The Hindu : Muslim Board rejects Ayodhya formula, VHP defiant

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Monday, Mar 11, 2002

Front Page

Front Page

Muslim Board rejects Ayodhya formula, VHP defiant
By Javed M. Ansari and Neena Vyas

Members of the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board during a meeting on the Ayodhya issue in New Delhi on Sunday. - Photo: Anu Pushkarna

NEW DELHI, MARCH 10. The Kanchi Sankaracharya, Jayendra Saraswati's ``formula'' for resolving the Ayodhya tangle appeared to be in tatters today with the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board expressing its ``inability to accept'' it on the ground that it was ``incomplete and inchoate'' and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad giving notice to the Government and the Supreme Court that there would be trouble if any attempt was made to prevent `bhoomi/ shila puja' on the acquired land in Ayodhya on March 15.

After a day-long meeting, the Board gave its decision. It objected to the proposed `bhoomi puja' at Ayodhya, called on the Government to enforce the judgment of the Supreme Court and take ``adequate steps to prohibit any symbolic kar seva or puja on the acquired land.''

But the AIMPLB said though it could not accept the present formula of the Sankaracharya, it was open to ``fresh proposals.'' The archarya's proposals were at best a ``workable agreement but do not offer a solution to the problem in its entirety.'' In short, they had said nothing about rebuilding a mosque although they offered 42 acres of acquired land to the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas for starting construction of a Ram temple.

The VHP general secretary, Praveen Togadia, went on the offensive soon after the Board's decision became known. There was also a veiled warning of a backlash _ ``agar Musalmaan

avivadit bhoomi par mandir banane mein rok lagate hain aur apni tang adate hain to weh Hinduon ki bhavna se khel rahe hain'' (if Muslims come in the way of a temple being constructed on the undisputed, acquired land in Ayodhya, they are playing with the feelings of Hindus), he said at a press conference.

Warning of a countrywide agitation, of turning every Indian village, district and town into an Ayodhya, he said a ``Hindu movement'' would be launched in which ``crores of people will participate.''

Another signal came when he said ``the VHP has never withdrawn any of its announced programmes... the `shila puja' will be held on the pre-determined place at exactly 2.15 p.m. on March 15.'' And ``we are certain we will get the permission.''

The Muslim Personal Law Board listed the grounds on which it was unable to accept the Sankaracharya formula. Its statement made it clear that it could not accept the proposal in the absence of altered temple construction plans (to exclude the sanctum sanctorum on the disputed site of the demolished Babri Masjid), and a written commitment from the VHP, the RSS and other affiliate organisations of the Sangh Parivar such as the Bajrang Dal. It also cited the absence of an assurance that in the event of the Muslims winning the title suit, the temple construction plan would be amended to shift the sanctum sanctorum and that they would be allowed to build the mosque on the site without any obstruction.

The Board also did not seem to place too much faith in the VHP's reported assurance of building a wall around the disputed site in view of its plans to go ahead with its mobilisation and agitational programme. The Board felt that the Sankaracharya's proposal offered little to the Muslims. While the proposal ensured the commencement of temple construction with ``immediate effect,'' the Muslims were being asked to wait for the final judicial verdict. ``A solution to the dispute is not possible in a piecemeal manner, it must be resolved in a holistic manner so that a construction of the mosque is also not delayed,'' the statement said.

Today's meeting of the executive committee of the AIMPLB was held at the Jamia Hamdard Convention Hall, and attended by nearly 70 members. It was not entirely a smooth affair. In its bid to rope in different shades of Muslim opinion, the Board had also extended invitations to the Imams of Jama Masjid and the Fatehpuri mosque, as well as the former MP, Meem Afzal. Significantly, all three stayed away from the meeting.

The discussion focussed on the issue of the Babri Masjid with most members making it clear that there was no question of relenting on the basic demand of building the mosque at the site from where it was demolished provided the courts ruled in their favour. Also, they were opposed to any ``symbolic puja'' on the Government-controlled, acquired land in Ayodhya. The former MP, Syed Shahbuddin, G.M. Banatwala and Zafaryab Jilani were of the view that as far as the court was concerned, there was no distinction between disputed and undisputed area. ``Not a brick can be moved without the permission of the courts'' said Mr. Shahbuddin.

`I did my best'

KANCHEEPURAM, MARCH 10. The Kanchi Sankaracharya, Jayendra Saraswati, today remained silent when asked to react to the rejection of his formula by the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board. He told reporters that he had ``done his best.''

It was now up to those at the negotiating table to sort out the issue. Asked about the contents of the letter in which he had put forward the proposal to the Board, the acharya said the issue involved many legal aspects. He had instructed others not to speak about it and it would not be fair for him to comment on it.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Front Page

Stories in this Section

Muslim Board rejects Ayodhya formula, VHP defiant

Govt. still hopeful of solution

We won't accept court verdict: Nyas

'Pak. must address India's concerns'

CEC rules out early polls in J&K

West Bengal police, VHP activists clash

One stabbed in Gujarat

Retirement sought

Vikas in U.P. police custody

Arafat's office destroyed

Inflation slides