The history of those times is well recorded. A large Hindu temple complex would not have got unrecorded. No one is coming out as to what complex existed except saying that a temple existed exactly below the Taj - a fact which cannot be verified for obvious reasons.Better to ignore such fundamental revelations from time to time.

rambabu wrote:

Any issue aimed at disrupting the peace of the nation is undesirable. In the past, it's not only saffron groups, many historians and architectural groups raised this issue with a view to explore the historical facts.

Taj mahal was built only a few hundred years ago. Nobody can say that the particular site would have been vacant since time immemorial before construction of Taj Mahal. In fact, there is no site on which there would have been made many structures from time to time, demolished or just collapsed in course of time. This is axiomatic and need not be bothered about by us. The historians and archaeologists are specialists in their field and they attempt to find out past facts. Hindu religion is older than Muslim and Christian. Obviously, the Muslims and Christians also made everything on the same land that was earlier monopoly of Hindus.  Naturally, there must be Hindu construction prior to whatever they constructed.  This is no cause for communal tension but the saffron brigade is interested in creating communal trouble. 

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

rambabu wrote:

Any issue aimed at disrupting the peace of the nation is undesirable. In the past, it's not only saffron groups, many historians and architectural groups raised this issue with a view to explore the historical facts.

Taj mahal was built only a few hundred years ago. Nobody can say that the particular site would have been vacant since time immemorial before construction of Taj Mahal. In fact, there is no site on which there would have been made many structures from time to time, demolished or just collapsed in course of time. This is axiomatic and need not be bothered about by us. The historians and archaeologists are specialists in their field and they attempt to find out past facts. Hindu religion is older than Muslim and Christian. Obviously, the Muslims and Christians also made everything on the same land that was earlier monopoly of Hindus.  Naturally, there must be Hindu construction prior to whatever they constructed.  This is no cause for communal tension but the saffron brigade is interested in creating communal trouble. 

 This is a  pertinent and logical point  you pointed Sir, with which I agree. I also agree with you,whosoever is trying to create communal tension are no less than traitors. 

As usual, when any Hindu tries to show his point it creates communal tension but when others destroyed Hindu property it's not even worth mention as is can create communal tension. That's the beauty of Hindu tolerance power not found in any other community anywhere in the world. We are real followers of Mahatma Gandhi - 'If someone hits you on one cheek offer him the other too'. One day either your would stop feeling pain or he will not find you worth wasting his slaps.

Tolerance is taken as weakness . And moreover,other religions have protective cover "Minorities.". This explains all.

rambabu wrote:

Tolerance is taken as weakness . And moreover,other religions have protective cover "Minorities.". This explains all.

It's not cover of minority but a power of "Mass Vote bank Politics"

Why not this facility available to Jains, Sikhs, Parsis then? These minorities groups are educated and do not follow fatwas.

We live in present times in an environment of democracy, secularism and socialism.  There can be no excuse for hurting religious sentiments of any  community or demolishing any religious buildings.  We cannot judge events in medieval times according to current norms.  It goes without saying that there was neither democracy nor socialism nor secularism in the medieval period when certain religious buildings were damaged and new structure built on them. Then might was right and victor could do anything. We need not and must not continue the bad practices in those times. Irrespective of anything in ancient or medieval period, we need now to uphold democratic, socialist and secular ideals and do nothing that may lead to national disintegration. 

suni51 wrote:

rambabu wrote:

Tolerance is taken as weakness . And moreover,other religions have protective cover "Minorities.". This explains all.

 

It's not cover of minority but a power of "Mass Vote bank Politics"

 

Why not this facility available to Jains, Sikhs, Parsis then? These minorities groups are educated and do not follow fatwas.

 I agree with you. This facility is not available as you said because of their eduction. No govt wants educated people. The essence of vote bank politics is, "the less educated' more advantageous".

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

We live in present times in an environment of democracy, secularism and socialism.  There can be no excuse for hurting religious sentiments of any  community or demolishing any religious buildings.  We cannot judge events in medieval times according to current norms.  It goes without saying that there was neither democracy nor socialism nor secularism in the medieval period when certain religious buildings were damaged and new structure built on them. Then might was right and victor could do anything. We need not and must not continue the bad practices in those times. Irrespective of anything in ancient or medieval period, we need now to uphold democratic, socialist and secular ideals and do nothing that may lead to national disintegration. 

Secularism is not one sided game to satisfy one particular religion for the sake of votes. Besides government has no right to stop anyone putting his rightful stake and that too in the name of false secularism. Let the facts speak for themselves.

suni51 wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

We live in present times in an environment of democracy, secularism and socialism.  There can be no excuse for hurting religious sentiments of any  community or demolishing any religious buildings.  We cannot judge events in medieval times according to current norms.  It goes without saying that there was neither democracy nor socialism nor secularism in the medieval period when certain religious buildings were damaged and new structure built on them. Then might was right and victor could do anything. We need not and must not continue the bad practices in those times. Irrespective of anything in ancient or medieval period, we need now to uphold democratic, socialist and secular ideals and do nothing that may lead to national disintegration. 

Secularism is not one sided game to satisfy one particular religion for the sake of votes. Besides government has no right to stop anyone putting his rightful stake and that too in the name of false secularism. Let the facts speak for themselves.

No doubt, secularism and for that matter any thing cannot be one sided.  Here the point is that we live in present times. We cannot undo what happened during medieval times. Let us accept facts as these exist now or earliest in 1950 when our constitution became operative. By reopening every issue from remote ancient and medieval periods, we shall be nowhere.