09-25-2010, 01:23 AM
Babari structure, a new viewpoint
by Ishwa
Summary of the main findings by the ASI investigation may be stated as follows:
There is 'archeological evidence of a massive structure' below ground where the Babri mosque was destroyed in 1992.
The structure bears distinctive features associated with ancient temples of northern India.
There is evidence of building work there from as far as the 10th century.
Deducing this with the discovered 12th century inscription of king Nayachandra gives me the
following chronological development:
1. Pre-Sultanate Period (till 1192)
a. Ancient Temple: a 10th/11th century temple is beneath the demolished Babri Masjid, as per B.B. Lal.
b. this temple must have been demolished ââ¬â the demolisher should be a Ghaznavid.
c. New Temple: Raja Nayachandra inscription 12th century. He built a new temple, as per B.B. Lal.
2. Sultanate Period (1192-1526)
1st possibility: perhaps this Nayachandra Temple was also demolished and then rebuilt
2nd possibility: or probably it was converted into a Muslim structure and then reused as temple
3rd possibility: or most probably it was retained as temple.
Anyway, this new structure must have been used by Hindus as a temple before Babar arrived there in 1528. There is no logic in converting or rebuilding a mosque on the same spot as a temple, if it was already used as a mosque.
3. Mughal Period (1528)
Babar demolished/damaged the temple and gave orders to Mir Baqi to 'build' a mosque, according to a Babari inscription. In Muslim jargon 'demolishing a temple and building a mosque on the same spot' can also mean that the temple was converted into a mosque, having destroyed the idols and organic icons, founded the Qiblah and ornamented the building with Muslim inscriptions.
As there is no structure found being built between the 10th/11th century Ancient Temple and the later demolished Babari Masjid, in my opinion the last structure is the New Temple built by king Nayachandra in the 12th century.
At least the style of architecture of the demolished Babari structure is pre-Mughal! Besides, it is impossible to construct the structure from scratch in one year (1528).
This all is in support of my opinion that the demolished structure was the New Temple.
Babar, thus, didn't demolish the temple completely, but desecrated and converted the functional temple, also known as Masjid-i Janamsthan for Janmasthana (ke) Mandira, into a non-functional Muslim structure, renamed as the (Mandira>) masjid (converted by=) of Babar: the Babari Masjid.
If correct, this has a far reaching consequence. Hindus didn't demolish a Muslim construction, but a desecrated former temple of their own, felt to be too offensively dishonoured was felt to be fit to get demolished and then getting rebuilt anew with a fresh, spotless start.
by Ishwa
Summary of the main findings by the ASI investigation may be stated as follows:
There is 'archeological evidence of a massive structure' below ground where the Babri mosque was destroyed in 1992.
The structure bears distinctive features associated with ancient temples of northern India.
There is evidence of building work there from as far as the 10th century.
Deducing this with the discovered 12th century inscription of king Nayachandra gives me the
following chronological development:
1. Pre-Sultanate Period (till 1192)
a. Ancient Temple: a 10th/11th century temple is beneath the demolished Babri Masjid, as per B.B. Lal.
b. this temple must have been demolished ââ¬â the demolisher should be a Ghaznavid.
c. New Temple: Raja Nayachandra inscription 12th century. He built a new temple, as per B.B. Lal.
2. Sultanate Period (1192-1526)
1st possibility: perhaps this Nayachandra Temple was also demolished and then rebuilt
2nd possibility: or probably it was converted into a Muslim structure and then reused as temple
3rd possibility: or most probably it was retained as temple.
Anyway, this new structure must have been used by Hindus as a temple before Babar arrived there in 1528. There is no logic in converting or rebuilding a mosque on the same spot as a temple, if it was already used as a mosque.
3. Mughal Period (1528)
Babar demolished/damaged the temple and gave orders to Mir Baqi to 'build' a mosque, according to a Babari inscription. In Muslim jargon 'demolishing a temple and building a mosque on the same spot' can also mean that the temple was converted into a mosque, having destroyed the idols and organic icons, founded the Qiblah and ornamented the building with Muslim inscriptions.
As there is no structure found being built between the 10th/11th century Ancient Temple and the later demolished Babari Masjid, in my opinion the last structure is the New Temple built by king Nayachandra in the 12th century.
At least the style of architecture of the demolished Babari structure is pre-Mughal! Besides, it is impossible to construct the structure from scratch in one year (1528).
This all is in support of my opinion that the demolished structure was the New Temple.
Babar, thus, didn't demolish the temple completely, but desecrated and converted the functional temple, also known as Masjid-i Janamsthan for Janmasthana (ke) Mandira, into a non-functional Muslim structure, renamed as the (Mandira>) masjid (converted by=) of Babar: the Babari Masjid.
If correct, this has a far reaching consequence. Hindus didn't demolish a Muslim construction, but a desecrated former temple of their own, felt to be too offensively dishonoured was felt to be fit to get demolished and then getting rebuilt anew with a fresh, spotless start.