Skip to main content

Consecration of Lord Ram’s idol: Which one? Baffling riddle of the temple at Ayodhya


By Shamsul Islam* 

According to the Supreme Court of India (Ayodhya Judgment dated November 9, 2019), “The exclusion of the Muslims from worship and possession took place on the intervening night between 22/23 December 1949 when the mosque was desecrated by the installation of Hindu idols.” [Supreme Court Ayodhya Judgment, pp. 921-22].
The idol of Ram Lalla (Ram as child) which was placed under the central dome of in the Babri Mosque (claimed to be the exact place where Ram took birth) was made of metal and was of nine inches tall. It was the idol which was worshipped that time onward and continued to be worshipped after demolition of the Babri Mosque on December 6, 1992 in the make-shift temple by Hindus.
However, on January 22, 2024 a 51-inch stone idol of Ram Lalla will be consecrated through a Brahmanical  ritual called as ‘pran-pratishtha’ (putting soul into an idol) ceremony ) in the newly built Ram Temple at Ayodhya.  “On January 22, 2024, PM Narendra Modi will perform the Pran Pratishtha ceremony under the guidance of Pandit Laxmikant Dixit along with other 121 Vedic Brahmins from across the country”, says a report.
Since, PM of a democratic-secular polity of India is conducting this ritual, not only worshippers of Ram but common Indians too have every right to ask what will happen to the deity which was worshipped as Ram. Digvijaya Singh, former chief minister of Madhya Pradesh, a practising Hindus has raised the same issue by asking: “Where is the idol of Ram Lalla over which the conflict happened? Why has the old idol not been consecrated?”
PM Modi must take the nation in confidence about the status of already consecrated idol of Ram. Will there be two consecrated idols in the Ram Temple or old idol will be deprived of ‘pran’ or soul? Is there going to be a ‘pran aparatishtha’ (depriving the idol of soul) ritual for the discarded idol?
Swami Dayanand Saraswati on idol Consecration
RSS and PM Modi glorify founder of Arya Samaj, Swami Dayanand Saraswati as barrage of the Hindu nation. It will be pertinent to know what Swami said about idol worship and consecration of idols. All those interested must read chapter 11 of his masterpiece, Satyarth Prakash (Light of Truth). In this book dealing with this issue he raised following issues which RSS and Modi must respond:
 “If as you say that the God comes into the image when invoked, why does not the idol show signs of consciousness and why does not the image also leave when the God is asked to depart? Whence does it come and here does it go? The fact of the matter is that the All-pervading Spirit can neither come into and idol, nor, leave it. If you mantras are efficacious that you can summon God, why can you not infuse life into your dead son by the force of the very same mantras? Again why can you not bide the soul depart from the body of your enemy?
“The soul is possessed of consciousness, while idol is dead and inert. Do you mean to say that the soul should also lose its consciousness and become lifeless like the idol? Idol worship is a fraud.
“Being All-pervading He cannot be imagined to exist in any particular object only. To hold to the contrary would be tantamount to believing that the sovereign Lord of the earth rules over a small cottage to the exclusion of His whole Empire and would be an insult to Him. In like manner, it is a blasphemy against God to imagine Him as existing in one particular object only… If as you say that the God comes into the image when invoked, why does not the idol show signs of consciousness and why does not the image also leave when the God is asked to depart? Whence does it come and here does it go? The fact of the matter is that the All-pervading Spirit can neither come into and idol, nor, leave it. If you mantras are efficacious that you can summon God, why can you not infuse life into your dead son by the force of the very same mantras? Again why can you not bide the soul depart from the body of your enemy?
“There is not a single verse in the Vedas to sanction invocation of the Deity and vitalization of the idol, likewise there is nothing to indicate that it is right to invoke idols, to bathe them, to install them in temples and apply sandal paste to them.
"The formless Supreme Spirit that pervades the universe can have no material representation, likeness or image." Yajur Veda, 32: 3.”

Destruction of Ram Temple by Muslims: A fact not known even to Goswami Tulsidas who lived during those times 

It is no ordinary religious inauguration of a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya to be slated for January 22, 2024. It has clear political and polarizing agenda attached to it. Underling this character of the inauguration PM Modi declared that “Ram Bhakts have waited for 550 years” to see it happen.
It is not only in India but almost 60 foreign countries where Hindutva organizations are active amongst Hindus; the January 22 is to be celebrated because “After 500 years of struggle by Hindus, Bhagwan Shri Ram Mandir is being inaugurated.” The thrust of the celebration programmes is that Ram Temple at Ayodhya is finally built after being destroyed by Muslims 500 hundred years back. It has been 500 year long struggle to see it happen
Such claims by Indian PM and his Hindutva co-fellows in the world are only spreading hatred against Muslims thus contributing to the Islamophobic narrative in India and abroad. Sadly, such statements are not only are in contempt of the Supreme Court Judgment on Ayodhya but also contradict ‘Hindu’ narrative of history. 
It may be interesting to note that RSS archives have no document to prove that during the British rule since its inception in 1925 ever demanded building of Ram Temple in Ayodhya. 
Supreme Court in its 1039 pages long judgment did not admit that Babri Mosque was built on the ruins of any Ram Temple. It is sad that while religious poison is being spread openly the Supreme Court remain a mute spectator while its findings are being mis-reported. 
So far as the ‘Hindu’ narrative is concerned there is no mention of it in the writings of the most prominent worshipper of Ram to date, Goswami Tulsidas who lived between 1511-1623. He was the person who penned the Epic, Ramcharitmanas in Avadhi language which angered the local Brahmins as the story of Ram was not written in Sanskrit. This was the work which mesmerized Hindus of India with the story of Lord Ram and the latter became house-hold deity of every Hindu home, specially in northern India. He penned his above mentioned work during 1575-76. According to the Hindutva version Ram birth-place temple was destroyed during 1538-1539. Thus Ramcharitmanas written almost 37 years after the so-called destruction of Ram birth-place temple should have mentioned this destruction. But it did not mention it.
Are Hindutva zealots trying to say that the greatest story-teller and worshipper of Ram and his Court (Darbar), Tulsidas, did not speak truth in his historic work? Is not it an attempt to question the credibility of Goswami Tulsidas? Are the Hindutva zealots trying to say that Goswami Tulsidas kept mum on the issue of the destruction of a temple at Ram's birth-place due to some ulterior motives?

Ramzade versus Babarzade

The inauguration of Ram Temple is blatantly being used to denigrate Indian Muslims. The building of the Temple is the defeat of ‘Babarzade’ (children of Babar) by ‘Ramzade’ (children of Ram).  It is pertinent to know about the nature of ‘Muslim’ rule in India. The Hindutva zealots demanding Muslim-free India must know that all ‘Muslim’ rulers survived due to the Hindu high Castes joining the ‘Muslim’ rulers in running their empires. How solid this unity was can be gauged by the fact that after Akbar no Mughal emperor was born of a Muslim mother. Moreover, Hindu high Castes provided brain and muscles to the ‘Muslim’ rulers faithfully. Likewise, Mughal rule established by Babar who was invited by a section of Hindu kings to seize India was the rule of Hindu high Castes also.
Aurobindo Ghose who played prominent role in providing Hindu foundation to the Indian nationalism confessed that Mughal rule continued for over a century due to the fact that Mughal rulers gave Hindus, “positions of power and responsibility, used their brain and arm to preserve” their kingdom. [Cited in Chand, Tara, "History of the Freedom Movement in India", vol. 3, Publication Division Government of India, Delhi, 1992, p. 162.]
Renowned historian Tara Chand relying on the primary source material of the medieval period concluded that the from the end of 16th century to the middle of 19th century, “it may reasonably be concluded that in the whole of India, excepting the western Punjab, superior rights in land had come to vest in the hands of Hindus” most of whom happened to be Rajputs. [Chand, Tara, "History of the Freedom Movement in India", vol. 1, Publication Division  Government of India, Delhi, 1961, p. 124.]
The contemporary records prove that Aurangzeb rule was also the rule of Rajputs and Kshatriyas [members of the two of the four Hindu Castes in order of precedence after Brahmins]. Aurangzeb never faced Shivaji in the battle-field. It was his commander-in-chief, a Rajput ruler of Amer (Rajasthan), Jay Singh I (1611–1667) who was sent to subjugate Shivaji (1603-1680). Jay Singh II (1681-1743), (nephew of Jay Singh I) was other prominent Rajput commander of the Mughal forces who served Aurangzeb. He was conferred the title of ‘Sawai' [one and a quarter times superior to his contemporaries] chief by Aurangzeb in 1699 and thus came to be known as Maharaja Sawai Jai Singh. He was also given the title of Mirza Raja [a Persian title for a royal prince] by Aurangzeb. The other titles bestowed on him by other Mughal rulers were ‘Sarmad-i-Rajaha-i-Hind’ [eternal ruler of India], ‘Raj Rajeshvar’ [lord of kings] and ‘Shri Shantanu ji’ [wholesome king]. These titles are displayed by his descendants even today. This Rajput chief also gave his daughter in marriage to the son of Aurangzeb who became Mughal emperor after Aurangzeb. [click here and here]
Rajput commanders fighting for Aurangzeb was no exception. Akbar’s battles against Rana Pratap were led by one of his brother-in-law, Maan Singh. Maasir al-Umara a biographical dictionary of the officers in the Mughal Empire beginning from 1556 to 1780 [Akbar to Shah Alam] is regarded as the most authentic record of the high rank officials employed by the Mughal kings. According to it Mughal rulers during this period employed around 100 (out of 365) Hindu high-ranking officials most of them being “Rajputs from Rajputana, the midlands, Bundelkhand and Maharashtra”. Brahmins followed Rajputs in manning the Mughal administration so far as the number was concerned. [Khan, Shah Nawaz, Abdul Hai, Maasir al-Umara (translated by H Beveridge as Mathir-ul-Umra), volumes 1& 2, Janaki Prakashan, Patna, 1979.] Interestingly, Kashi Nagri Pracharini Sabha [established in 1893] “committed to the cause of Hindi as official language” published Hindi translation of this book in 1931.
Another crucial fact which is consciously kept under wrap is that despite more than 500 hundreds of effective ‘Muslim’ rule which according to Hindutva historians was nothing but a project of annihilating Hindus or forcibly converting the latter to Islam, India remained a nation with an absolute Hindu majority. The British rulers held first census in 1871-72. It was the time when even ceremonial ‘Muslim’ rule was over. According to the Census report: “The population of British India is, in round numbers, divided into 140½ million [sic] of Hindoos (including Sikhs), or 73½ per cent., 40¾ millions of Mahomedans, or 21½ per cent. [Memorandum on the Census Of British India of 1871-72: Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty London, George Edward Eyre and William Spottiswoode, Her Majesty's Stationary Office 1875, p. 16.]

A poem by Iqbal, a Babarzada eulogizing Ram

The inauguration of Ram Temple at Ayodhya is being aggressively used to declare Muslims and enemy of Ram. This kind of pervert Hindutva mind-set has little knowledge of India’s past. Mohammad Iqbal penned one of the greatest poems in praise of Ram in Urdu which was titled “Imam-e-Hind” (spiritual leader of India). 
Hai Raam ke wajood pe Hindustaan ko naaz
Ahl-e-Nazar samajhte hain us ko Imam-e-Hind
(India is proud of the existence of Ram
Spiritual people consider him prelate of India)
It is quite evident that he does not believe that Ram is leader of Hindus alone, otherwise he would have used the word Ahl-e-Hind (people of India) rather than Ahl-e-Nazar (people with vision). For him, the status of Lord Ram as a spiritual leader is not limited to the Vaishnavas or Hindus only. Lord Ram lives in the ethos of India and its people.
Talwar ka dhani tha, shujaat mai fard tha
Paakeegi mai, josh-e-muhabbat mai fard tha
(He was expert in sword craft, was unique in bravery
Was matchless in piety and in the enthusiasm of love)
Iqbal saw in Ram a perfect role model for the national movement. He is brave, and can fight wars against any wrong. 
Iqbal, accords Ram not only the status of philosophical fountain head of India but of the world. 
Sab falsafi hain khita-e-maghrib ke Ram-e-Hind
(All philosophers of the west would have acknowledged India and are fan of Ram). 
Deepavali for Ram or PM Modi
Deepavali (Festival of Lights) is the most popular Hindu festival in most parts of India. Deepavli is the celebration of Ram’s return to his kingdom with wife Sita and his brother Lakshman after defeating Ravan of Lanka. It is celebrated as victory of truth over evil. 
Now Deepavli for Ram has a competitor which can be named as PM Modi’s Deepavli. Modi declared this plan during a roadshow in Ayodhya on December 31, 2023. According to him, “The whole world is waiting for the historic moment. With folded hands, I am requesting 140 crore people of the country that on January 22, when the consecration of Ramlalla’s idol takes place, light the Ram Jyoti in your house and celebrate Deepawali. The entire country should sparkle with lights on the evening of January 22.” 
Thus Deepavali for Ram is being substituted by Deepavali for PM Modi when he appears in the attire of a rishi or Brahmin saint to put soul into the life-less idol of Ram. Interestingly, the Hindutva zealots have taken this call very seriously by calling Hindus to celebrate January 22 as Maha-Deepavali (Great Deepavali); Deepavali for Ram and Maha-Deepavali  for PM Modi!

Whose Ram? Common people banned from participating in Consecration Ceremony

Ram is known for protecting his people; uphold righteousness, compassion and kindness. Ram is equated with common women/men. His rule is described as Ram Rajya or a rule for the benefit of common people. According to Gandhi it essentially meant, “The land of dharma and a realm of peace, harmony and happiness for young and old, high and low, all creatures and the earth itself, in recognition of a shared universal consciousness.”
However, these are common Hindus who will not be allowed to join the ceremony on January 22nd. It was made clear by none other than PM Modi who asked common worshippers of Ram not to crowd Ayodhya on January 22. He told them to come later at their convenience because “this time the navya, bhavya, divya (new, grand, divine) temple in Ayodhya is not going anywhere and ‘darshan’ will be available for centuries”.
Sadly, PM Modi did not ask the rich, film actors, industrialists, leading sports persons to come later. In fact, 22nd celebration participation was restricted to a galaxy of Very-Very-Very Important Persons. PM Modi overlooked the fact that the first invites should have gone to those poor worshippers of Ram who despite miserable life had contributed to the coffers of VHP for building Ram Temple. It may be relevant here to know that many of the invitees are not only meat-eaters but have been fond of beef.
Supreme Court Ayodhya judgment: Trickery over-rides justice
The Supreme Court of India has directly helped the VHP and PM Modi in becoming the only franchisees of Ayodhya Ram Temple project. The highest court of justice in India corroborated two important facts.
1. “The exclusion of the Muslims from worship and possession took place on the intervening night between 22/23 December 1949 when the mosque was desecrated by the installation of Hindu idols. The ouster of the Muslims on that occasion was not through any lawful authority but through an act which was calculated to deprive them of their place of worship.” [Supreme Court Judgment pp. 921-22] 
2. “On 6 December 1992, the structure of the mosque was brought down and the mosque was destroyed. The destruction of the mosque took place in breach of the order of status quo and an assurance given to this Court. The destruction of the mosque and the obliteration of the Islamic structure was an egregious violation of the rule of law.” [Supreme Court Judgment pp. 913-14] 
The Judgment also nowhere mentioned that Babri Mosque was built after destroying a Ram Temple in the past. Despite these findings which talked of “[The] egregious violation of the rule of law” and done not by a “lawful authority but through an act which was calculated to deprive them of their place of worship”, Supreme Court took a U turn handing over the site for Ram Temple building to the same group of Hindutva organization who had conspired in both the cases. Supreme Court to ensure that no Hindu competitor of RSS-VHP is allowed any participation in latter’s Ram Temple project disallowed claim of Nirmohi Akhada, the original claimant of Ram Temple at the site of Babri Mosque.  [Supreme Court Judgment p. 925].  
It was apolitical judgment was made clear by the current Chief Justice of India, D Y Chandrachud (who was one of the Justices in the Bench which gave unanimous judgment for building Ram Temple) when he stated: “The case has a long history of conflict, of diverse viewpoints based on the history of the nation and all those who were part of the bench decided that this will be a judgment of the court.” His above statement was, in fact, re-phrasing of propaganda material by Hindutva organizations. This Judgment legitimized the criminal acts of the Hindutva zealots; what Hindutva goons could not achieve on December 22-23, 1949 and December 6, 1992 was got delivered to RSS through this Judgment! 

Conclusion

Today Ayodhya is being presented as a case of perpetual war of Hindus against Muslims. There cannot be a shoddier lie than this. During India’s War of Independence 1857 Ayodhya it was the same Ayodhya where Maulvis and Mahants and common Hindu-Muslims stood united in rebelling against the British rule and kissed the hangman’s noose together. Maulana Ameer Ali was a famous Maulvi of Ayodhya and when Ayodhya’s well-known Hanuman Garhi’s (Hanuman Temple) priest Baba Ramcharan Das took lead in organizing the armed resistance to the British rule, Maulana also joined the revolutionary army. In one battle with the British and their stooges, both of them were captured and hanged together on a tamarind tree at the Kuber Teela (razed for the new temple) in Ayodhya.
This region also produced two more great friends, belonging to different religions that made life hell for the British sponsored armies. Acchhan Khan and Shambhu Prasad Shukla were two such friends who lead the army of Raja Devibaksh Singh in the district of Faizabad. Both of them were able to defeat the Firangee army in many battles, inflicting heavy losses on them. It was due to the treachery again that they were captured. In order to desist anyone from such companionships between Hindus and Muslims both these friends were publicly inflicted prolonged torture and their heads were cruelly filed off.
The Hindutva rulers of India led by PM Modi must understand that existence of Indian democratic-secular polity must not be sacrificed for securing victory for ruling India for 5 more years.  
----
*Formerly with Delhi University, click here for some of Prof S. Islam's writings in  and video interviews/debates. Facebook: https://facebook.com/shamsul.islam.332. X: @shamsforjustice. Blog: http://shamsforpeace.blogspot.com/

Comments

TRENDING

'Flawed' argument: Gandhi had minimal role, naval mutinies alone led to Independence

Counterview Desk Reacting to a Counterview  story , "Rewiring history? Bose, not Gandhi, was real Father of Nation: British PM Attlee 'cited'" (January 26, 2016), an avid reader has forwarded  reaction  in the form of a  link , which carries the article "Did Atlee say Gandhi had minimal role in Independence? #FactCheck", published in the site satyagrahis.in. The satyagraha.in article seeks to debunk the view, reported in the Counterview story, taken by retired army officer GD Bakshi in his book, “Bose: An Indian Samurai”, which claims that Gandhiji had a minimal role to play in India's freedom struggle, and that it was Netaji who played the crucial role. We reproduce the satyagraha.in article here. Text: Nowadays it is said by many MK Gandhi critics that Clement Atlee made a statement in which he said Gandhi has ‘minimal’ role in India's independence and gave credit to naval mutinies and with this statement, they concluded the whole freedom struggle.

BSF should take full responsibility for death of 4 kids in West Bengal: Rights defender

By Kirity Roy*  One is deeply disturbed and appalled by the callous trench-digging by BSF in Chetnagachh village under Daspara Gram Panchayat, Chopra, North Dinajpur District, West Bengal that has claimed the lives of four children. Along the entire stretch of Indo-Bangladesh border of West Bengal instead of guarding the actual border delineated by the international border pillars, BSF builds fences and digs trenches well inside the Indian territory, passing through villages and encroaching on private lands, often without due clearance or consent. 

A Hindu alternative to Valentine's Day? 'Shiv-Parvati was first love marriage in Universe'

By Rajiv Shah*   The other day, I was searching on Google a quote on Maha Shivratri which I wanted to send to someone, a confirmed Shiv Bhakt, quite close to me -- with an underlying message to act positively instead of being negative. On top of the search, I chanced upon an article in, imagine!, a Nashik Corporation site which offered me something very unusual. 

How GMOs would destroy non-GMO crops: Aruna Rodrigues' key submissions in SC

Counterview Desk The introduction of Bt and HT crops will harm the health of 1 billion Indians and their animals, believes Aruna Rodrigues, who has made some 60 submissions to the Supreme Court (SC) during the last 20 years. As lead petitioner who filed Public Interest Litigation in 2005, during a spate of intense hearings, which ended on 18 January 2024, she fought in the Apex Court to prevent the commercialization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Indian agriculture. 

Social justice day amidst 'official neglect' of salt pan workers in Little Rann of Kutch

By Prerana Pamkar*  In India’s struggle for Independence, the Salt Satyagraha stands as a landmark movement and a powerful symbol of nonviolent resistance. Led by Mahatma Gandhi, countless determined citizens walked from Sabarmati Ashram to Dandi in Gujarat. However, the Gujarat which witnessed the power of the common Indian during the freedom struggle is now in the throes of another significant movement: this time it is seeking to free salt pan workers from untenable working conditions in the Little Rann of Kutch (LRK).

Jallianwala massacre: Why Indian govt hasn't ever officially sought apology from UK

By Manjari Chatterjee Miller*  The king of the Netherlands, Willem-Alexander, apologized in July 2023 for his ancestors’ role in the colonial slave trade. He is not alone in expressing remorse for past wrongs. In 2021, France returned 26 works of art seized by French colonial soldiers in Africa – the largest restitution France has ever made to a former colony. In the same year, Germany officially apologized for its 1904-08 genocide of the Herero and Nama people of Namibia and agreed to fund reconstruction and development projects in Namibia. .

Corporatizing Indian agriculture 'to enhance' farmer efficiency, market competitiveness

By Shashank Shukla*  Today, amidst the ongoing farmers' protest, one of the key demands raised is for India to withdraw from the World Trade Organization (WTO). Let us delve into the feasibility of such a move and explore its historical context within India's globalization trajectory.

Interpreting UAPA bail provisions: Is Supreme Court setting the clock back?

By Kavita Srivastava*, Dr V Suresh** The Supreme Court in its ruling on 7th February, 2024 in   `Gurvinder Singh v State of Punjab’ held that its own well-developed jurisprudence that "Bail is the rule and jail the exception" will not apply to those charged under the UAPA.

A 'distorted narrative' of Indian politics: Congress failing to look beyond LS polls

By Prem Singh*  About 15 days ago, I told a senior journalist friend that there are not even two   months left for the Lok Sabha elections, Rahul Gandhi is roaming around on a delectation (tafreeh). The friend probably found my comment exasperating and replied that he is not on a delectation trip. The conversation between us on this topic ended there. 

Livelihood issues return to national agenda ahead of LS polls: SKM on Bharat Bandh

Counterview Desk  Top farmers' network, the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) has claimed big success of Grameen Bharat Bandh and industrial /sectoral strikes, stating, the “struggle reflected anger of farmers, workers and rural people across India”, adding, the move on February 16 succeeded in bringing back peoples’ livelihood issues in the national agenda just ahead of the general election to the Lok Sabha.