Ram Mandir - Proofs

A video showing the proof of existence of original Ram temple which was demolished by Babar.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• ram
• temple
• mandir
• babari
• masjid
• mosque
• proof

[0musing]

I wonder what exactly the muslims are trying to say, when all these muslims deny that there was any mandir before demolition of the masjid?

Are they saying that the muslims never destroyed any mandir's in India and then build masjid's at the same spot? Seriously, did the muslims build all their masjids from scratch and are as peace loving and tolerant as they would like to believe themselves?

[zanyguy123]

@0musing

Islam and its history is full of destruction and death...muslims who know their own history are embarrassed and quite rightly so..read the books on hindu temples by sitaram goel and on ayodhya issue by koenraad elst.. Islam is an ideology that has propafated by force and if need be we have to assert ourselves by force too...

[DamnBulletin]

@envsh03 The Mosque itself fell out of use in the 1930s, and has been used as a temple since 1949. It is one of the five most sacred sites in Hinduism and of no importance to Islam.

Since different parties have held the land over thousands of years, a just settlement has to be found, either outside of court or enforced by a court verdict.

If you don't like that, well too bad. Hindus have a right to preserve their culture in their own homeland and Babar is no longer the ruler.

[DamnBulletin]

@envsh03 I don't know whether you understand who Rama was or when he lived. You can read the arguments in the short book that I cited.

In brief, the issue is not that of Rama's birth. The Hindu claim to the land is based on the fact that the site was a Hindu temple since antiquity, which Babar and Mir Baki had destroyed to build a Mosque (thousands of temples were replaced with Mosques during the Islamic rule in India).

[envsh03]

@DamnBulletin The circumstances of my birth, or your birth, are not relevant!

The central question on which this case hinges, is the birth of Ram. Hence, it is entirely proper and reasonable, to ask for evidence to substantiate the matter.

[DamnBulletin]

@envsh03 Strictly speaking, of course, it is nonsense. Just as Jesus being born of a virgin, or rising from the dead. All religions are based on myths.

You are not in the clear either. Do you have conclusive evidence regarding the circumstances of birth of your ancestors back, say, five generations?

You can learn more about the issue by googling 'The case against the temple' by Koenraad Elst.

[envsh03]

@DamnBulletin Hindus believe that this is the birthplace of Ram. Hence, if there is no evidence to substantiate this -or worse still, Ram did not exist at all! -then it makes a nonsense of the thing!

[DamnBulletin]

@envsh03 It is not at all an essential question. Hindus believe (or want to believe) that the original temple consecrated the birthplace of Rama. The question of Rama's existence or his divinity is at par with the existence or divinity of Jesus, or the "divine inspiration" for that unholy book called the Koran.

[envsh03]

There is no evidence to prove that this is the birthplace of Ram!

Surely, this is the essential question and the essence of the matter.