Ayodhya dispute: claims and counter-claims -29/09/2010

29/09/2010

Ayodhya dispute: claims and counter-claims

(ZAMEEN DO EIKARRH CHAHIYE,HUMEIEN BHI,TUMHE BHI...JEENE KE LIYE!!!

MARNE PER TOOO KOI HUMEIN DO GUZ ZAMEEN MEIN DAFNAEY YA NADEE KINARE JALAYE,

KYA FARQ PADTA HAI??

KYON LADTE HO,MARTE AUR MARTE HO ZAMEEN KE TUKDE KE LIYE???

BHAGAWAN YA ALLAH NE TOOO DIL MEIN BASNE KI BAAT KAHI HAI!!!

AYODHYA MEIN SARV DHARM BHAICHARE KI AUR PYAR-SNEH KI DHARA BAHTI HAI,

MANDIR MEIN HER DEVI-DEVTAON KI MURTIYAIN DIKHTI HEIN,

BUDDH HO YA MAHAVEER SABKO JAGAH MILTI HAI!!!

JAHAM MUSLIM FHOOLON KE HAAR BANATE HAI,

AUR HINDU USSSE SHRADHA BHAV SE MURTIYON PER CHADHHATE HAI,

JAHAN HINDU KARTEIN HEIN MASJIDON KI RAKSHHA,

AUR MUSLIM BANATEIN HEIN KHADAOUN MAHANTON KI!!!

JAHAN MUSLIM DARJEE KE SEELE KAPDON KO,

HINDUON KE RAMLALLA PAHANTE HEIN!!

YEH AASTHA USS INSANIYAT PER HI TO HAI

JISSE RAM-RAHIM,AALAH,GOD,BUDDHA,MAHAVIR NE SIKHAYA HAI!!!

PER AIISSA KYON KI MUSLIM MURTIYON KI IBADAT NAHIN KARTE,

HINDU AAZAN NAHIN SUNNA CHAHTE-YEH QAISI CHAHAT HAI???

QUON NA INSANIYAAT KA MANDIR HO, RAM-RAHIM KE VACHAAN HON??

NA MURTIYON AUR GHANTIYON SE TUMHARA ZI TALKH HO,

NA AAZAANON KI GOONJ SE HUMARA MANN KASMASAYE???

KYA AYISI AYODHYA NAHIN HO SAKTI???

JAHAN DALITON KE BHI RAM-RAHIM,SAVARGON KE BHI RAM-RAHIM,

HINDUON KA BHI RAM-RAHIM,MUSALMANO KE BHI RAM RAHIM

PYAR KE BOL SEEKHAYEIN!!


(BACHPAN MEIN SUUNI VO BOL GEET KI YAAD AA GAYEIN-

"TU HINDU BANEGA NA MUSALMAN BANEGA,

INSAAN KI AULAAD HAI INSAAN BANEGA)

SOO!!! CHOODO KAL KI BATEIN,KAL KI BAAT PURANI

NAYE TAUR PE LIKHINGE,MILKAR NAYEE KAHANI!!

JAI BHARAT,JAI HINDUSTAN,JAI INDIA!!(

YAAD HAI HUM SABKO,HUM SAB PAHLE BHARATIYE HEIN!!!

(HUMEIN SABKO BANNA HEIN SAMARTH! SWABHIMANI!BHARAT!...LADNA HAI,BHOOK!BHAYE!AUR BHRASHTACHAAR KE KHILAF!!BURAION,GAREEBI,KURITIOUN KE KILAF!...HUMARA HAAT SABHI ZAROORATMANDON,SHOSHITON KE SAATH HOGA!!...KYONKI KARM HI POOJA HAI! MEHNAT HI IBBADAT HAI! INSAANIYAT HI DHARM HAI!! BAKI TOOOOO SIRF AAPNI AASTHA YA FAITH HAI,JISE BHI-PUJO TO BHAGWAN HAI, NA POOJO PASHAN HAI!!JEENA HAI TO 'SHOW PIECE YA ORNAMENT BAANKER NAHIN, SARTHAK-'PERSON'S OF SUBSTANCE' BAANKER JINA HI JEEVAN HAI!!

VIBHATAILANG-30/9/10...MERI TVARIT ABHIVYAKTI)



New Delhi: The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court will Thursday give its verdict on the Ayodhya land row. Here are the claims and counter-claims of the contestants in the Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi dispute:



Birthplace of Hindu god Ram:

- Hindu litigants say the disputed site in Ayodhya is the birthplace of Ram.

- Muslim litigants argue there is no historical, archaeological or religious proof for this. They say even Hindu religious bodies and 'akharas' in Ayodhya are not unanimous on this issue.

Ram temple:

- Several Hindu organisations claim a Ram temple was built at the site in 10th-11th century A.D. This was destroyed to raise the Babri mosque in the 16th century.

- Muslim groups say there is no historic evidence to back this. According to them, Turkish sultans found a mound at Ram Kot in Ayodhya in 1194.



Temple or mosque:

- Hindu groups claim the Ram temple was razed by Mir Baqi, a general of Mughal emperor Babar, to build a mosque in 1528.

- Muslim groups say there is no evidence to back this assertion.



Archaeological evidence:

- The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), which carried out excavations, said in a 574-page report that there were distinctive features associated with a 10th centrury north Indian temple beneath the Babri mosque site.

- Muslim groups and the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Waqf Board challange the ASI findings. They say the ASI ignored the discovery of glazed tiles and pottery, besides two graves, which proved that Muslim settlements existed there even before Babar's time.



Possession rights:

- Muslim groups claim they have held the title of the land at the site for centuries. They say that regular prayers were offered at the mosque till Dec 22, 1949.

- Hindus argue that Muslims got possession of the site during Babar's time.



Legal limitation:

- Hindus argue that the Rule of Limitation applies to the suit filed in 1961 by Muslim litigants and organisations. Muslims protected their title though adverse possession.

- Muslim groups argue that they have the legal title. One cannot go back to several centuries ago on the argument of adverse possession.