Historian and eminent writer Arnold Toynbee had said 'presence' of controversial Mosques in Mathura, Varanasi and Ayodhya were "insult" to Bharat

Arnold Joseph Toynbee (Born 14th April 1889, expired October 22, 1975) was an English historian of repute.

He had argued eloquently that in 1817, when the Russians conquered Warsaw, they converted the city’s main church from a Catholic to an Orthodox place of worship, merely to humiliate the Poles. 

When in 1918 Russia had lost in World War I and Poland became independent, the Poles retaliated by demolishing the Orthodox church and replacing it with a Roman Catholic one. 

Toynbee's argument was that in either case these were done for 'national honour'. 

Toynbee



In 1960 he had come to New Delhi to deliver the Maulana Azad Memorial Lecture, he was surprise over the fact that Aurangzeb’s mosque in Varanasi was still there. He felt that it should have been removed and illustrated the issue with a Polish-Russian example.

According to right wing intellectual S Gurumurthy, there were three convergent factors which powered the Ayodhya movement.

He told Times Now in an interview - these factors included 'the invaders' provocative' symbols (the mosques) should never have been allowed to exit. In this context, he cited the instance of Toynbee's reference in the Maulana Azad Memorial Lecture and said, "he (Toynbee) recalled the Polish" government's move. 

Toynbee, according to Gurumuthy, had said three Mosques - Mathura, Kanshi (Varanasi) and Ayodhya symbolise the 'dominance' of Aurangzeb (Islamic) rule over India and it is a provocative monument.

"He (Toynbee) said it is an archaeological disturbance".

According to other experts too, Arnold Toynbee had said that he is "embarrassed and also ashamed" that you (India) still haven’t removed the name of Aurangzeb and the Mughals even after the partition, 

"....it’s an insult to your free state".

In his interview Gurumuthy says when Hindus made their 'just' claim, they were mocked at and people even questioned Hindu leaders and masses -- "Was Ram born in India?"

Or even questions were asked -- "Did Rama ever exist?" 

Hence, Gurumuthy says the Ram temple movement actually had evolved as a "corrective" to all these.  

Answering questions, Gurumuthy also said -- "Ram temple is perhaps the most benevolent expression of the idea of India...Mahatma Gandhi believed (in the concept of) Ram rajya and he equated it with Swarajya".

 

The Idgah, Mathura has been allegedly built on the ruins of Keshav Deo temple destroyed by Aurangazeb 

Nov 9, Supreme Court verdict -- highlights and view and counter views  

“At the heart of the Constitution is a commitment to equality upheld and enforced by the rule of law. Under our Constitution, citizens of all faiths, beliefs and creeds seeking divine provenance are both subject to the law and equality before the law. The Constitution does not make a distinction between the faith and belief of one religion and another.” 

– Supreme Court on Nov 9, 2019  

On November 9, 2019, Indian judiciary made history. The Supreme Court of India ordered that the disputed holy site of Ayodhya in the communally sensitive state of Uttar Pradesh should be given to Hindus. In India, the Muslims are generally taken as ‘historical entity and group of outsiders, traders and invaders’. 

The claims of the Muslim side were rejected and they would be ‘dispossessed’ of the 16th century Babri Mosque. The Supreme Court also ordered that Muslims should be given five acres of land at Ayodhya itself but away from the disputed site.

History, according to Victor Hugo, is partly an ‘echo’ of the past in the future.

History is related to time and nothing flies in this mortal world and perhaps immortal universe faster than the time. The ‘time span’ of last few decades has many things new and unique both in national and my personal life vis-a-vis national polity. Often the Ayodhya movement turned India upside down.

In 1989-90, when Ayodhya’s land dispute had emerged as a major issue, I was in my days of baptism into journalism far off in the wilds of Nagaland. 

It was the era of post-Shilanyas politics, the Congress party had opened up a Pandora’s Box. The Hindutva mascot L K Advani had launched the Rath Yatra and ultimately BJP withdrew support to the VP Singh-led country’s first multi-party government. 

So in more ways than one, it was nearly dream come true for me to get an assignment to cover ‘Ayodhya’ in September 2010. Now in circa 2019, the world has changed yet again – more ways than one. 

The Hindutva assertion is a reality now especially with the duo of Narendra Modi and Amit Shah at the helm of affairs. But the seed of that assertion was kicked off by the Temple Movement and its protagonists – likes of L K Advani and Ashok Singhal. Some of their roles came in for sharp criticism too. Even the illustrious former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee – given out as a moderate face and poet-politician, came under attack later.

Vajpayee, according to a video accessed by the media later revealed, had said on December 5, 1992 that – “Rokne ka to sawal hi nahin hai (There is no question of stopping us). Tomorrow we will not be violating any court order if we perform kar seva)”

Essentially the five-member bench judgment of the Supreme Court goes back in time to ‘undo’ the taking away from Hindus of a place they have ‘believed’ traditionally and worshipped as the place of birth of God Ram. 

The Supreme Court order itself stated - The disputed land forms part of the village of Kot Rama Chandra or, as it is otherwise called, Ramkot at Ayodhya, in Pargana Haveli Avadh, of Tehsil Sadar in the District of Faizabad. An old structure of a mosque existed at the site until 6 December 1992. 

1989 - Shilanyas 

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) decided that it would file a petition seeking review of the Supreme Court's judgement in the Ayodhya issue. "The land of the mosque belongs to Allah and under Sharia law, it cannot be given to anybody," AIMPLB secretary Zafaryab Jilani told reporters. 

The board also categorically refused to take five-acre land in Ayodhya in lieu of the mosque. “The board is of the view that there cannot be any alternative to the mosque," said Jilani. 

In fact in the first week of December, a review petition was filed by Jamiat Ulemma-i-Hind general secretary Maulana Syed Ashhad Rashidi. 

It said the Nov 9, 2019 verdict had fourteen errors. The chief of them being the court granted ‘relief’ to those who violated the laws, demolished Babri Masjid in 1992 and repeatedly flouted the orders of the Supreme Court itself.

ends