Muslim side in Ayodhya trial asks SC to not rely solely on Quran or Hadith for mosque claim
The Muslim side to the Ayodhya title suit told the Supreme Court on Tuesday not to solely rely on the Holy Quran and Hadith while examining their claim over the Ram Janmabhoomi- Babri Masjid disputed site. Ironically, the Muslims distancing from their religious texts came in stark contrast to the Hindu side digging deep into these texts to show how the presence of pictures, engravings on pillars inside the Babri Masjid made it "un-Islamic".
Responding to the Hindu side's averments, senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Sunni Central Waqf Board, told a five-judge bench that pillars with engravings inside the mosque made no difference to the worship of Muslims so long as these pillars had no image of Hindu deities. He said that the presence of pillars was not meant for "deification" but was for decoration purpose and one must not read too much into their presence in the mosque.
The bench found this argument unpalatable and reminded Dhavan that the arguments by the Hindu side quoted from Quran and Hadith to show that no mosque should have any symbols, pictures or images. Any structure having these art forms will be "haraam" which cannot be used as a mosque, the Hindu side had argued.
Dhavan said, "The images of lotus, garud and lion on the pillars served as emblems of the ruling nawabs or sultans. It is the emperor's edit that determines the law. A king may act un-Quranically, but he may remain ruler of a Muslim regime. So this court should not go just by Quran or Hadith." The bench then asked Dhavan to show any evidence that these figurines were "emblems" or that flowers engraved on pillars served as "decoration" in other mosques, but no evidence was forthcoming. The bench said that this would be relevant as the Hindu side further argued these pillars were remnants of an existing temple at the disputed site.
Dhavan then cited Qutab Minar as an example to show how the prayer area walls had temple inscriptions. He also cited cultural assimilation which seeped into mosque structures as well as not all workmen who built it were Muslims. The arguments will continue on Wednesday.
‘GRAVINGS NOT DEIFICATION’
|
| Pillars with engravings in mosque made no difference to the worship of Muslims so long as the pillars had no image of Hindu deities |
| Images of lotus, garud and lion on the pillars served as emblems of the ruling nawabs |
| Hindu side had quoted Quran & Hadith to show no mosque should have any symbols, pictures |
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Supreme Court")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}