Press release from the ALL INDIA CONFEDERATION OF SC/ST ORGANISATIONS
Neither Hindus nor Muslims are entitled to the disputed land at Ayodhya. SLP filed in Supreme Court claming the title for the Buddhists.
New Delhi, 7th January, 2011
Dr. Udit Raj, Chairman of Buddha Education Foundation and the All India Confederation of SC/ST Organisations, told the press that Special Leave Petition (SLP) no. DC 466/2011 has been filed in the Supreme Court against the judgment of Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench in the much disputed matter of Ayodhya.
Prof. Ravi Verma Kumar – Senior Advocate, Nitin Meshram – Junior Advocate and E.C. Vidyasagar – Advocate on Record are the team which is defending the matter in Supreme Court. Shri Sangh Priya Gautam, Advocate – Former Union Minister is extending full cooperation in this matter.
The High Court had dismissed our petition in 2003 saying that relief was not sought against any of the parties in the suit. The Buddhists in India now challenge the legality and constitutionality of impugned judgment delivered on 30.9.2010. Not only disputed land but construction before the existence of Babri Mosque belong to Bauddh Vihar. Justice Sudhir Aggarwal held that Kasauti Pillars of disputed structure, strongly resemble Buddhists pillars of those seen at Varanasi (page no. 4690 of Volume 19). Justice S. U. Khan held that Carnegy has mentioned that the Kasauti Pillars, which were used in the construction of mosque, strongly resembled Buddhist Pillars which he had seen at Banaras. Accordingly, it is also possible that they were also ruins of some Buddhist religious place on and around the land on which the mosque was constructed and some material thereof was used in the construction of mosque (page no. 246). It is worthwhile to mention that P. Carnegy, was an officiating commissioner and Settlement Officer of Faizabad District as well as a British archaeologist. He found that the Kasauti pillars of disputed structure had a strong resemblance with the Bauddh Vihar of Sarnath, Varanasi. He submitted this report in 1870.
Dr. Udit Raj said that Buddhists are the necessary parties wherever history and culture are concerned. Prof. Wilson observed that the Chinese traveler Hwen Thsang found no less than 20 Buddhist monasteries with 3000 monks at Ajudhia in the 7th century. Fa-hein, another great Chinese traveler, recorded in Chinese language which was later translated into English, found that king Prasenjeet, the ruler of Kosal (also known as Ayodhya) was an ardent follower of Buddha.The Archeological Survey of India submitted its report in 2003 and found that there is circular shrine beneath the disputed structure. After this, the Allahabad High Court ordered for further collection of evidences but, so far, it has not been done. It is most likely that this shrine is of Buddhists. It says that 50 pillar bases in association of huge structure are indicative of remains which are distinctive features found associated with temples of North India. This itself supports that it could be a Buddhist place because temples of North India connotes to Hindus, Jain and Buddhists as well. Objecting to the finding of ASI, the Sunni Central Board of Waqfs – plaintiff number 1 O.O.S. No. 4 of 1989 said that the short report on inscription one of which is in Nagari, and are in Arabic, show how casual and preconceived in its notion was the ASI. The first is not to be dated with any certitude to the 11th century : its time range could be 7th-12th centuries, and it could be a Pali record of Buddhist provenance —- a piece of evidence negativing the presence of Hindu temple.
In the whole litigation, Hindus have not been in a position to prove that Lord Rama was born here. At the most, they have evidence that the idol was placed stealthily on 22nd and 23rd December, 1949. Thus, there is no historical and archeological evidence in their support. Similarly, Muslims have also failed to name the organisation and person who built the Babri Mosque. On the basis of mere prayer offered there, they are claiming the title of the land. The Babri Mosque structure does not resemble the mosques spread over the country including the mosques built by Babar. This Babri Mosque lacks in vazoo and minarettes. The Allahabad High Court has wrongly given land to Hindus, Muslims and Nirmohi Akhara.
On the basis of above facts, Buddhists and Ambedkarites are the real claimants of this land. The Supreme Court has been urged to decide the matter on the basis of Constitution and the rule of law. And if it happens, this communal dispute will be settled forever.
(B. Mandal) Media Incharge
KAFILA - COLLECTIVE EXPLORATIONS SINCE 2006 
now waiting for the Christians, Jains, Sikhs to come forward and lay claim. By the way, i’m Buddhist.
LikeLike
being an atheist, i like your sense of humour—yes, why not have a religious disco club for all believers who love to dance to hip-hop, reggae, hard rock etc.
on a serious note, the writer has shown complete ignorance about the architectural elements of mosques.
please consult—islam: art and architecture edited by markus hattstein and peter delius. this work is unsurpassable in its analytical depth,scope, and clarity.
LikeLike
Not clear from the above if the SLP argues that there was demolition of the Baudh place by anyone, and if so when.
Babri Masjid was what stood there at the time of Independence and formation of the Republic. Status quo Should have been maintained, there as well as everywhere else, instead of leaving us, the children of the independence with this baggage.
That is not to say that looking at history, with the aid of archeology among other tools, is not a valid or necessary pursuit; it is needed for our exploration of our cultural history. But the courts cannot be the ultimate arbiters of it.
What about claims to other such places? Are we likely to find remains of Buddhist places there, i wonder.
Anyway, if the Court has admitted the SLP, it would be interesting to see how it handles the Buddhist challenge to the current scene of seeing all our history purely in terms of the Hindu vs Muslim paradigm. Even the judiciary might gain from it. So overall its a good intervention I think.
LikeLike
We donot trust the hindu dominated judiciary ,we have seen how hindu judges gave decision in Ayodhya dispute in Allahabad high court in india.
LikeLike
The more the merrier ! One more disputant can take the wind out of the self-important litigants who were holding the entire nation to ransom for the last 25 years. But as a property dispute, one cannot deny that it was a Masjid which was destroyed and no Buddhist claim to the land can absolve the perpetrators of the crime.
It is a fact that the Vedic/Brahminic religion which existed prior to and after the the Buddha did not have temples. They were worshipers of the Agni and the day-to-day life was punctuated with different rituals pregnant with grand meanings. The idea of building monasteries and temples was a post-Buddhist reaction and it is even held that many Buddhist temples have got transformed into appropriate Vishnu/Siva/Subrahmanya temples as Dharma waned in India. Just compare the temple of the Reclining Buddha in places as far away as Beijing and Galle ( Sri Lanka) with that of the Anantha Padmanabha Swamy Temples of Trivandrum and Kasargode, one can see the pointers.
I only wish that the cycle of applying retributive justice does not get exacerbated with this Buddhist initiative. We should rather remind all parties of the first and the finest definition of Sanatana Dharma as given by, who else, the Saakya Muni : “Nahi verena verani, Sammatidha Kadachana/ Averena cha Sambandhi/ Easa Dhammo Sanatano”
This is Sanatana Dharma : hatred does not ever quell hatred/ Non-hatred extinguishes hatred.
LikeLike
Barbaric people require barbaric treatment.in 21 st centuary hindus are occupying Bodh gaya and poluting Bodh gaya by drinking Alcohol in side the premises and doing pind dan which is cow shits nothing else.
LikeLike
Jane on 8th jan comments above that now waiting for the Jains, Sikhs and Christians to claim,,, may I dare to ask where the Atheists have gone? They are also a part of the mainstream Indian citizen brethern and they too could claim their share in the spicy loaf called the Babri Masjid dispute. And by the way, I am Muslim.
LikeLike
160 million dalits are getting ready to take their land back from hindus,even puri temple belongs to Buddhist.Chinease PilgrimXuanzang wrote that there were 3000 Buddhist monks and hundred of monasteries and only 10 devas or temple belongs to Hindu religion(Brahminical) in seventh centuary.Buddhism was a dominent religion in seventh centuary in Ayodhya.Muslims presence came into 12 th centuary.even Bhatlakshmidha who ruled awadh did not mentioned ayodhya or Rama.160 million dalits who are buddhist by birth but made untouchable by dwarf Adishankracharya.time has come 160 million dalits and 120 million dalits should get ready to take their land from hindus.It is shame for 160 million dalits that hindus are still occupying the Bodh gaya.I would request th Bhante Susai to take hindus on head and librate the bodh gaya from hindus.
LikeLike
It is the true history of this land.
LikeLike
I, 100% assure all hindus temples and masjid were buddhist temple or budhvihar in india and abroad.
LikeLike