Ayodhya title dispute: ‘Nothing but temple can be built there, way to be found is how,’ says Uma Bha

www.mangaloretoday.com

Mar 9, 2019 - Union minister and senior BJP leader Uma Bharti, a prominent face of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, welcomes the Supreme Court decision on mediation, but says that only a Ram temple can be constructed at the site. Excerpts from an interview to The Indian Express:

 

 

Do you think the Supreme Court’s move for mediation will find a solution to the dispute?

It is clear the Supreme Court is very keen to sort it out. It is a good thing. The appointed mediators should keep in mind — I am not questioning them, they are appointed by the court — that nothing can be constructed there except the temple. Because the court itself had accepted that the centre of that structure is Ram Janmabhoomi, the birthplace of Ram Lalla. We must remember that one party in this dispute itself is Ram Lalla Viraajman. The way to be found is how to construct a temple there. Except the temple, nothing can be constructed.

Are you saying the mediation process should be only on how to construct the temple?

I am no one to give them advice or guidelines. This is my right to say this, a right I inherited from my ancestors and which will be transferred to future generations, that it is the birthplace of Lord Ram and we want to see a temple there. When I went to Italy, I visited the Vatican to see the Pope. I go to Ajmer Dargah also. I cannot go to Mecca. If somebody says there should be a temple in Mecca Medina, I will oppose it. I will oppose if someone wants to build a masjid in Vatican city. I want a similar stand from Muslims and Christians for my demand for a temple in Ayodhya, and nothing else can be built there. There should be a national consensus for this. This country is secular — there are masjids in Faizabad, Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh and across India. But that site is special, it is the birthplace of Lord Ram. The court has proved it. I am a person who is facing trial in my fight for this.

Do you think that processes like mediation efforts would further delay temple construction, as some say?

Although Left journalists used to ridicule our faith, saying Ram is a mythological character and that there is no birth certificate etc, there was a long fight. After long years of fight, Hindus got together to own the place after Independence. Jawaharlal Nehru spoiled it for appeasement politics. It was very easy to sort it out in 1949, but he did not. When the court said in 2010 that the site was Ram Lalla’s birthplace, I was very happy. I felt a fight of 500 years had achieved its mission. Now the question is only how to construct the temple.


Union minister and senior BJP leader Uma Bharti, a prominent face of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, welcomes the Supreme Court decision on mediation, but says that only a Ram temple can be constructed at the site. Excerpts from an interview to The Indian Express:

Do you think the Supreme Court’s move for mediation will find a solution to the dispute?

It is clear the Supreme Court is very keen to sort it out. It is a good thing. The appointed mediators should keep in mind — I am not questioning them, they are appointed by the court — that nothing can be constructed there except the temple. Because the court itself had accepted that the centre of that structure is Ram Janmabhoomi, the birthplace of Ram Lalla. We must remember that one party in this dispute itself is Ram Lalla Viraajman. The way to be found is how to construct a temple there. Except the temple, nothing can be constructed.

Are you saying the mediation process should be only on how to construct the temple?

I am no one to give them advice or guidelines. This is my right to say this, a right I inherited from my ancestors and which will be transferred to future generations, that it is the birthplace of Lord Ram and we want to see a temple there. When I went to Italy, I visited the Vatican to see the Pope. I go to Ajmer Dargah also. I cannot go to Mecca. If somebody says there should be a temple in Mecca Medina, I will oppose it. I will oppose if someone wants to build a masjid in Vatican city. I want a similar stand from Muslims and Christians for my demand for a temple in Ayodhya, and nothing else can be built there. There should be a national consensus for this. This country is secular — there are masjids in Faizabad, Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh and across India. But that site is special, it is the birthplace of Lord Ram. The court has proved it. I am a person who is facing trial in my fight for this.

Do you think that processes like mediation efforts would further delay temple construction, as some say?

Although Left journalists used to ridicule our faith, saying Ram is a mythological character and that there is no birth certificate etc, there was a long fight. After long years of fight, Hindus got together to own the place after Independence. Jawaharlal Nehru spoiled it for appeasement politics. It was very easy to sort it out in 1949, but he did not. When the court said in 2010 that the site was Ram Lalla’s birthplace, I was very happy. I felt a fight of 500 years had achieved its mission. Now the question is only how to construct the temple.

courtesy - Yahoo