Argument 1: Two wrongs don’t make a right. If Babur destroyed a temple that does not mean you should destroy a mosque.
1. This argument started only in 2003, after Archaeological Survey of India provided definite proof of a temple under the Babri structure. Before this, the argument was that Babur never ever destroyed any temple! Babur was a saint before 2003.
2. This argument is normally given by those who have been ‘historically’ weak in aptitude – read ‘secular historians’ and ‘secular writers’ et al. Sometimes I feel that before arguing with such people, both sides should first give an aptitude test to assess minimum intellectual threshold. The reason is that this is one of the most flawed reason one can give to argue such points, and yet is persistently used by these ‘intellectuals’. Continue reading to know why.
3. This argument ASSUMES a-priori that destruction of a monument of a pedophile rapist mass-murderer is wrong. But that is what we are arguing! Unless one can prove why it is wrong, how can you ASSUME it to be wrong to begin with!
4. Any person who has studied maths even till elementary level without cheating, would know that why two wrongs, any number of wrongs will only make wrong and never make a right. If you add several negative numbers, it will always yield a larger negative number. So there is nothing unique about this argument unless these ‘intellectuals’ have always faltered to choose where to ‘add’ and where to ‘multiply’!
5. Those who have studied maths till Class 12 have definitely studied mathematical induction. Its a simple logical concept which we shall apply here:
This is argument of secular intellectuals:
Event 1: ‘Babur destroyed a temple’ was wrong.
Event 2: ‘Babri symbol of shame was destroyed’ is also wrong.
The logic is that ‘Event 1 + Event 2′ don’t make a Right event. So Event 2 should not happen simply because Event 1 has already happened.
This is its extension as per induction:
Now fact is that even Event 2: ‘Babri symbol of shame was destroyed’ has also ALREADY happened.
So Event 3: ‘Criticism of Event 2 or destruction of Rama Lala temple’ is ALSO wrong by same logic!
Even if Event 2 was wrong, secular intellectuals should not condemn it because then they would be doing another wrong ‘Event 3′.
To extend it further, come what may happen as future events, they should never complain or oppose because Two Wrongs don’t make a Right!
In essence, what this logic means is that whatever has happened is bygone. One should never condemn it or criticize it because condemnation or criticism will not make it right.
So if I loot belongings of a ‘secular intellectual’, he should not retort or even complain. After all two wrongs don’t make a right! I loot again and again he should not retort. I keep looting and then ask my future generations to keep looting his future generations and continue doing so for 1000 years and still he should never complain!
In summary, if at all these ‘secular intellectuals’ believe in principle of ‘Two wrongs don’t make a right’, and believe certain events like destruction of Babri Masjid or demanding for destruction of other monuments built by dacoits to be wrong, they should simply always keep their mouths SHUT to honor their own argument! They flout their own logic by breaking their silence!
Argument 2: Babri monument had historical value because it was old. So destroying it was wrong.
1. If Babri monument had historical value because it was old, even the existing Ram Lala temple has at least some historical value. So even it should be preserved.
2. By this logic, every thing in past has an historical value. If I punch on face of such a historian, he should preserve the injury mark to maintain its historical value.
3. If the argument is that Babri Masjid being older has more historical value, then the temple beneath it has even more historical value. And hence from historical standpoint, Kar Sewaks did a great job!
4. By this logic monuments should also be built or those sites should also be declared heritage sites where Mumbai attacks happened (Taj, CST) and call them ‘Kasab Dhaam’. In fact all places where terrorist attacks have happened in history should be turned into heritage sites in name of those terrorists.
Argument 3: So many innocents were killed due to violence and riots after the destruction of Babri Masjid. How can one justify such an act then which caused death of so many innocents?
1. Another beauty of logical fallacy. Perhaps aptitude training should be compulsory from early childhood to prevent situations where responsible people lack this critical faculty. In this case, a deliberate cause-effect relationship is being created.
2. Riots happened because there was section of anti-nationals who considered a criminal like Babur as their role model and not because a structure was demolished in far-flung Ayodhya. And then it only shows the following:
a. Our security forces are ill-equipped to handle notorious gangs. Or perhaps there are insiders involved to immobilize security forces.
b. Our media and communication channels are irresponsible enough to not ensure that people do not defend a self-confessed criminal like Babur.
c. Our education system and policies are misguided to nurture supporters of criminals.
3. By this logic India should gift Kashmir to Pakistan because of the killings happening in the valley. They should create Bodoland, Gorkhaland, ULFA Land, Mao Land and all other lands to ensure innocents are not killed!
4. In brief, this is the logic of spineless devoid of moral standing. Because if this not be so, then it simply means ‘Jiski Laathi Uski Bhains’ – My buffalo because I have the stick! If I threaten to create disruption, then everyone should listen to me. And if someone else becomes even more threatening then he should be listened. This is only a recipe of Jungle Raaj not civilized living which is based on principles and not whims of few fanatics.
Argument 4: But then it was mosque. How can you hurt sentiments of millions of Muslims?
1. If I name myself as Rashtrapati, I do not become President of India. Babri Masjid was only a namesake mosque. Since Babur was not a Muslim in first place (refer http://agniveer.com/
2. Some may say that Muslims used to worship there and hence it was a mosque. This is even more frivolous logic. The Muslims who support worshipping in Babri Masjid could belong to two categories: first are those who do know about Babur. This is government’s failure to not been able to educate them about reality of Babur. The good Muslims would definitely hate to be associated with Babur once they know his disgusting reality.
The other category is those of miscreants. They are anti-nationals and should be dealt with iron hand. Tomorrow they may support financing a mosque in name of Osama Bin Laden or Nadir Shah or Mahmud Ghazni! Such fanatic perverts are fit to be in Somalia or Afghanistan but not in India.
3. Sentiments of ALL the nationalist and humanist Muslims would be elevated when they are dissociated from such terrorists like Babur. Already Kasabs and Osamas have done a lot of damage to pride and image of these good Muslims. They should now be relieved of being made scapegoats by associating them with every historical criminal of the world.
Argument 5: By your logic, then all structures created by Muslim rulers should be destroyed. Eye for eye only makes you blind.
1. Another example of foolish logic. Who is taking eye for eye here? Who is killing innocent Muslims or destroying their places of worships or looting their homes?
2. Structures created by Muslim rulers (they were namesake Muslims and not really Muslims by the way) fall in two categories:
a. Structures like Taj Mahal, Red Fort, Fatahpur Sikri, Jama Masjid etc which were actually old Indian structures that were captured by these terrorists from West Asia. These looters had nothing to do with art and architecture and they merely had Quranic verses inscribed on these structures to make them their own property and fool even fellow Muslims. P N Oak has done great research on these. All these structures should be rightfully proclaimed by their original names and any associations with criminals like Akbar, Shah Jahan, Aurangzeb should be lawfully removed.
b. Structures like mosques at Kashi Vishwanath, Mathura and thousand of other temples which were created only to denigrate Hindus and destroy existing culture. I disagree completely with VHP, RSS and BJP that only Ram Mandir should be given or only Ayodhya, Mathura and Kashi should be restored. Because I believe that these structures are NOT Hindu-Muslim issue. There is nothing Hindu-Muslim about it. These are national issues and ALL these structures represent insult for our national sovereignty and independence.
More than Hindus, they are symbols of shame for Muslims because such structures club Muslims with misdeeds of these terrorist rulers who were political perverts and had little to do with seeking Ultimate.
Thus, in interest of national pride, ALL THESE STRUCTURES SHOULD BE DEMOLISHED. Agniveer is bound to put all efforts to reach that stage in future. And ideally it would have these structures destroyed by MUSLIMS to restore them the self-respect they deserve for being Indian and being Humans. There is no element of religion about it.
Argument 6: We should have a hospital built in Janmabhoomi area instead of temple or mosque.
1. I respect the sentiments but then hospitals can be built in a lot of other areas. Why only in Janmabhoomi. But yes, if hospital is best thing to be built here because it is more useful than a temple or mosque, then even mosques at Kashi Vishwanath, Mathura and other structures should also be destroyed and let us have hospitals everywhere.
2. I ask the naughty secularists who give this argument that how many of them would be willing to go into a rented place and convert their homes into a nursing home or a hospital? All people giving such free advice should first set such an example. Also would they justify replacement of all heritage places like Raj Ghat, Shanti Van, India Gate, Shakti Sthal etc also to be converted into hospitals so as to be more useful for society? Let them raise a national issue on these first and then discuss Janmabhoomi. After all these places are less ‘historical’ than site of Janmabhoomi as per oldness!
3. I personally believe the real Mandir or temple to be built at Janmabhoomi would be by converting this place into a center that would ensure that no Babur is able to cause such a destruction ever again in future. That would be the real Puja of the character of Ram. So:
a. A high-quality Vedic research center should be built there where scholars can research and bring out gems of Vedic wisdom in all fields of life for the world. This would go a long way to spread the religion of Shri Ram all across the world.
b. A high-quality Kshatriya training center to train our next generations in both Shaastra Vidya (Vedas) and Shastra Vidya (Self-defense) should be created to have a cadre of trained Kshatriyas to safeguard the nation, Dharma and society from present and future Baburs for ages to come. In short, let us ensure that true followers of Ram and Pujaks of Hanuman emerge from this Ram Mandir.
Argument 7: There is no way to prove that Ram was born here. Why then be fussy about a small piece of land?
1. Another red-herring. As I said, it is immaterial if Ram was born here or somewhere else. That would be impossible to prove because even archaeological evidences of that age is impossible to get. But the point is that there is no doubt that Babur was a terrorist much worse than Osama Bin Laden and that he created a structure in Ayodhya. Even if no temple would have been found below Babri Masjid erected in memory of Babur’s male sex-partner Babri, still the structure would have deserved being demolished.
2. It is no more a question of a piece of land. It is a question of self-respect for all Indians. Since Ayodhya is associated with Shri Ram, it would be greatest assertion of self-dignity if this structure by a sex-maniac terrorist is replaced by a monument dedicated to the greatest role-model for all Indians – Shri Ram – who was a symbol of compassion, bravery and character (the antithesis of Babur).
Argument 8: One should respect the judgment of the Court and not take law in hands.
1. While I agree that Courts should be complied with to maintain discipline in society, that does not mean that anything that court utters has to be RESPECTED. Respect cannot be enforced.
2. Courts are run by humans and there is no way to prove that only the most brilliant brains go into the legal profession. In fact if one sees the status of legal system in India, there are hardly other systems one can think of which has more inefficiencies. Further, going by the education system of India, it is unlikely that only the best brains have been choosing the legal profession. The reverse may be perhaps true.
3. So for example stupid decisions like trying to unnecessarily push homosexuality down our throats for frivolous reasons, or justifying vulgar photos in newspapers because there is also a ‘children section’ just below the ‘Adult section’ to provide ‘Wholesome’ entertainment only provides glimpses of the thought-process of our judges. Shanti Bhushan just gave a list of 8 corrupt judges and no one dared to book him! All these suffice to tell the standard of our judicial legal system.
4. Courts keep overruling their own judgments. So while one should comply with court as a matter of discipline in larger society, that does not mean Court can be considered a right authority to teach us what is right and wrong. In fact, to my view, Court is a completely incompetent authority to deal with such issues.
5. And if Court be indeed the right authority, I fail to understand what prompted these ‘law-abiding’ forces to overrule Supreme Court in Shah Bano case?
6. The only right point in this argument is perhaps that one should not get into violence and harming innocent people in any situation. Beyond that, only Ishwar is the greatest judge and these human judges stand nowhere close to that Supreme Judge. Our lives should be governed by the inspiration of that Supreme Judge alone and no other human.
To summarize, sickular arguments on this issue are completely baseless. One also has to admit that even the supporters of Ayodhya Movement – VHP, RSS, BJP – failed to rightly convey the true character of Babur among masses and unnecessarily led it to become a Hindu-Muslim issue. In reality, there is nothing Hindu-Muslim about this issue. Its a national issue for everyone alike. In fact a Babri masjid or a mosque at Mathura/ Kashi is much more demeaning to Muslims than Hindus because it brackets them with terrorists.
I do not know what the Court’s judgment would be on this issue. If it is in favor of destruction of Babri Masjid and construction of a center dedicated to Shri Ram, I welcome it. If it is not, all right-minded nationalist forces should unite together, bring all sections of population together, move forth towards consolidation of our votes, not be distracted by forces with ulterior motives, enter the parliament with thumping majority and then pave the way for destruction of all symbols of national shame by including nationalists from all religions and replacing them with centers of tolerance and humanism.
कोई टिप्पणी नहीं:
एक टिप्पणी भेजें