Does Hindu Temple Lie Beneath 16th Century Mosque

[Guest guest]

Last Updated: Monday, 24 March, 2003, 12:59 GMT

 

Ayodhya dig yields first reports

 

A court in northern India has received a first report on controversial excavations taking place at a holy site claimed by Hindus and Muslims.

 

Diggers have been working for two weeks

Details of the dig in the town of Ayodhya have not been made public since work started two weeks ago following a court order.

 

Archaeologists are trying to settle a row over whether the ruins of a Hindu temple lie beneath a 16th century mosque pulled down by Hindu zealots in 1992.

 

The destruction of the mosque sparked off religious riots across India in which more than 2,000 people died.

 

Hindus say the mosque was built on the ruins of a temple marking the birthplace of the Hindu God, Ram.

 

They want to build a new temple on the site.

 

Competing claims

 

The court has given no word yet on the archaeologists' report.

 

On Monday it heard an appeal from Muslims, who want digging at the site to be extended to include the core area of the site now occupied by a makeshift Hindu temple.

 

Some Indian historians have already raised doubts about the excavation, arguing that it could lead to more historical disputes.

 

Hindus are optimistic the dig will unearth evidence of temple ruins at Ayodhya.

 

Muslims warn the work could further complicate things.

 

Representatives from India's small Jain community have joined in the row, too, saying one of their ancient temples may also have existed in Ayodhya.

 

Some experts say there may also have been a Buddhist temple there.

 

Media ban

 

The 15-member Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) team is overseeing the excavations.

 

Nearly 80 labourers are involved in the dig.

 

Team members are banned from talking to reporters about their work.

 

Access to the site has been denied to the media.

 

The ASI has two weeks to complete its work.

[Guest guest]

 

The question is, how did people come to know there was a Rama temple in that location before the 16th century? Was it recorded somewhere or was it someone's wild speculation or even worse a political (BJP) rumor?

 

I wouldn't be suprised if it is one of the latter. Anyway, if the following report is to be believed, they have found nothing so far. Although they still have a month and a half to go, they are already asking for more time! One would have thought finding remains of a 16th century construction would be simple, especially since they have been allowed to dig anywhere and as deep as they wish.

 

http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/mar/26ayo.htm

 

It is also interesting that the Buddhists and the Jains have staked a claim to that place.

 

Cheers

 

[Enlightened 0]

Ofcourse the temple is there underneath the mosque in ayodhya. Look closely when you go to Ayodhya and squint your eyes when you look at the mosque, it seems to be a temple. However, it may be not be seen as a temple for one who is a hindu, but for a muslim it has been a worship site for their one and only god. To believe that it is not a worship site just because there is a difference in architecture and rituals conducted is just ignorance. Furthermore, what is Ayodhya? isnt it a place where Rama has born? then what is Your heart? isn't it where the same rama has born as the lord if you are a devotee.All the holy places in the whole wide world seem to be where ever we are regardless of our religion.

[Enlightened 0]

Dont you guys think that we are trying to hang on to the past? past is past, why dig a temple, if it results in people killing themselves over this piece of architecture