Publication: Organiser
Date: September 7, 2003
The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), in its final excavation report submitted to the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court, has substantiated the fact that Hindus have been claiming for so long. The ASI informed the Court that a temple-like massive structure existed beneath the disputed site before the construction of the so-called Babri mosque in Ayodhya and that there are sufficient evidence of continuity in structural activities for over 3300 years. The sealed report was opened before the full bench of the Court comprising Justice Sayed Rafat Alam, Justice Khem Karan and Justice Bhanwar Singh. The Court had directed the ASI on March 5, 2003, to excavate the site in order to get sufficient evidence whether there was any temple, which was demolished and a mosque was built on it. The Court has given six weeks' time to the parties concerned to file their objections over the ASI report, if any.
The 574-page report, which has given a summary of the results of digging in Chapter X, says that a monumental structure existed just below the disputed structure from the 10th century onwards. It also mentions that the stone, decorated bricks and 50 pillar bases, which are distinctive features of temples in north India, were found-at the site. The report further says, "Now viewing it in totality and taking into account the archaeological, evidence of a massive structure just below the disputed structure and evidence of continuity in structural phases from the tenth century onwards up to the construction of the disputed structure along with the yield of stone and decorated bricks as well as mutilated sculpture of divine couple and carved architectural members including foliage patterns, amalaka, kapotpali, doorjamb with semi-circular shrine pilaster, broken octagonal shaft of black schist pillar, lotus motif, circular shrine having pranjala (water chute) in the north, 50 pillar bases in association of the huge structure, are indicative of remains which are distinctive features found associated with the temples of north India."
The ASI has also given the historical background of the material recovered from the excavation. It reports "…during the early medieval period (11-12th century), a huge structure, nearly 50 metres in north-south orientation, was constructed, which seems to have been short-lived, as only four of the fifty pillar bases exposed during the excavation belong to this level with brick crush floor. On the remains of the above structure was constructed a massive structure with at least three structural phases and three successive floors attached with it." Answering the question whether the structure recovered could be for residential use, the report says, "The evidence suggest that the area below the disputed site remained a place for public use for a long time till Mughal period when the disputed structure was built, which was confined to a limited area and population seemed around it as evidenced by the crease in contemporary archaeological material including pottery. The same is further attested by the conspicuous absence of habitational structures such as house complexes, soakage pits, ring wells, drains, wells, hearths, kilns or furnaces, etc, from Gupta period onwards and in particular from early medieval Rajput period and medieval Sultanate period."
This is not for the first time, but twice in the past, that the excavation was carried out at the disputed site. The first excavation was reportedly carried out in 1969-70 when a Banaras Hindu University team led by A.K. Narain, T.N. Roy and P. Singh opened three small trenches in three separate localities-the Jain Ghat, Lakshman Tekri and Nal Tila. A part of Kuber Tila was also subjected to surface scrapping. In 1975, the noted archaeologist, B.B. Lal, who later retired as Director-General of the ASI, began a research project on the archaeology of the Ramayana sites. He along with a team from ASI headed by KV Soundrara Rajan, excavated the site and chose the Ramjanmabhoomi area as one of the areas for excavation. In a trench there, Shri Lal had found a massive brick wall, house floors rubble collapse. Not only this, the Ground Penetrating Radar Survey (GPRS), a scientific survey conducted recently (January 2003), following the direction of the Allahabad High Court, has also established the existence of a structure beneath the disputed structure.
The disputed structure was built over an 11th century temple in 1528 at the behest of Mughal emperor Babar. The first recorded incident of violence over the issue between Hindus and Muslims took place in 1853 during the reign of Nawab Wajid Ali Shah of Awadh. In 1949, when the idol of Ramlala mysteriously emerged at the temple, the city magistrate attached the property and locked the gates, but prayers by Hindus continued at the site. Following so many efforts to liberate the Ramjanmabhoomi on the part of Hindus, a suit was filed before Faizabad's civil judge on January 16, 1950, by one Gopal Singh Visharad, asking unrestricted darshan. The senior saint and former Ramjanmabhoomi Trust chairman, the late Mahant Ramchandra Paramhans also filed a similar suit. In 1984, the ,VHP launched a massive movement for opening the locks of the temple, following which the Faizabad session judge on February 1, 1986, allowed Hindus to worship at the site and the locks were re-opened.
In 1988-89, nearly two lakh Ramshilas were worshiped all over the country by Hindus. On November 9, 1989, the then Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi allowed shilannyas at an undisputed site. In 1990, the then BJP president L.K. Advani carried out a Rath Yatra from Somnath to Ayodhya but was arrested in Bihar, following which the VP Singh Government fell and lakhs of karsevaks gathered in Ayodhya. They hoisted the saffron flag at the disputed structures and 30 of them were killed in police firing. On December 6, 1992, the agitated karsevaks demolished the disputed structure and built a makeshift temple at the site. After the NDA Government assumed power, efforts were made, at Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee's behest, to find a solution through talks. The Shankaracharya of Kanchi initiated talks with the All India Muslim Personal Law Board but the talks failed. On March 12, 2003, the ASI began excavation in Ayodhya on the directions of Allahabad High Court. It submitted three interim reports during the excavation work and the final report was submitted on August 22, which was opened on August 25.
Although, the Muslim bodies have strongly criticised the report terming it full of contradictions and having inadequate proofs to establish existence of a temple below the demolished structure, the pro-temple people have welcomed the report and urged Muslims to come forward to hand over the land to Hindus and help in developing harmonious atmosphere in the country. "In the light of these findings, Muslim organisations should do some positive thinking and rethink their rigid stand on the temple issue," said BJP General Secretary, Abbas Naqvi. Shri Pramod Mahajan appealed to Muslims to stop fighting over Ramjanmabhoomi issue and hand over the site to Hindus allowing the re-construction of a Ram temple. "It is not too late even now. Muslims should come forward to hand over the land for the construction of the temple. The issue has been conclusively resolved as far as we are concerned," said RSS spokesperson, Ram Madhav in Chennai.
The BJP President Venkaiah Naidu said that the ultimate evidence sought by the critics of the temple in the form of ASI excavation is now before us. "With this the dispute should be put to rest and all of us should come together to rebuild the Rain temple. A united approach for the reconstruction of the Ramjamnabhoomi temple will be an important symbolic step in making India proud, prosperous and secure nation," he said. He further said: "It is unfortunate that some of the parties in the Court are now questioning the ASI report. Although the Court agreed to all the demands of such parties concerned during excavations. It was on their allegation that the internationally reputed archaeologist and chief scientist of the ASI Shri Mani was not impartial to them, the Court had him replaced. Even the workforce used for digging was also picked up on the basis of religious ratio up-on the insistence of these parties. Hence, their criticism of the ASI is unjustifiable. In the light of the conclusive evidence, the Muslim community should rise above narrow considerations and in the spirit of brotherhood, pave the way for the reconstruction of a Rain temple at the venerated site. The Muslim community and Muslim organisations should respect the sentiments of Hindus and come forward to resolve this matter once and for all, as delay can only vitiate the atmosphere. Obey should not be misled by the arguments of the so-called pseudo-secularists, who only pursue vote-bank politics."
He said the BJP believed that the construction of the temple could best be facilitated in a spirit of mutual goodwill and agreement. "We want the temple to be built as a symbol of national self-respect and honour, not just a victory for one community over the other. The BJP is keen to see that the two contending parties meet afresh, discuss matters in the light of the new facts to reach an amicable solution for the construction of the Ram temple at Ayodhya. All communities should now cooperate in the construction of the temple in Ayodhya and help it emerge as an enduring symbol of national unity and brotherhood."
He further pointed out in the past many Muslim leaders had indicated their willingness to support a Ram temple on the site if there was evidences that the Babri Masjid was constructed on the site of a temple. The elaborate excavations conducted by a professional body like the ASI under judicial instructional clearly prove the matter, he added.
