 Hello, welcome to NewsClick. Today we're going to discuss with the author of a new book, Ayodhya, City of Faith, City of Discord. Mr. Vali Singh is here with us. He's a journalist and he's been to Ayodhya plenty of times while he was researching the book. So the first thing I want to begin with is that the Supreme Court has ruled on the Ayodhya matter and if the ruling had been different, say if the Muslim side had been allotted that plot of land, the 1500 square feet, then how would Ayodhya have responded? Well, thanks for having me here firstly. I think it was not something that anybody was expecting in the sense that given the prevailing politics, nobody was expecting that the Muslim side would get a favorable verdict. I mean that's a sad truth but it is the truth and if there was a verdict that was in favor of the Muslims, I spoke to a lot of Muslims there, right? I was there on the day. They were quite clear that it would have led to actually more tension, more strife, even perhaps more bloodshed if the verdict was not what it is. Okay. Which is to say that if the verdict was in favor of the mosque, there would have been perhaps more tension as it would have given something in the words of a local there a stick to beat them with again. But after the judgment came out and the mosque had not got the land, did you get a chance to speak to people and see if their opinion had changed somewhat? So this is after the verdict, like on the day of the verdict or the next day of the verdict where we saw that there was no incident of any kind of protest or violence. In fact the next day or in fact the day itself and the next day was being celebrated as Milad and Nabi or the birthday of Prophet Muhammad. In Ayodhya itself the administration kind of both cautioned Muslims against you know taking out any kind of processions and there was no celebration of Prophet Muhammad's birthday. But the next day outside say 20-30 kilometers out of Ayodhya there were villages where Muslims decided to just go ahead and celebrate and despite knowing that the judgment is not perfect for them but they have no choice but to just get along with it. So there is a sense of what's the word for it sort of forced silence or forced acceptance but the bottom line as people have said that it is now being accepted. There is no other way around it. Now the other thing is you tracked Ayodhya. So how what defines the city now? Is it the same city which you read about when you were doing your research? I mean it is like a small town based entirely on its pilgrim sort of religious economy based on temples seasonal festivals and so on. So like any other not really any other but I think like many other small towns it is struggling with its infrastructure basic infrastructure it is struggling with no industry lack of employment lack of good hospitals lack of schools and as a young boy told me there are not even puncture shops like there's nothing there in the sense it's all it's a small town based on religion especially Hindu religion and so in that sense it has not changed in fact I think people have across communities where they're like maybe you know this is the end of the dispute and they can perhaps now move on. So while the moving on sentiment is being criticized I think we need to remember that if somebody has been living in a place which is full of like that kind of decay because of one issue and if that issue now seems that it has been resolved whether rightly or wrongly I think a lot of people are kind of relieved that at least now they don't have this issue they dispute. They don't have to go over this again and again. Yeah again and again so that that was the sentiment on the day of the verdict and in the subsequent days what happens in the future we'll find out but it is linked to the larger politics of the country. Okay so tell me a little bit about the land question it's not just the 1500 plot of land it is a land dispute which Ayodhya has seen over decades and centuries what was that about? The particular site if you mean yes it's not centuries actually the first mention comes around 1855 and so on so that also as people have written and I've also mentioned in the book that it was about Hanuman Gari and in fact Muslims claimed that the Baragis of Hanuman Gari had raised down a small mosque on top of Hanuman Gari and that was the cause of a Malvi from Meti who was leading like a campaigner with his band of followers was marching towards Ayodhya to try and reclaim that mosque that Hanuman Gari area. So when that conflict took place Muslims were outnumbered and they ran and took shelter in this mosque called Bapri Mosque that's how the first mention I found out came in about the mosque itself but what about the idea that there was a temple where did you find the first mention? The first mention of a temple is mentioned in the travellers accounts Tiefenhaler and the Jesuit priest from Austria and there was I think William Finch was another British traveller they have all described that there is a temple that people worship as the place of Ram's birth and there's also a cradle. So what I would say is that Hindus have incrementally increased their presence all over Ayodhya and as well as this site this particular site so Ram Janmabhumi was there as a place it was worshipped but you know nobody was really like so madly sure that that is Ram Janmabhumi all of Ayodhya is Ram Janmabhumi it is only in the last few decades or in the last three decades actually almost three decades that we see that this complete fixation that is that is exactly the spot. How did that come about? I think it is carefully manufactured. You mean was it the British chroniclers who started this process? Yeah British chroniclers I think recorded the local priests versions the mythology the legends they recorded that and whatever came in the Gazette once it was recorded it was used as evidence that there was the slightly less known fact which people don't talk about is that the British chroniclers also recorded that Ayodhya probably has Buddhist origins or Jain origins so those layers of history have completely kind of faded away layers of religious history and only one unidimensional history is today is what we see that Ayodhya is only Ram Ayodhya is also Jain there are several three Thankars who were born there Ayodhya also is associated with Buddha himself and also known as Sakeet so and then of course the Muslim layers which goes back actually centuries and I mean of course what is Hindu because there is a 11th century evidence of a Gahadwala temple Gahadwala king donating some money and some to the Brahmin priests but again it's not necessarily a Ram temple it could have been a Shri White temple in fact in fact all of North India in the sense was a Shri was Shri White to strongholds and then as we see that Vaishnava movement matches and then kind of overtakes Shri White places of worship and then we see that today. So how would how would then Ayodhya be today how would they remember December 6th what would it mean for them? I think there would be well I think we know this that the Muslims mark that day as Yomegam which is a day of mourning because you know the mosque was demolished so many of them died in Ayodhya itself houses were burnt down etc this time again I think though there has been restraint on the side of the VHPR SS and Hindus in general and that restraint is welcome but let us see I mean on the 6th I think there would there is a sense that okay the dispute is maybe finally over in the town and they can move on to development and and but what of the demolition itself you see those cases are not resolved yet? Yes those cases actually I mean they're just slowly crawling and I think justice would be served if those cases are heard and decide on a fast-track basis and not just you know language allowed to law language even though courts have said that they should be fast-tracked also the average Hindus likely to tell you that it was never a mosque anyway it was always a temple and then the other term is the that is always uses the disputed structure so you kind of just deny that there were that it was a mosque one always said it was a dispute structure so you're kind of absolving yourself in a sense that even for religious place even for secular people the the structure of the mosque meant something it was a heritage building and it was a shared heritage for everyone does that ever come up when you speak to people in Ayodhya? I think the sensibility are very different I mean educated urban maybe more informed people in Ayodhya also would take that view but the larger because since 1940s it has been kind of very carefully through propaganda through books and pamphlets and so on it has been drilled down in the minds of the Hindus in that region that this was Ramjan Bhumi and look there were temples that were Hindu pillars that are Hindu motives so it was our temple and invaders came destroyed the temple why don't you tell me about some of the pamphlets that you know you mentioned in your book that there's a certain pamphlet which is available which is an old pamphlet in a new form so both these pamphlets the old and the new available in Ayodhya and just tell me who wrote them what happened what's the history of these I was shocked I mean it was it is like a parallel history it's pulp history that is being fed to the people there in the form of a pamphlet which harks back to these glorious days of Ram and takes it back to lakhs of years millions of years now you think nine nine like nine like years precise numbers are given so and then there's also this gory story of how thousands of Hindus were massacred and from their blood and so on but the mortar was made for them for the mosque so you have almost you know completely demonized the entire community so by writing this pulp history of Ayodhya which is completely sort of insightful towards one religion and the people and it's not history we should not be propaganda the people who wrote this pamphlet which is a refurbished form form of the earlier pamphlet who were they they were so there were people you see it again because India was divided on religious lines and so there was a lot of strife there's communalization was quite strong in that region we had riots in Kanpur Banaras and Ayodhya also in 1934 so there was already a section of Hindus who were linked with sub nationalist groups such as Hindu Mahasabha back then who were who facilitated who guided this kind of production of these kind of propaganda pamphlets to make their claims stronger it is available very much I think five rupees of ten rupees or something like that it's called Ayodhya ka Rakht Ranjit Itihas so the blood soaked history of Ayodhya and there's no evidence of that why is it that people can't tell the difference between this these stories and history is it I think the narrative has been that Muslims came they destroyed they converted the pillage they raped and that narrative has been there since colonial times since pre-colonial times but but but Ayodhya was a holy site for Muslims as well Ayodhya was an extremely holy site for Muslims why is it that Ayodhya is full of graveyards why is Ayodhya is the birthplace of several Sufi fakirs and saints even Chirag the as is supposed to be born there there is a small shrine for him there is Shah Madar there are other Sufi saints so the Sufi movement was strong when it was strong then Ayodhya was also center of Sufi fakirs there's the patron saint of Ayodhya as it was called Bari Bhua now that syncretic plural history of Ayodhya is is almost struggling to survive and make itself hurt make itself seen and also Ayodhya being such a small place a lot of outsiders have come in who are not really connected with the and there's an economic aspect which you mentioned that the temple tourism is the yes I mean that's the only way mostly only way of income generation and interestingly they call it Akash Vritti a lot of people write what is your profession they say Akash Vritti so whatever falls from the sky which was deciphered to me by a local temple owner a priest as that when there is good rain there are good crops and then these peasants and farmers come and they spend a lot and then we also make some money and so the shopkeepers or the priests or the pandas everybody makes money when there is good rainfall and good crops harvest okay so now Ayodhya is a little bit at peace compared to how it was before it's a tenuous peace there is no choice one is a very unequal battle would you like to go back visit more now yes yes I mean I have I think I'm now completely going to track the subject track this down because it is reflective of what happens in the I'm furious what is left to track no there's lots left to track where will the land be given will it be in Ayodhya the the Ayodhya or will it be this loose definition of Ayodhya the land be accepted or will the land be accepted but firstly will that it also depends on where the land is being given it is is it giving given in the acquired area is it being given there is it being given across the river in the district that Ayodhya is those are questions that will also convey how a supreme court judgment is implemented by the state and center right thanks so much Wale for joining us thank you thank you thank you for watching NewsClick