![]() ![]() Nirmohi Akhara’s case: Faith + collective memory – Hindutva However, the Ram Lalla Virajman and those that share its position remain critical of the Historians’ Report to the Nation (1991), which argues that the existence of Ram Mandir is a myth.Īlso read: The unusual and quirky questions Supreme Court asked during Ayodhya hearing Hence, it claims, the Hindu belief that a temple of Ram was demolished to build the Babri Masjid is a ‘scientific’ fact. It claims that the archaeological findings prove there was a Hindu religious structure beneath the Babri Masjid. The ASI report on Ayodhya excavations from 2003 forms the outer layer of its argument. However, the Ram Lalla Virajman doesn’t rely solely on Hindu faith for its legal argument. It was now possible to raise the issue of the construction of a new temple on the site of the demolished Babri Masjid within the framework of the title suit.īut more importantly, the VHP was now able to legalise its faith-centric argument in favour of a Ram Mandir. Second, the Hindutva demand to have a grand Ram Mandir found a legal recognition. First, it legitimised the VHP’s claim as a stakeholder in the title suit. ![]() This legal intervention had three outcomes. 217). This is what is known as the Ram Lalla Virajman. The Babri Masjid Question 1528-2003: A Matter of National Honour. Vol. It filed a petition on behalf of the deity, Ram, before the Allahabad High Court only on 23 October 1989, claiming that “the entire premises (disputed site and the area around it)…belong to the…deity therefore defendants should be prohibited from interfering in the …construction of new temple building”. (A.G. Noorani, 2003. The VHP did not have legal standing in the Ayodhya case before 1989. The legal history of the conflict also confirms that the VHP’s self-representation as the sole spokesperson of the Hindus is factually wrong. (It is, in fact, ironic that the Allahabad High Court in its judgment eventually accepted the Wakf Board as the ‘representatives of Muslim interests’). The Wakf Board and the Ram Lalla Virajman may officially claim to represent the Hindus and Muslims of India, but the Nirmohi Akhara’s presence as a legitimate stakeholder in the case undermines this obvious communali s ation of the Ayodhya dispute. Ram Lalla Virajman’s case: faith + archaeology – history Also read: All will respect Supreme Court decision on Ayodhya, says UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |