Notwithstanding a growing chorus for early construction of a
Ram
temple
in
ahead of next year's general elections, many
youth
in the holy city
say they don't
want to be drawn into the "political melee" while asserting that their future "won't hinge"
on the fate of the proposed
temple.
Another section of
youth, however, are anxious to have the
temple constructed but "not at the cost of communal harmony."
Aman Kumar, a stone craftsman
in his late 30s who runs a statuary shop named Shri
Ram Murti
in the heart of the city, says, "
Ayodhya
is the land of Lord
Ram. I was born here and more than three generations of my family have been living here. We are a family of
Ram worshippers, and it pains us to see
Ram Lalla inside a tent."
A precious idol of
Ram Lalla (child avatar of Lord
Ram), along with those of Laxman, Bharat and Shatrughan,
is currently kept inside the tent at the disputed Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site, which many Hindus believe to be the birthplace of Lord
Ram.
Kumar, when asked about the current frenzy surrounding the controversial
temple issue, says, "People of
Ayodhya, of all communities, have always lived
in peace. It
is outsiders and politicians with agenda, who come to our town and vitiate the atmosphere."
"I will be very happy if a
Ram
temple
is built but it should not happen at the cost of communal harmony.
Ayodhya has already suffered
in 1992," he told media.
On December 6, 1992, an army of 'kar sewaks' (right-wing activists), drawn from various parts of the country converged
in
Ayodhya and razed the 16th century Babri Mosque, triggering unrest
in the
temple town and large-scale riots
in other parts of India.
The spectre of 1992 still haunts many people of both the communities, who had directly or indirectly suffered
in the violence that erupted after the demolition of the mosque.
Meanwhile, senior police officials
say, security has been stepped up
in
Ayodhya,
in view of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad's 'Dharma Sabha', being touted as the largest congregation of '
Ram bhakts'
in
Ayodhya since the 1992 'kar seva'.
Rohit Pandey, 18, a tour guide, who speaks multiple Indian languages, and wears a prominent 'tilak'
on his forehead, comfortably pallies with Mohammad Azim, a 46-year-old auto-driver
in the city, who bore the brunt of the 1992 tragedy.
"We affectionately call him 'Mamu' (uncle). He brings the tourists here and I then take them to
Ram janmabhoomi and other sightseeing places. Hindu and Muslims do not have problem here. I also
want a
Ram Mandir but the peaceful atmosphere should not be disturbed," he says.
Azim says Rohit
is almost of the same age as one of his four sons and "
youth like him
want to
focus
on building their future, but are misguided by politicians. My sons
want to
focus
on their
career, not this issue, which anyway
is
in court."
Vikas Dwivedi, 18, an
Ayodhya native, currently pursuing engineering at
Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut, says, "I am more concerned about my future, my family's future. The fate of the
Ram
temple
is neither going to affect my
career, nor would I let it be affected."
Another
Ayodhya resident, Anil Yadav, a college graduate now preparing for competitive examinations, says, "We have friends from all communities. We celebrate Holi and Eid together.
Some politicians and right-wing groups may be whipping up sentiments
on
Ram
temple issue, but I am going to be focussed
on my
career goals."
"The Supreme Court will decide
on the contentious issue, and everyone should respect that," he says.
The chorus has grown within the BJP and the
Sangh Parivar, seeking construction of a
temple there through ordinance as the apex court recently fixed the
Ayodhya title suit for the first week of January next year before an appropriate bench, which will decide the schedule of hearing.
Several BJP and VHP leaders have claimed that majority population of
Ayodhya and rest of the country
want to see the
temple get built as it
is a "matter of faith" for them.
Lucknow-native Himanshu Singh, a fresh law school graduate, who spent part of his childhood
in
Ayodhya, says, "Politicians and religious outfits' leaders should not try to become our spokespersons.
Temple or no
temple, why should they decide
on behalf of people."