Is Ayodhya Mandir Justified?

6 Dec on my 9th Birthday, there was a Masjid in India that was being demolished. It led to series of riots. It also led to many Mandirs being demolished in our Islamic neighborhood. The year was 1992.

The case is now in now in courts and everytime near the elections the issue always makes a comeback. It is fierselly debated but not much has moved. It surely makes everyone wonder if we will ever have a closure on the issue.

Going into the background, it is alleged that there was a temple in Ayodhya, the birth place of Shri Ram. Then in 1526 the Central Asian Turk Babar invaded India. After failed to defend or establish his rule in central Asia, he tried his luck in India and replaced the Afghan rulers. He never liked India as written in Baburnama where he called it a hot place of Dark ugly people. To show his stamp of rule more due to political reasons he is alleged to have built a Mosque over the sacred place of Mandir. This is the issue.

To start with, critics allege that Ramayana is a mythological story. Then there is a point that there surely was a Masjid that everyone has seen but no Mandir. And there are such many more arguments.

As per my personal opinion, yes Ramayana cannot be taken as a historical document, but it surely represented the essence of India. Centuries of compilations show that contributors were aware of the north south axis of India. The locations in the scripture bear a strong imprint of the geography. In my personal opinion there was a prince in Ayodhya who had a major kingdom (Not over whole of India) and must have been very popular. From his story must have been a starting point of Ramayana.

Overall whatever be the case, Hindus all over India, Nepal and the world have always known what Ayodhya is. It leaves to any doubts that whatever be the history, the location is sacred to Hindu's.

Also the location bears no historical importance to Muslims. However how it is important to Islamists (I am intentionally using Muslim and Islamists differently). As they used it for demanding Pakistan, how they oppose Uniform Civil Code, triple talaq etc, Ayodhya represents notional Islamic domination over India. It represents the feeling we have a Mosque over Ayodhya, while you cannot enter Mecca.

If a Mandir comes up there, people who could not accept democratic rule calling it Hindu rule and then collaborated with British to form Pakistan, see it as a major loss.

Hence while it might be religious for majority, for me Ram Mandir will represent a victory against one of the most regressive mindset of the world and will bring closure to a major issue which forces Hindu's to feel lesser in their majority country.

While I am a secular person, dead against RSS and Stupsanghi supporters, this issue rings a bell in me. It reminds me how I feel at sight of Harmandir Sahib (Not Golden Temple) being shattered by this Hinduist rule of 1984. Let's hope for a rightful closure at the earliest.