navanavonmilita
2010-10-03 13:23:29 UTC
Ayodhya: Shit Goes on
http://cogitoergosum.co.cc/2010/10/03/ayodhya-shit-goes-on/
Ayodhya: Shit Goes on
Ayodhya: Shit Goes on
Key litigants on Ayodhya title suit dispute meet
CNN-IBN
Posted on Oct 03, 2010 at 15:05
New Delhi: Three days after the Allahabad High Court verdict on the
Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit dispute, one of the key
litigants in the Ayodhya issue, Nirmohi Akhara’s Mahant Gyan Das and
Mohammad Hashim Ansari met in Ayodhya on Sunday.
The first sign of a possible compromise on the Ayodhya issue. Ansari
says it is better to solve the issue with talks.
Ansari has proposed Out-Of-Court settlement between both the parties
rather than go to the Supreme Court.
Hashim Ansari had also met Chief Priest of the Hanuman Garhi temple
Gyan Das, also the head of the Nirmohi Akhara Parishd, on September
23. There was a meeting amongst local Muslims before the verdict that
the matter be resolved at the local level.
Area under central dome is Ram Janmasthan: HC
Bhupendra Chaubey , CNN-IBN
Posted on Sep 30, 2010 at 20:29 | Updated Oct 01, 2010 at 08:46
New Delhi: The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on Thursday
decided by majority that the land under the central dome of the
demolished Babri Masjid is the Ram Janmasthan. While delivering its
verdict in the contentious 60-year-old Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid
title suit case the three-judge special bench comprising of Justice
Sibghat Ullah Khan, Justice Sudhir Agrawal and Justice Dharam Veer
Sharma ruled that the 2.77 acres of land be divided into three parts –
one-third to the party representing ‘Ram Lala Virajman’, one-third to
Sunni Wakf Board and one-third to Nirmohi Akhara.
The High Court also dismissed the title suits of Sunni Wakf Board and
Nirmohi Akhara and declared them to be time barred. The court also
ruled that status quo be maintained for three months at the site in
Ayodhya.
“The honorable judges have dismissed Muslims suit and they have partly
allowed suit number five by Hindus. One judge has partly and one has
fully allowed. But the majority has decided that the land will be
divided in three parts. The court has said in three months till then
it is status quo,” said senior lawyer Ravi Shankar Prasad, who
represented Mahant Raghuvar Das.
The Sunni Wakf Board said that it would file an appeal against the
verdict in the Supreme Court
“We don’t accept the one third formula. We accept the mosque as an
intact body. But we believe there is no need for resentment as the
matter will go to the Supreme Court,” said Sunni Wakf Board lawyer
Zafaryab Jilani.
Hindu Mahasabha counsel PL Mishra said that that verdict had something
for every one.
“Honourable Justice Agarwal has said that pooja has always been
performed on the land where the Ram Lala exists. Lord Ram will
continue to exist there. But, the Nirmohi Akhara has been using the
premises as well. The Muslims have also been offering namaz there.
Hence, the land will be divided into three and each of them will
receive their part. The government-acquired land under Special
Acquisition Act of 1993 will be divided and then, other infrastructure
requirements for entry and exit of the three parts will be put up,”
said Mishra.
Justice Khan and Justice Agarwal said that the area under the central
dome of the three-domed structure where Lord Ram’s idol exists
belonged to Hindus.
However, the third judge Justice Sharma ruled that that the disputed
site was the birth place of Lord Ram and that the disputed building
constructed during the rule of Mughal emperor Babur was built against
the tenets of Islam and did not have the character of the mosque.
On the disputed structure, Justice Sharma said it “was constructed by
Babar, the year is not certain but it was against the tenets of Islam.
Thus, it cannot have the character of a mosque.”
Differing with the other two judges, he also ruled that the disputed
structure was constructed on the site of the old structure after
demolition of the same. “The Archaeological Survey of India has proved
that the structure was a massive Hindu religious structure,” he said.
He said the idols were placed in the middle dome of the disputed
structure in the intervening night of December 22 and 23, 1949.
With regard to the status of the disputed site — inner and outer
courtyard, Justice Sharma said “it is established that the property in
suit is the site of Janambhoomi of Ram Chandra Ji and Hindus in
general had the right to worship ‘charan’, ‘Sita Rasoi’, other idols
and other object of worship existed upon the property in suit.”
He said “it is also established that Hindus have been worshipping the
place in dispute as Janamsthan, i.e., a birth place as deity and
visiting it as a sacred place of pilgrimage as of right since time
immemorial.”
The judge said after the construction of the disputed structure, “it
is proved the deities were installed inside the disputed structure on
22/23.12.1949. It is also proved that the outer courtyard was in
exclusive possession of Hindus and they were worshipping throughout
and in the inner courtyard (in the disputed structure) they were also
worshipping.
“It is also established that the disputed structure cannot be treated
as a mosque as it came into existence against the tenets of Islam.”
Justice Khan said “all the three sets of parties, i.e. Muslims, Hindus
and Nirmohi Akhara are declared joint title holders of the property/
premises in dispute as described by letters A B C D E F in the map
Plan-I prepared by Shri Shiv Shankar Lal, Pleader/Commissioner
appointed by court in Suit No. 1 to the extent of 1/3rd share each for
using and managing the same for worshipping. A preliminary decree to
this effect is passed.”
However, the judge observed that it is further declared that the
portion below the central dome where at present the idol is kept in
makeshift temple will be allotted to Hindus in final decree.
He also said that Nirmohi Akhara will be allotted share including that
part which is shown by the words ‘Ram Chabutra’ and ‘Sita Rasoi’ in
the said map.
Justice Khan said even though all the three parties are declared to
have one-third share each, “however, if while allotting exact
portions, some minor adjustments in the share is to be made, then the
same will be made and the adversely-affected party may be compensated
by some portion of the adjoining land which has been acquired by the
central government.”
In his gist of findings, Justice Khan observed that the disputed
structure was constructed as mosque by or under the orders of Babar
but it is not proved by direct evidence that the premises in dispute
including constructed portion belonged to Babar or the person who
built it.
He also said that no temple was demolished for constructing the mosque
as it was built over the ruins of temple which was lying for a very
long time.
In his judgement, Justice Agarwal said “it is declared that the area
covered by the central dome of the three-domed structure, i.e., the
disputed structure being the deity of Bhagwan Ram Janamsthan and place
of birth of Lord Rama as per faith and belief of Hindus belong to
plaintiffs (party on behalf of Lord Rama) and shall not be obstructed
or interfered in any manner by the defendants.”
He also observed that the area within the inner courtyard excepting
some portion belongs to members of both the communities, Hindus and
Muslims, since it was being used by both since decades and centuries.
“It is, however, made clear that the for the purpose of share of
plaintiffs (parties on behalf of Lord Rama) under this direction”, the
area which is covered by central dome of the three-domed structure,
shall also be included, he said.
Justice Agarwal said the area covered by structures Ram Chabutra, Sita
Rasoi and Bhandar in the outer courtyard is declared in the share of
Nirmohi Akhara and they shall be entitled to possession thereof, in
the absence of any person with better title. Justice Agarwal said the
open area within the outer courtyard shall be shared by Nirmohi Akhara
and the party for Lord Rama since it has generally been used by the
Hindu people for worship at both places.
“It is, however, made clear that the share of Muslim parties shall not
be less than one-third of the total area of the premises and if
necessary, it may be given some area of outer courtyard.
“It is also made clear that while making metes and bounds, if some
minor adjustments are to be made with respect to the share of
different parties, the affected party may be compensated by allotting
the requisite land from the area which is under acquisition of the
Government of India,” the judge said.
In his findings on issues, Justice Agarwal said the parties of the
Muslim side have failed to prove that the property in dispute was
constructed by Babar in 1528 AD.
Justice Sharma, writing a separate judgement, observed that the
disputed site is the birth place of Lord Rama. “Place of birth is a
juristic person and is a deity. It is personified as a spirit of
divine worshipped as Lord Rama as a child.
“Spirit of divine ever remains present everywhere at all times for
anyone to invoke at any shape or form in accordance with his own
aspirations and it can be shapeless and formless also,” he said.
On the disputed structure, Justice Sharma said it “was constructed by
Babar, the year is not certain but it was against the tenets of Islam.
Thus, it cannot have the character of a mosque.”
Differing with the other two judges, he also ruled that the disputed
structure was constructed on the site of the old structure after
demolition of the same. “The Archaeological Survey of India has proved
that the structure was a massive Hindu religious structure,” he said.
He said the idols were placed in the middle dome of the disputed
structure in the intervening night of December 22 and 23, 1949.3
With regard to the status of the disputed site — inner and outer
courtyard, Justice Sharma said “it is established that the property in
suit is the site of Janambhoomi of Ram Chandra Ji and Hindus in
general had the right to worship ‘charan’, ‘Sita Rasoi’, other idols
and other object of worship existed upon the property in suit.”
He said “it is also established that Hindus have been worshipping the
place in dispute as Janamsthan, i.e., a birth place as deity and
visiting it as a sacred place of pilgrimage as of right since time
immemorial.”
The judge said after the construction of the disputed structure, “it
is proved the deities were installed inside the disputed structure on
22/23.12.1949. It is also proved that the outer courtyard was in
exclusive possession of Hindus and they were worshipping throughout
and in the inner courtyard (in the disputed structure) they were also
worshipping.
“It is also established that the disputed structure cannot be treated
as a mosque as it came into existence against the tenets of Islam.”
(With inputs from PTI) Watch Video:
September 30, 2010, 9:30 PM IST.Who Are the Nirmohi Akhara?.Search
India Real Time .Article Comments (1,765) India Real Time HOME PAGE
».EmailPrintPermalinkTwitter
Digg
+ More
close StumbleUponYahoo!
BuzzMySpacedel.icio.usRedditLinkedInFarkViadeoOrkut Text Krishna
Pokharel And Tripti Lahiri
The Allahabad High Court delivered a complex verdict in the Babri
Masjid case today, dividing the sacred site into three parts – one for
Muslims and two for Hindus.
They had to deal in their case with a most unusual cast of characters,
including the Hindu god Lord Ram himself, who was named as a party to
the case by one of the (human) Hindu litigants.
Here is a glossary of some terms from the case that may not be
familiar to all:
Nirmohi Akhara
One third of the site will go to the Nirmohi Akhara, a group of Hindu
ascetics who are devotees of none other than Lord Ram. Their name
means, roughly, “Group Without Attachment.” They have given up the
material world for the company of their god. They are “sadhus” – or
Hindu holy men often characterized by the hermetic tendencies. They
claimed in court that there is no mosque called Babri Masjid at the
site in Ayodhya, nor did the Mughal commander Babur make any conquest
or any occupation of territory in India. They also claimed the site is
of ancient antiquity and has existed before the living memory of man.
Lord Ram and his court representatives receive another third of the
site.
Ram Janmabhoomi
Literally, this phrase means “the land Ram was born on.” Hindu groups
refer to the property in Ayodhya where the medieval Babri mosque
stood, and that was at the heart of the 60 year dispute with this
phrase. Ram is one of the most revered incarnations of one of the
deities of a Hindu trinity—the god of preservation, Vishnu.
Sunni Waqfs Board
This is an elected legal body that oversees Sunni Islamic properties
endowed for religious or charitable purposes. The plaintiff in the
case that was decided Thursday was the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central
Board of Waqfs, which supervises these properties in the state where
the town of Ayodhya is located. The board gets the third portion of
the site.
Ram Lalla
This refers to Hindu idols placed in the central dome of the mosque,
allegedly in 1949. The phrase specifically refers to Ram as a baby or
a young child. Parts of the Hindu suits revolved around seeking access
to these idols and having them remain there, while the Muslim
plaintiffs wanted them removed.
Nirmohi Akhara
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article may need to be updated. Please update this article to
reflect recent events or newly available information, and remove this
template when finished. Please see the talk page for more
information.
This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references.
Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Part of a series on
Hinduism
Om • Brahman • Ishvara
Hindu • History of Hinduism
Deities
Brahman
Ishvara
Trimurti
Brahma • Vishnu • Shiva
Devis and Devas
Saraswati · Lakshmi · Parvati
Shakti · Durga · Kali
Ganesha · Subrahmanya · Ayyappa
Rama · Krishna
Hanuman
Prajapati · Rudra
Indra · Agni · Dyaus
Bhumi · Varuna · Vayu
Philosophy
Concepts
Brahman · Om · Ishvara
Atman · Maya
Karma · Samsara
Purusharthas
(Dharma · Artha · Kama · Moksha)
Schools
Astika
Samkhya · Yoga
Nyaya · Vaisheshika
Purva mimamsa
Uttara mimamsa (Vedanta) (Dvaita, Advaita, Vishishtadvaita)
Nastika
Charvaka
Scriptures
Vedas
Rigveda • Yajurveda
Samaveda • Atharvaveda
Divisions
Samhita, Brahmana,
Aranyaka, Upanishad
Upavedas
Ayurveda • Dhanurveda
Gandharvaveda • Sthapatyaveda
Vedangas
Shiksha · Chandas · Vyakarana
Nirukta · Kalpa · Jyotisha
Upanishads
Rig vedic
Aitareya
Yajur vedic
Brihadaranyaka · Isha
Taittiriya · Katha · Shvetashvatara
Sama vedic
Chandogya · Kena
Atharva vedic
Mundaka · Mandukya · Prashna
Puranas
Brahma puranas
Brahma · Brahmanda
Brahmavaivarta
Markandeya · Bhavishya
Vaishnava puranas
Vishnu · Bhagavata
Naradeya · Garuda · Padma
Shaiva puranas
Shiva · Linga
Skanda · Agni · Vayu
Itihasas
Ramayana · Mahabharata
Other scriptures
Bhagavat Gita
Dharma Shastra · Manusmriti
Artha Shastra · Yoga Vasistha
Sutras · Stotras · Tantras
Yoga Sutra
others
Classification of scriptures
Śruti · Smriti
Practices
Worship
Puja · Japa · Bhajana
Tapa · Dhyana
Yajna · Homa
Tirthadana · Naivedhya
Temple · Vigraha · Bhakti
Samskaras
Garbhadhana · Pumsavana · Simantonayana · Jatakarma · Namakarana ·
Nishkramana · Annaprashana · Chudakarana · Karnavedha · Vidyarambha ·
Upanayana · Praishartha · Keshanta · Ritushuddhi · Samavartana ·
Vivaha · Antyeshti
Varnashrama Dharma
Varna
Brahmin · Kshatriya
Vaishya · Shudra
Ashrama
Brahmacharya · Grihastha
Vanaprastha · Sanyasa
Festivals
Navaratri
Vijayadashami (Dasara)
Deepavali · Shivaratri · Holi
Kumbha Mela · Ratha Yatra · Vishu · Bihu · Baisakhi · Puthandu
Ganesh Chaturthi · Onam
Rama Navami · Janmashtami
Raksha Bandhan
Philosophers
Ancient
Gautama · Jaimini · Kanada · Kapila · Markandeya · Patañjali · Valmiki
· Vyasa
Medieval
Adi Shankara · Basava · Dnyaneshwar · Chaitanya · Gangesha Upadhyaya ·
Gaudapada · Jayanta Bhatta · Kabir · Kumarila Bhatta · Madhusudana ·
Madhva · Namdeva · Nimbarka · Prabhakara · Raghunatha Siromani ·
Ramanuja · Vedanta Desika · Tukaram · Tulsidas · Vachaspati Mishra ·
Vallabha
Modern
Aurobindo · Coomaraswamy · Dayananda Saraswati · Gandhi · Krishnananda
· Narayana Guru · Prabhupada · Ramakrishna · Ramana Maharshi ·
Radhakrishnan · Sivananda · Vivekananda · Yogananda
Other Topics
Hindu denominations
Hinduism by country
Mythology • Hindu calendar
Hindu law • Hindu iconography
Hindu nationalism • Hindutva
Hindu pilgrimage sites
Persecution • Criticism
Glossary
Hinduism Portal
Hindu Mythology Portal
v • d • e
Nirmohi Akhara is a Hindu religious denomination comprising ardent
devotees of Lord Hanuman. It is one of the 14 akharas recognized by
the Akhil Bharatiya Akhara Parishad, and belongs to the Vaishnava
sampradaya.[1] It is headed by Mahant Bhaskar Das.
This group has been in the spotlight in connection with the Ayodhya
debate since 1949 when it filed a suit to take over the disputed site
of Babri Mosque.[2]
The name means, roughly, “Group Without Attachment.” They have
renounced the material world for the company of God. They are “sadhus”
– or Hindu holy men often characterized by ascetic tendencies. They
have claimed in court that there is no mosque called Babri Masjid at
the disputed site in Ayodhya. [3]
Nirmohi Akhara filed a suit in 1885 (as per Allahabad High Court
Judgement dated 30 September 2010, see below reference No.4) with the
sub-judge of Faizabad, seeking consent to construct a temple for the
Hindu God Rama in the area called the Ram Chabutra, adjacent to the
Babri Mosque. The sub-judge held then that two large religious
structures in close proximity could potentially be a threat to public
order. Permission was denied by the court, though the Nirmohi Akhara
has since kept up its effort to reclaim the land and construct the
temple.[4]
In 1989, the Nirmohi Akhara filed a lawsuit against the Uttar Pradesh
State government claiming that they had been worshiping the deities
installed at a temple at the then disputed site since time immemorial.
Accordingly, they requested the Court to hand over management of the
temple to the Nirmohi Akhara.[5]
On September 30, 2010, a Lucknow panel of three judges of the
Allahabad High Court pronounced the verdict on the case deciding to
give a third part of the land to each party namely the Sunni Waqf
Board, Ram-Lalla Deity and Nirmohi Akhara, with the Ram-Lalla Deity
retaining its present position and the Nirmohi Akhara getting the
areas named Sita Rasoi and Ram Chabutara, within the disputed site.[2]
[6]
References
1.^ http://www.firstfoundation.in/who_rel_H_Akhadas.htm
2.^ a b http://www.hindustantimes.com/Ayodhya-land-to-be-divided-into-three-parts-HC/Article1-606452.aspx
3.^ http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/09/30/who-are-the-nirmohi-akhara/
4.^ http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1907/19070040.htm
5.^ Allahabad High Court Judgement summary, page 15, 17[1]
6.^ http://www.asianage.com/india/who-nirmohi-akhara-252
This organization-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by
expanding it.
v • d • e
Nirmohi Akhara is a Hindu religious sect of the Vaishnavite order. It
was established in 1720 by Ramanandacharya to counter the growing
influence of Shaivism. Akhara literally means a wrestling ring, and
thus suggests militant overtones of the religious sect. The rich sect
owns many temples and mutts in the Indian states of Uttar Pradesh,
Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat and Bihar. Members of
the sect are expected to lead a simple and austere life of celibacy
and accept Rama as the presiding God. New recruits to the sect are
mainly in their teens and maybe from any Hindu caste. They are put
through a gruelling schedule of mastering the Hindu scriptures (Vedas
and Upanishads) and also martial arts. In former times members of the
sect had a mandate to provide protection to the followers of Rama and
were provided rigorous training in archery, swordsmanship and
wrestling. These are still part of their curriculum but in a moderate
way.
Retrieved from “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirmohi_Akhara“
Categories: Organization stubs | Organisations based in Uttar Pradesh
| Ayodhya | Hindu movements and organizations | Hindu denominations
•This page was last modified on 2 October 2010 at 18:51.
•Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
License;
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation,
Inc., a non-profit organization.
…and I am Sid Harth
Conflict, Hindu Society, History, Hot Off The Presses, Indian society,
News, Views and Reviews, Propaganda, Religious fundamentalism,
Terrorism
03/10/2010
« Biharis Bang, Oops, Ban Narendra Modi’s Ass
http://cogitoergosum.co.cc/2010/10/03/ayodhya-shit-goes-on/
Ayodhya: Shit Goes on
Ayodhya: Shit Goes on
Key litigants on Ayodhya title suit dispute meet
CNN-IBN
Posted on Oct 03, 2010 at 15:05
New Delhi: Three days after the Allahabad High Court verdict on the
Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit dispute, one of the key
litigants in the Ayodhya issue, Nirmohi Akhara’s Mahant Gyan Das and
Mohammad Hashim Ansari met in Ayodhya on Sunday.
The first sign of a possible compromise on the Ayodhya issue. Ansari
says it is better to solve the issue with talks.
Ansari has proposed Out-Of-Court settlement between both the parties
rather than go to the Supreme Court.
Hashim Ansari had also met Chief Priest of the Hanuman Garhi temple
Gyan Das, also the head of the Nirmohi Akhara Parishd, on September
23. There was a meeting amongst local Muslims before the verdict that
the matter be resolved at the local level.
Area under central dome is Ram Janmasthan: HC
Bhupendra Chaubey , CNN-IBN
Posted on Sep 30, 2010 at 20:29 | Updated Oct 01, 2010 at 08:46
New Delhi: The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on Thursday
decided by majority that the land under the central dome of the
demolished Babri Masjid is the Ram Janmasthan. While delivering its
verdict in the contentious 60-year-old Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid
title suit case the three-judge special bench comprising of Justice
Sibghat Ullah Khan, Justice Sudhir Agrawal and Justice Dharam Veer
Sharma ruled that the 2.77 acres of land be divided into three parts –
one-third to the party representing ‘Ram Lala Virajman’, one-third to
Sunni Wakf Board and one-third to Nirmohi Akhara.
The High Court also dismissed the title suits of Sunni Wakf Board and
Nirmohi Akhara and declared them to be time barred. The court also
ruled that status quo be maintained for three months at the site in
Ayodhya.
“The honorable judges have dismissed Muslims suit and they have partly
allowed suit number five by Hindus. One judge has partly and one has
fully allowed. But the majority has decided that the land will be
divided in three parts. The court has said in three months till then
it is status quo,” said senior lawyer Ravi Shankar Prasad, who
represented Mahant Raghuvar Das.
The Sunni Wakf Board said that it would file an appeal against the
verdict in the Supreme Court
“We don’t accept the one third formula. We accept the mosque as an
intact body. But we believe there is no need for resentment as the
matter will go to the Supreme Court,” said Sunni Wakf Board lawyer
Zafaryab Jilani.
Hindu Mahasabha counsel PL Mishra said that that verdict had something
for every one.
“Honourable Justice Agarwal has said that pooja has always been
performed on the land where the Ram Lala exists. Lord Ram will
continue to exist there. But, the Nirmohi Akhara has been using the
premises as well. The Muslims have also been offering namaz there.
Hence, the land will be divided into three and each of them will
receive their part. The government-acquired land under Special
Acquisition Act of 1993 will be divided and then, other infrastructure
requirements for entry and exit of the three parts will be put up,”
said Mishra.
Justice Khan and Justice Agarwal said that the area under the central
dome of the three-domed structure where Lord Ram’s idol exists
belonged to Hindus.
However, the third judge Justice Sharma ruled that that the disputed
site was the birth place of Lord Ram and that the disputed building
constructed during the rule of Mughal emperor Babur was built against
the tenets of Islam and did not have the character of the mosque.
On the disputed structure, Justice Sharma said it “was constructed by
Babar, the year is not certain but it was against the tenets of Islam.
Thus, it cannot have the character of a mosque.”
Differing with the other two judges, he also ruled that the disputed
structure was constructed on the site of the old structure after
demolition of the same. “The Archaeological Survey of India has proved
that the structure was a massive Hindu religious structure,” he said.
He said the idols were placed in the middle dome of the disputed
structure in the intervening night of December 22 and 23, 1949.
With regard to the status of the disputed site — inner and outer
courtyard, Justice Sharma said “it is established that the property in
suit is the site of Janambhoomi of Ram Chandra Ji and Hindus in
general had the right to worship ‘charan’, ‘Sita Rasoi’, other idols
and other object of worship existed upon the property in suit.”
He said “it is also established that Hindus have been worshipping the
place in dispute as Janamsthan, i.e., a birth place as deity and
visiting it as a sacred place of pilgrimage as of right since time
immemorial.”
The judge said after the construction of the disputed structure, “it
is proved the deities were installed inside the disputed structure on
22/23.12.1949. It is also proved that the outer courtyard was in
exclusive possession of Hindus and they were worshipping throughout
and in the inner courtyard (in the disputed structure) they were also
worshipping.
“It is also established that the disputed structure cannot be treated
as a mosque as it came into existence against the tenets of Islam.”
Justice Khan said “all the three sets of parties, i.e. Muslims, Hindus
and Nirmohi Akhara are declared joint title holders of the property/
premises in dispute as described by letters A B C D E F in the map
Plan-I prepared by Shri Shiv Shankar Lal, Pleader/Commissioner
appointed by court in Suit No. 1 to the extent of 1/3rd share each for
using and managing the same for worshipping. A preliminary decree to
this effect is passed.”
However, the judge observed that it is further declared that the
portion below the central dome where at present the idol is kept in
makeshift temple will be allotted to Hindus in final decree.
He also said that Nirmohi Akhara will be allotted share including that
part which is shown by the words ‘Ram Chabutra’ and ‘Sita Rasoi’ in
the said map.
Justice Khan said even though all the three parties are declared to
have one-third share each, “however, if while allotting exact
portions, some minor adjustments in the share is to be made, then the
same will be made and the adversely-affected party may be compensated
by some portion of the adjoining land which has been acquired by the
central government.”
In his gist of findings, Justice Khan observed that the disputed
structure was constructed as mosque by or under the orders of Babar
but it is not proved by direct evidence that the premises in dispute
including constructed portion belonged to Babar or the person who
built it.
He also said that no temple was demolished for constructing the mosque
as it was built over the ruins of temple which was lying for a very
long time.
In his judgement, Justice Agarwal said “it is declared that the area
covered by the central dome of the three-domed structure, i.e., the
disputed structure being the deity of Bhagwan Ram Janamsthan and place
of birth of Lord Rama as per faith and belief of Hindus belong to
plaintiffs (party on behalf of Lord Rama) and shall not be obstructed
or interfered in any manner by the defendants.”
He also observed that the area within the inner courtyard excepting
some portion belongs to members of both the communities, Hindus and
Muslims, since it was being used by both since decades and centuries.
“It is, however, made clear that the for the purpose of share of
plaintiffs (parties on behalf of Lord Rama) under this direction”, the
area which is covered by central dome of the three-domed structure,
shall also be included, he said.
Justice Agarwal said the area covered by structures Ram Chabutra, Sita
Rasoi and Bhandar in the outer courtyard is declared in the share of
Nirmohi Akhara and they shall be entitled to possession thereof, in
the absence of any person with better title. Justice Agarwal said the
open area within the outer courtyard shall be shared by Nirmohi Akhara
and the party for Lord Rama since it has generally been used by the
Hindu people for worship at both places.
“It is, however, made clear that the share of Muslim parties shall not
be less than one-third of the total area of the premises and if
necessary, it may be given some area of outer courtyard.
“It is also made clear that while making metes and bounds, if some
minor adjustments are to be made with respect to the share of
different parties, the affected party may be compensated by allotting
the requisite land from the area which is under acquisition of the
Government of India,” the judge said.
In his findings on issues, Justice Agarwal said the parties of the
Muslim side have failed to prove that the property in dispute was
constructed by Babar in 1528 AD.
Justice Sharma, writing a separate judgement, observed that the
disputed site is the birth place of Lord Rama. “Place of birth is a
juristic person and is a deity. It is personified as a spirit of
divine worshipped as Lord Rama as a child.
“Spirit of divine ever remains present everywhere at all times for
anyone to invoke at any shape or form in accordance with his own
aspirations and it can be shapeless and formless also,” he said.
On the disputed structure, Justice Sharma said it “was constructed by
Babar, the year is not certain but it was against the tenets of Islam.
Thus, it cannot have the character of a mosque.”
Differing with the other two judges, he also ruled that the disputed
structure was constructed on the site of the old structure after
demolition of the same. “The Archaeological Survey of India has proved
that the structure was a massive Hindu religious structure,” he said.
He said the idols were placed in the middle dome of the disputed
structure in the intervening night of December 22 and 23, 1949.3
With regard to the status of the disputed site — inner and outer
courtyard, Justice Sharma said “it is established that the property in
suit is the site of Janambhoomi of Ram Chandra Ji and Hindus in
general had the right to worship ‘charan’, ‘Sita Rasoi’, other idols
and other object of worship existed upon the property in suit.”
He said “it is also established that Hindus have been worshipping the
place in dispute as Janamsthan, i.e., a birth place as deity and
visiting it as a sacred place of pilgrimage as of right since time
immemorial.”
The judge said after the construction of the disputed structure, “it
is proved the deities were installed inside the disputed structure on
22/23.12.1949. It is also proved that the outer courtyard was in
exclusive possession of Hindus and they were worshipping throughout
and in the inner courtyard (in the disputed structure) they were also
worshipping.
“It is also established that the disputed structure cannot be treated
as a mosque as it came into existence against the tenets of Islam.”
(With inputs from PTI) Watch Video:
September 30, 2010, 9:30 PM IST.Who Are the Nirmohi Akhara?.Search
India Real Time .Article Comments (1,765) India Real Time HOME PAGE
».EmailPrintPermalinkTwitter
Digg
+ More
close StumbleUponYahoo!
BuzzMySpacedel.icio.usRedditLinkedInFarkViadeoOrkut Text Krishna
Pokharel And Tripti Lahiri
The Allahabad High Court delivered a complex verdict in the Babri
Masjid case today, dividing the sacred site into three parts – one for
Muslims and two for Hindus.
They had to deal in their case with a most unusual cast of characters,
including the Hindu god Lord Ram himself, who was named as a party to
the case by one of the (human) Hindu litigants.
Here is a glossary of some terms from the case that may not be
familiar to all:
Nirmohi Akhara
One third of the site will go to the Nirmohi Akhara, a group of Hindu
ascetics who are devotees of none other than Lord Ram. Their name
means, roughly, “Group Without Attachment.” They have given up the
material world for the company of their god. They are “sadhus” – or
Hindu holy men often characterized by the hermetic tendencies. They
claimed in court that there is no mosque called Babri Masjid at the
site in Ayodhya, nor did the Mughal commander Babur make any conquest
or any occupation of territory in India. They also claimed the site is
of ancient antiquity and has existed before the living memory of man.
Lord Ram and his court representatives receive another third of the
site.
Ram Janmabhoomi
Literally, this phrase means “the land Ram was born on.” Hindu groups
refer to the property in Ayodhya where the medieval Babri mosque
stood, and that was at the heart of the 60 year dispute with this
phrase. Ram is one of the most revered incarnations of one of the
deities of a Hindu trinity—the god of preservation, Vishnu.
Sunni Waqfs Board
This is an elected legal body that oversees Sunni Islamic properties
endowed for religious or charitable purposes. The plaintiff in the
case that was decided Thursday was the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central
Board of Waqfs, which supervises these properties in the state where
the town of Ayodhya is located. The board gets the third portion of
the site.
Ram Lalla
This refers to Hindu idols placed in the central dome of the mosque,
allegedly in 1949. The phrase specifically refers to Ram as a baby or
a young child. Parts of the Hindu suits revolved around seeking access
to these idols and having them remain there, while the Muslim
plaintiffs wanted them removed.
Nirmohi Akhara
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article may need to be updated. Please update this article to
reflect recent events or newly available information, and remove this
template when finished. Please see the talk page for more
information.
This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references.
Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Part of a series on
Hinduism
Om • Brahman • Ishvara
Hindu • History of Hinduism
Deities
Brahman
Ishvara
Trimurti
Brahma • Vishnu • Shiva
Devis and Devas
Saraswati · Lakshmi · Parvati
Shakti · Durga · Kali
Ganesha · Subrahmanya · Ayyappa
Rama · Krishna
Hanuman
Prajapati · Rudra
Indra · Agni · Dyaus
Bhumi · Varuna · Vayu
Philosophy
Concepts
Brahman · Om · Ishvara
Atman · Maya
Karma · Samsara
Purusharthas
(Dharma · Artha · Kama · Moksha)
Schools
Astika
Samkhya · Yoga
Nyaya · Vaisheshika
Purva mimamsa
Uttara mimamsa (Vedanta) (Dvaita, Advaita, Vishishtadvaita)
Nastika
Charvaka
Scriptures
Vedas
Rigveda • Yajurveda
Samaveda • Atharvaveda
Divisions
Samhita, Brahmana,
Aranyaka, Upanishad
Upavedas
Ayurveda • Dhanurveda
Gandharvaveda • Sthapatyaveda
Vedangas
Shiksha · Chandas · Vyakarana
Nirukta · Kalpa · Jyotisha
Upanishads
Rig vedic
Aitareya
Yajur vedic
Brihadaranyaka · Isha
Taittiriya · Katha · Shvetashvatara
Sama vedic
Chandogya · Kena
Atharva vedic
Mundaka · Mandukya · Prashna
Puranas
Brahma puranas
Brahma · Brahmanda
Brahmavaivarta
Markandeya · Bhavishya
Vaishnava puranas
Vishnu · Bhagavata
Naradeya · Garuda · Padma
Shaiva puranas
Shiva · Linga
Skanda · Agni · Vayu
Itihasas
Ramayana · Mahabharata
Other scriptures
Bhagavat Gita
Dharma Shastra · Manusmriti
Artha Shastra · Yoga Vasistha
Sutras · Stotras · Tantras
Yoga Sutra
others
Classification of scriptures
Śruti · Smriti
Practices
Worship
Puja · Japa · Bhajana
Tapa · Dhyana
Yajna · Homa
Tirthadana · Naivedhya
Temple · Vigraha · Bhakti
Samskaras
Garbhadhana · Pumsavana · Simantonayana · Jatakarma · Namakarana ·
Nishkramana · Annaprashana · Chudakarana · Karnavedha · Vidyarambha ·
Upanayana · Praishartha · Keshanta · Ritushuddhi · Samavartana ·
Vivaha · Antyeshti
Varnashrama Dharma
Varna
Brahmin · Kshatriya
Vaishya · Shudra
Ashrama
Brahmacharya · Grihastha
Vanaprastha · Sanyasa
Festivals
Navaratri
Vijayadashami (Dasara)
Deepavali · Shivaratri · Holi
Kumbha Mela · Ratha Yatra · Vishu · Bihu · Baisakhi · Puthandu
Ganesh Chaturthi · Onam
Rama Navami · Janmashtami
Raksha Bandhan
Philosophers
Ancient
Gautama · Jaimini · Kanada · Kapila · Markandeya · Patañjali · Valmiki
· Vyasa
Medieval
Adi Shankara · Basava · Dnyaneshwar · Chaitanya · Gangesha Upadhyaya ·
Gaudapada · Jayanta Bhatta · Kabir · Kumarila Bhatta · Madhusudana ·
Madhva · Namdeva · Nimbarka · Prabhakara · Raghunatha Siromani ·
Ramanuja · Vedanta Desika · Tukaram · Tulsidas · Vachaspati Mishra ·
Vallabha
Modern
Aurobindo · Coomaraswamy · Dayananda Saraswati · Gandhi · Krishnananda
· Narayana Guru · Prabhupada · Ramakrishna · Ramana Maharshi ·
Radhakrishnan · Sivananda · Vivekananda · Yogananda
Other Topics
Hindu denominations
Hinduism by country
Mythology • Hindu calendar
Hindu law • Hindu iconography
Hindu nationalism • Hindutva
Hindu pilgrimage sites
Persecution • Criticism
Glossary
Hinduism Portal
Hindu Mythology Portal
v • d • e
Nirmohi Akhara is a Hindu religious denomination comprising ardent
devotees of Lord Hanuman. It is one of the 14 akharas recognized by
the Akhil Bharatiya Akhara Parishad, and belongs to the Vaishnava
sampradaya.[1] It is headed by Mahant Bhaskar Das.
This group has been in the spotlight in connection with the Ayodhya
debate since 1949 when it filed a suit to take over the disputed site
of Babri Mosque.[2]
The name means, roughly, “Group Without Attachment.” They have
renounced the material world for the company of God. They are “sadhus”
– or Hindu holy men often characterized by ascetic tendencies. They
have claimed in court that there is no mosque called Babri Masjid at
the disputed site in Ayodhya. [3]
Nirmohi Akhara filed a suit in 1885 (as per Allahabad High Court
Judgement dated 30 September 2010, see below reference No.4) with the
sub-judge of Faizabad, seeking consent to construct a temple for the
Hindu God Rama in the area called the Ram Chabutra, adjacent to the
Babri Mosque. The sub-judge held then that two large religious
structures in close proximity could potentially be a threat to public
order. Permission was denied by the court, though the Nirmohi Akhara
has since kept up its effort to reclaim the land and construct the
temple.[4]
In 1989, the Nirmohi Akhara filed a lawsuit against the Uttar Pradesh
State government claiming that they had been worshiping the deities
installed at a temple at the then disputed site since time immemorial.
Accordingly, they requested the Court to hand over management of the
temple to the Nirmohi Akhara.[5]
On September 30, 2010, a Lucknow panel of three judges of the
Allahabad High Court pronounced the verdict on the case deciding to
give a third part of the land to each party namely the Sunni Waqf
Board, Ram-Lalla Deity and Nirmohi Akhara, with the Ram-Lalla Deity
retaining its present position and the Nirmohi Akhara getting the
areas named Sita Rasoi and Ram Chabutara, within the disputed site.[2]
[6]
References
1.^ http://www.firstfoundation.in/who_rel_H_Akhadas.htm
2.^ a b http://www.hindustantimes.com/Ayodhya-land-to-be-divided-into-three-parts-HC/Article1-606452.aspx
3.^ http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/09/30/who-are-the-nirmohi-akhara/
4.^ http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1907/19070040.htm
5.^ Allahabad High Court Judgement summary, page 15, 17[1]
6.^ http://www.asianage.com/india/who-nirmohi-akhara-252
This organization-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by
expanding it.
v • d • e
Nirmohi Akhara is a Hindu religious sect of the Vaishnavite order. It
was established in 1720 by Ramanandacharya to counter the growing
influence of Shaivism. Akhara literally means a wrestling ring, and
thus suggests militant overtones of the religious sect. The rich sect
owns many temples and mutts in the Indian states of Uttar Pradesh,
Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat and Bihar. Members of
the sect are expected to lead a simple and austere life of celibacy
and accept Rama as the presiding God. New recruits to the sect are
mainly in their teens and maybe from any Hindu caste. They are put
through a gruelling schedule of mastering the Hindu scriptures (Vedas
and Upanishads) and also martial arts. In former times members of the
sect had a mandate to provide protection to the followers of Rama and
were provided rigorous training in archery, swordsmanship and
wrestling. These are still part of their curriculum but in a moderate
way.
Retrieved from “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirmohi_Akhara“
Categories: Organization stubs | Organisations based in Uttar Pradesh
| Ayodhya | Hindu movements and organizations | Hindu denominations
•This page was last modified on 2 October 2010 at 18:51.
•Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
License;
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation,
Inc., a non-profit organization.
…and I am Sid Harth
Conflict, Hindu Society, History, Hot Off The Presses, Indian society,
News, Views and Reviews, Propaganda, Religious fundamentalism,
Terrorism
03/10/2010
« Biharis Bang, Oops, Ban Narendra Modi’s Ass