Click to play videoAyodhya: It is only two 2 days to go before the Ayodhya verdict comes out. The Ayodhya dispute that essentially hinges on historical evidence have made the historians and archaeologists deeply divided on whether a pre-existing temple was demolished to build the Babri masjid.
Did Babur's official Mir Baqi build the Babri Masjid after demolishing a Ram Temple in 1528? Is there evidence to prove that Ram was actually born in this very spot in Ayodhya? Questions like these seem to perplex everyone, as Ayodhya verdict will shortly be declared.
An Archeological Survey of India report submitted in the court says, "There is evidence of a ‘massive structure’ just below the disputed structure. Excavations also have yielded sculptures of divine couples, foliage patterns and 50 pillar bases. All of which are the distinctive features associated with the temples of northern India.”
However, the Sunni Waqf Board says the ASI report is vague and self-contradictory. They raise two basic questions, firstly what is the evidence of the date of this particular massive structure and secondly what is the historical evidence that this massive structure was actually demolished by Mir Baqi to build the Babri mosque ?
DN Jha, an internationally published historian is one of the co-authors of a report submitted to the government in 1991. He too rubbishes the ASI report.
DN Jha said, “The report is not just motivated – it is doctored.
He and his fellow historians have argued that the pillars are no evidence of a temple.
Glazed pottery and animal bones that were found at the site point to a meat-eating Muslim population in the area and so for all you know, the massive structure that the ASI found could well have been a mosque.
Tulsidas’ Ramcharit Manas, was written just 50 years after the Babri Masjid was built. However, this book makes no mention of a Ram Temple being demolished to make room for a Masjid.
Hence, the historians argue that there is enough evidence to show that Babur did not destroy any Ram Temple. But Hindu groups say the mosque is illegal, as it has been built on land considered sacred by them. After all, when evidence is 500 years old, for every argument, there is a counter argument.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and Pinterest)
More on IBNLive Right Now
MOST SHARED
PHOTOGALLERY
