[The Supreme Court of India has delivered its verdict on the case concerning the land of the almost five-hundred-year-old Babri Masjid located in Ayodhya. In this verdict, the court has accepted the stance of the Hindus and rejected the position of the Muslims, ordering that the mosque be demolished and a temple be constructed in its place, while providing a separate site for the Muslims to build a mosque. Regarding this decision, when a question was posed to the esteemed teacher, Javed Ahmed Ghamidi, his response was summarized as follows.]
Commentary on this decision can only be made after a detailed study. It would be irresponsible to form an opinion about the decision without reading its reasoning. However, I would like to state a few fundamental points. You see, up until about one and a half to two hundred years ago, the world experienced an era of conquests. In those times, when conquerors seized a territory and made it part of their empire, they sometimes undertook oppressive measures such as demolishing historical and religious buildings or altering their structure or identity. Such actions have always been a dark chapter in human history. Islam has vehemently condemned them and has permitted jihad and combat to protect against such aggression. The importance of this issue is so extraordinary in the sight of Allah that He has declared the struggle against it with His own attribution. In Surah Al-Hajj, it is stated:
وَلَوۡلَا دَ فۡعُ اللّٰهِ النَّاسَ بَعۡضَهُمۡ بِبَـعۡضٍ لَّهُدِّمَتۡ صَوَامِعُ وَبِيَعٌ وَّصَلٰوتٌ وَّمَسٰجِدُ يُذۡكَرُ فِيۡهَا اسۡمُ اللّٰهِ كَثِيۡرًا
If God did not continue to drive away people through one another, monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques in which the name of God is abundantly taken all would have been destroyed.
(22:40)
In history, the matters of this nature that have occurred or about which such claims are made, have three possible scenarios:
One possibility is that a religious group claims that the building of a place of worship originally belonged to them and was demolished centuries ago by another religious group, which then converted it into their own place of worship. This claim might be accepted by the religious tradition of the group but cannot be historically substantiated.
Secondly, the claim that a place of worship was demolished and its religious identity was altered centuries ago should be historically proven. In other words, evidence should support this claim and historians should be in agreement regarding its origins.
Thirdly, there should also be claimants of the association and ownership of the place of worship, historical testimony should support them, and the building should remain in its original form.
There are several well-known examples of this third scenario. One example is the Kaaba, which according to the Abrahamic religious tradition was the center of monotheism, and whose own custodians had transformed it into a house of idols. The second example is the Mosque of Cordoba, which was converted into a church. The third example is Hagia Sophia, which was first converted into a mosque and later into a museum.
Wherever this third scenario exists, if the national government restores the place of worship to its original identity, it is a commendable action that should be praised in every respect. As for the first two scenarios, wherever they exist, the residents should accept the historical interactions that have taken place over centuries. Making such places contentious is akin to digging up old graves, which will result in nothing but chaos and discord. If this act was committed with any building centuries ago, it was wrong then, and if it is done with a building that has stood for centuries today, it will still be wrong. The reason for this is that when a place of worship that has stood for centuries is demolished to construct another place of worship, the emotions of the community that has developed a religious, cultural, and emotional attachment to it cannot be prevented from being agitated. This is an attempt to turn the wheel of history backward. If this tradition takes hold even once, it will become impossible to stop it, because perhaps there is hardly any region during the times of conquests where such actions were not taken or where such religious traditions did not develop among people. It is an unwise approach that cannot be used to govern the modern national state.
India is not the homeland of followers of a single religion. There are individuals from various communities numbering in the millions. There are large populations of Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, and Buddhists. The rulers of such a country must make decisions with careful consideration. The issue of the Babri Masjid is not simply that some people referred to a purported incident from four or five hundred years ago as a basis to approach the court, and the court ruled in their favor. The issue is that a mob arose and demolished a place of worship that had stood for centuries. The question is, what is the stance of the Indian government and courts on this criminal activity? Can such an activity be accepted in the contemporary national state?
What should have happened is that the intellectuals of India would train their nation to move forward by forgetting any incidents that might have occurred three or four hundred years ago. Their national leadership and decision-makers should also have demonstrated the same broad-mindedness. The case of the Shaheed Ganj Mosque in Lahore is no different. Historically, it is stated that this mosque was constructed during the era of Shah Jahan, and it was demolished during the reign of Maharaja Ranjit Singh and converted into a Gurdwara. Before the partition of India, Muslims attempted to restore it, resulting in the martyrdom of several Muslims. After the formation of Pakistan, it would not have been difficult to restore it as a mosque, but the leadership and the public relinquished their demands, thus permanently resolving the dispute. Consequently, to this day, a Gurdwara stands there instead of a mosque. The people of India should also demonstrate a similar attitude.
The demands of wisdom and knowledge suggest that if faced with the third situation mentioned, restoring a place of worship to its original identity is entirely appropriate and commendable. If nations, governments, or courts take such steps, we will salute them. Thus, if the mosque of Cordoba or Hagia Sophia is restored to their original state, it would be a highly admirable action. However, if a mosque, a temple, a church, a monastery, or any place of worship has been in existence for centuries, it should be accepted as a fact of reality, irrespective of its historical background. In the modern era’s multinational states, this is the path to peace and security.