the Executive and the National Integration Council. He also does not see any deception in securing access to the Babari Masjid on the plea of worship and performance of rituals. The Kar sevaks did not announce their real intent of demolition in advance nor did they openly force their way through the security cordon. They came stealthily and they succeeded because of the collusion of Narasimha Rao and Kalyan Singh governments. They came because they knew that they were not going to face any bullets!
Hindu sentiments have been systematically inflamed by the Sangh Parivar since 1983. No such sentiments existed for 364 years. Babari Masjid was not on the public agenda during the Freedom Movement or since 1947, until 1983.
The Parivar has no faith in the judiciary. It rejected the Krishna Iyer-Rajiv Gandhi formula and continues to 'formally' boycott the title suit proceedings in the Allahabad High Court.
The Sangh Parivar is yet to prove to the satisfaction of a judicial or quasi-judicial authority that Ayodhya is indeed the birth site of Ram, that the birth site lies within the Babari Masjid site and that a commemoration temple standing on the site was demolished to build the Babari Masjid in the place.
