Story behind Ram Mandir in Ayodhya

 

Ayodhya Temple

Ayodhya Temple: A Saga of Faith, Conflict, and Justice

Ayodhya, a city in Uttar Pradesh, India, is revered by millions of Hindus as the birthplace of Lord Rama, the hero of the epic Ramayana. For centuries, Ayodhya has been a site of pilgrimage, worship, and cultural heritage. However, it has also been a site of dispute, violence, and controversy, as the history of the Ayodhya temple reveals.

The Ayodhya temple, also known as the Ram temple, is a Hindu temple dedicated to Lord Rama, which is being constructed at the Ram Janmabhoomi, or the place where Rama was born.

However, the temple’s construction has not been smooth or easy. It has been marred by legal battles, political interventions, communal clashes, and historical controversies. The temple’s history spans over five centuries, from the Mughal era to the present day, and involves multiple actors, events, and perspectives.

In this blog, I will attempt to trace the history of the Ayodhya temple, from its origins to its completion, and examine its religious, cultural, and political implications. I will use various sources, such as historical records, archaeological reports, court judgments, and media reports, to present a balanced and objective account of the temple’s saga.

The Mughal Period (1528-1857) 

The origin of the Ayodhya dispute can be traced back to the 16th century, when the Mughal empire ruled over most of India. According to the Hindu belief, a temple dedicated to Lord Rama existed at the Ram Janmabhoomi site since ancient times. However, in 1528, the Mughal emperor Babur allegedly demolished the temple and built a mosque, known as the Babri Masjid, in its place. 

The mosque was named after Babur, and had three domes and a large courtyard. It was used by Muslims for prayers, and was considered a waqf, or a religious endowment. However, some Hindus continued to claim that the mosque was built on the ruins of a temple, and that the site was sacred to them. They also claimed that a pillar inside the mosque bore an inscription that stated that the temple was built by a king named Vishnu Hari.

The conflict between the two communities over the site intensified during the British rule, which began in 1857. The British administration tried to maintain law and order by dividing the site into two parts: the inner courtyard, where the mosque stood, and the outer courtyard, where a platform, called the Ramchabutra, was erected for Hindu worship.

However, this arrangement did not satisfy either side, and several lawsuits and petitions were filed by both Hindus and Muslims, seeking exclusive rights and possession over the site. The first such suit was filed in 1885 by a Hindu priest, Mahant Raghubir Das, who sought permission to build a temple on the Ramchabutra. The suit was dismissed by the Faizabad district court, and the appeal was rejected by the Allahabad High Court.

The Post-Independence Period (1947-1992)

After India gained independence from the British in 1947, the Ayodhya dispute entered a new phase, marked by increased religious mobilization, political involvement, and violent incidents. In 1949, a major event took place, when some Hindu activists secretly placed idols of Rama and Sita inside the mosque, and claimed that they had miraculously appeared there.

This sparked a huge uproar among the Muslims, who protested and demanded the removal of the idols. The local administration, fearing communal riots, locked the gates of the mosque, and declared it a disputed site. However, it also allowed Hindu priests to perform daily rituals and worship the idols, while Muslims were barred from entering the mosque.

In 1950, a Hindu devotee, Gopal Singh Visharad, filed a suit in the Faizabad civil court, seeking the right to worship the idols without any obstruction. In 1959, another suit was filed by the Nirmohi Akhara, a Hindu sect, claiming to be the custodian of the site and seeking its management. In 1961, a suit was filed by the Sunni Central Waqf Board, a Muslim body, claiming that the mosque was a waqf property and seeking its possession.

These suits were pending for decades, while the dispute continued to simmer and occasionally erupt in violence. In 1984, a Hindu organization, called the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), launched a nationwide campaign to build a grand temple of Rama at the disputed site, and mobilized millions of Hindus to support the cause. In 1986, a local court ordered the opening of the gates of the mosque, and allowed Hindus to worship the idols. This decision was challenged by the Muslims, who appealed to the Allahabad High Court.

In 1989, the VHP performed a symbolic foundation-laying ceremony, called the Shilanyas, near the disputed site, and announced its plan to start the construction of the temple. The same year, another suit was filed by a Hindu group, representing the deities of Rama and Sita, claiming the entire site as their property. The Allahabad High Court ordered a status quo on the site, and clubbed all the pending suits together for a final verdict.

In 1990, the then Prime Minister of India, V.P. Singh, tried to resolve the dispute by holding negotiations between the VHP and the Babri Masjid Action Committee, a Muslim group. However, the talks failed, and the VHP intensified its agitation. The then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Mulayam Singh Yadav, deployed security forces to protect the mosque, and clashed with the VHP activists, resulting in several deaths and injuries.

In 1992, the then leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), L.K. Advani, undertook a nationwide Rath Yatra, or a chariot procession, to garner support for the temple movement. The BJP, which was a partner in the alliance government at the center, also supported the VHP’s demand for the temple. On December 6, 1992, a large crowd of Hindu activists, gathered at the site for a rally, demolished the mosque, and erected a makeshift temple in its place.

This act triggered widespread communal violence across the country, killing more than 2,000 people, and damaging the social fabric of the nation. The central government dismissed the BJP-led state government of Uttar Pradesh, and took over the administration of the site. The Allahabad High Court ordered a status quo on the site, and directed the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to conduct a survey to determine the history and nature of the site.

The Demolition of the Mosque (1992)

The origin of the Ayodhya dispute can be traced back to the 16th century, when the Mughal emperor Babur allegedly demolished a temple dedicated to Lord Rama and built a mosque, known as the Babri Masjid, in its place1 The mosque was used by Muslims for prayers, but some Hindus claimed that the site was sacred to them and that the mosque was built on the ruins of a temple. 

Babari mosque

 

The conflict between the two communities over the site intensified during the British rule and after India’s independence. In 1949, some Hindu activists secretly placed idols of Rama and Sita inside the mosque, and claimed that they had miraculously appeared there The local administration locked the gates of the mosque, and allowed Hindu priests to perform daily rituals and worship the idols, while Muslims were barred from entering the mosque.

In 1984, a Hindu organization, called the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), launched a nationwide campaign to build a grand temple of Rama at the disputed site, and mobilized millions of Hindus to support the cause. In 1986, a local court ordered the opening of the gates of the mosque, and allowed Hindus to worship the idols. This decision was challenged by the Muslims, who appealed to the Allahabad High Court.

 

In 1989, the VHP performed a symbolic foundation-laying ceremony, called the Shilanyas, near the disputed site, and announced its plan to start the construction of the temple. The same year, another suit was filed by a Hindu group, representing the deities of Rama and Sita, claiming the entire site as their property. The Allahabad High Court ordered a status quo on the site, and clubbed all the pending suits together for a final verdict.

 

In 1990, the then Prime Minister of India, V.P. Singh, tried to resolve the dispute by holding negotiations between the VHP and the Babri Masjid Action Committee, a Muslim group. However, the talks failed, and the VHP intensified its agitation. The then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Mulayam Singh Yadav, deployed security forces to protect the mosque, and clashed with the VHP activists, resulting in several deaths and injuries.

 

In 1992, the then leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), L.K. Advani, undertook a nationwide Rath Yatra, or a chariot procession, to garner support for the temple movement. The BJP, which was a partner in the coalition government at the centre, also supported the VHP’s demand for the temple. On December 6, 1992, a large crowd of Hindu activists, gathered at the site for a rally, demolished the mosque, and erected a makeshift temple in its place.

 

This act triggered widespread communal violence across the country, killing more than 2,000 people, and damaging the social fabric of the nation. The central government dismissed the BJP-led state government of Uttar Pradesh, and took over the administration of the site. The Allahabad High Court ordered a status quo on the site, and directed the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to conduct a survey to determine the history and nature of the site.

The Judicial Process (1992-2019)

The demolition of the mosque and its aftermath led to a prolonged and complex legal process, involving multiple courts, commissions, and committees. In 1993, the central government acquired 67 acres of land around the disputed site, and passed a law, called the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, to facilitate the settlement of the dispute. The law was challenged by several parties in the Supreme Court of India, which upheld its validity in 1994, but also stated that the status of the disputed site would be decided by the Allahabad High Court.

In 1998, the Allahabad High Court began the hearing of the title suits, and examined the evidence and arguments of the parties. In 2003, the ASI submitted its report, which stated that there was evidence of a massive structure beneath the mosque, which could be a Hindu temple. The report was contested by the Muslim parties, who alleged that it was biased and flawed.

In 2009, the Liberhan Commission, which was appointed by the central government in 1992 to investigate the demolition of the mosque, submitted its report, which indicted several BJP and VHP leaders for their role in the incident. The report also accused the state and central governments of failing to prevent the demolition and the subsequent violence. The report was criticized by the BJP and the VHP, who denied any involvement or responsibility.

In 2010, the Allahabad High Court delivered its verdict, which divided the disputed site into three parts: one-third to the deity of Rama, represented by the Hindu Mahasabha; one-third to the Sunni Central Waqf Board; and one-third to the Nirmohi Akhara. The court also declared that the site was the birthplace of Rama, and that the mosque was built after the demolition of a Hindu temple. The verdict was welcomed by some parties, but rejected by others, who appealed to the Supreme Court.

In 2011, the Supreme Court stayed the Allahabad High Court’s verdict, and admitted the appeals of the parties. In 2017, the Supreme Court suggested an out-of-court settlement through mediation, but the parties failed to reach a consensus. In 2019, the Supreme Court constituted a mediation panel, headed by former judge F.M.I. Kalifulla, to explore the possibility of an amicable resolution. The panel submitted its report, which stated that the parties had agreed to a settlement, but the details were not disclosed.

In 2019, the Supreme Court resumed the hearing of the appeals, and concluded the arguments in October. On November 9, 2019, the Supreme Court delivered its unanimous verdict, which overturned the Allahabad High Court’s verdict, and ruled that the entire disputed site belonged to the deity of Rama. The court also ordered the central government to form a trust to oversee the construction of the temple, and to allot an alternative 5-acre land to the Sunni Central Waqf Board for building a mosque. The court also invoked the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which prohibits the conversion of any place of worship, and declared that the Ayodhya verdict was not a precedent for any future disputes.

The verdict was hailed by the BJP and the VHP, who called it a historic and landmark judgment. The Sunni Central Waqf Board and the Nirmohi Akhara accepted the verdict, and expressed their willingness to cooperate with the trust. The Babri Masjid Action Committee and some Muslim groups expressed their dissatisfaction, but said they would respect the verdict. The verdict was also welcomed by several political parties, religious leaders, and civil society groups, who appealed for peace and harmony.

The Construction of the Temple (2019-2024)

The construction of the temple began in 2020, after the central government formed a trust, called the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra, to oversee the project. The trust was headed by Mahant Nritya Gopal Das, the chief priest of the makeshift temple, and comprised of 15 members, including representatives of the VHP, the Nirmohi Akhara, and the central and state governments. The trust also appointed a construction committee, headed by Nripendra Misra, a former principal secretary to Prime Minister Modi.

The trust acquired the 67 acres of land around the disputed site, and planned to build a temple complex, which would include a main temple, a museum, a library, a research centre, a guest house, and other facilities. The trust also launched a nationwide donation drive, which collected more than 30 billion rupees ($361 million) from the public. The trust also received donations of stones, bricks, sand, and other materials from various organizations and individuals.

The design of the temple was based on the model prepared by the VHP in 1989, which was modified and enlarged by the trust. The temple was designed by Chandrakant Sompura, a renowned architect, who had also designed the Somnath temple in Gujarat. The temple was to be built in the Nagara style of architecture, with pink sandstone from Rajasthan. The temple was to have three domes, five entrances, 360 pillars, and 212 sculptures. The temple was to be 161 feet high, 235 feet wide, and 300 feet long. The temple was to house the idols of Rama, Sita, Lakshmana, and Hanuman, which were worshipped at the makeshift temple.

Who is the architect of Ayodhya temple?

The architect of the Ayodhya temple is Chandrakant B Sompura, a renowned temple architect from Ahmedabad. He belongs to a family of temple architects, who have designed more than 200 temples across India.

Conclusion

The Ayodhya temple is not just a building, but a symbol of faith, identity, and history for millions of people. It is also a testament to the diversity, complexity, and resilience of India, which has faced many challenges and changes over the centuries. The temple’s construction is a long journey, which has involved legal, political, and social aspects. The temple’s completion is also an opportunity for reconciliation, harmony, and cooperation among the different communities, who share a common heritage and culture. I hope this blog has given you some insights and perspectives on the Ayodhya temple, and its significance for India and the world. 

JAI SHREE RAM 

Thank you for reading.