Author: Prafull Goradia
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: June 15, 2006
Introduction: If there is anyone who is to
be squarely blamed for the demolition of temples in India and its neighbourhood,
it is Hindu leaders
The blame for the demolition of the only Hindu
temple in Lahore situated at Wachhoowali, Rang Mahal, must rest with Hindu
leadership. This is not the first desecration of its kind. According to records
available with me, since 1947, 244 mandirs, across 11 districts, have been
destroyed in Pakistan. The message that has been registered on most Muslims
over the centuries is that the Hindus do not care about the safety of their
temples.
Uncannily, our MEA's reaction to the desecration
in Lahore has been that it represents a violation of the Nehru-Liaqat Pact
of 1950 whereby both countries were to protect their minorities. Nehru's India
did protect but for Pakistan the pact was dead as soon as it was signed.
According to Taslima Nasrin, 69 temples were
desecrated in Bangladesh in 1990, a clear two years before the Babri episode.
Thereafter over 200 were martyred. Our Government has never protested to either
Pakistan or Bangladesh. Not even over the latest proposal to shift the Dhakeswari
mandir after which Dhaka was named.
On the contrary, the Government through its
Archaeological Survey has been burying the evidence of temple desecration
in its territory since 1947. The Rudramahalaya complex in Siddhpur, Gujarat,
is a classic example of the Government's perfidy. Another example is the Bijamandal
Masjid in Vidisha, Madhya Pradesh.
The other curious phenomenon is that when
the Babri edifice came down, as many Hindus participated in the condemnation
as the Muslims. The self-styled secularists or crypto-Muslims are more vociferous
about Muslim causes than even the ulema. The recent reaction of the Government
when a small dargah was removed to broaden a street in Vadodara was an eloquent
commentary on Hindu leaders' mentality.
Even Mr AB Vajpayee was quick to condemn the
Babri demolition. Mr LK Advani had subsequently called December 6, 1992, as
a dark day in his life. the height of the Ayodhya agitation, these leaders,
supported by the VHP and the RSS, had offered to Muslim leaders that all disputes
would end if they agreed to give up Ayodhya, Mathura and Varanasi in place
of the 3000-odd mandirs turned into masjids.
What was the message to Muslims? That the
most dedicated devotees of Hindutva were prepared to forgive 3,000 crimes
by the restitution of only three sites. Contrast this lackadaisical attitude
with two specimen of Muslim thinking.
Janab ZA Mansoorie, of the Jamaat-e-Islami
Hind has written to me as follows: "Islam forbids its believers to usurp
the place/structure of worship of the people of other faiths. There is strong
and permanent fatwa in this regard, that no namaz is acceptable to Allah unless
the mosque has been built by acquiring the piece of land legally. Otherwise,
Muslims should shun offering prayers. If, for some mosque, it is proved that
it was built violating Islamic injunctions, we Muslims have to withdraw..."
Sir Sikandar Hayaat Khan, the Prime Minister
of undivided Punjab, had opposed the Lahori Muslims' demand for the takeover
of Shahidganj gurudwara since originally this had been a masjid until the
advent of Ranjit Singh. He had stated that a Muslim takeover would set a dangerous
precedent for all those masjids across the country which were Hindu temples.
He especially mentioned the Quwattul Islam masjid next to Qutb Minar and Ajmer
Sharief.
