Thread by @dikgaj

So three men, among them a "spiritual guru" as "recognized" by judiciary, have been made facto trustees whose personal voices/ideology/politics-if-any will be declared to represent majority Hindu's& minority Muslims thoughts on Ram Janambhumi. The poison of Gandhian trusteesheep.

The regional sants/gurus with direct stakeholding in Ayodhya, or the survivors of karsevaks burned in locked train by jihadis at Godhra dont represent majority Hindus:"trustees" of conscience of Hindus appointed from high above are put into deciding fate of Hindu sacred geography

Gandhi imposed the "trusteesheep" model of Indian politics backed by power of his "political funding"&a bit of defacto Brit help: he put Nehru as "trustee" picked by an individual totally unaccountable to the people of India, to rule over India.

Now 3 men, with one man seemingly judicially recognized in the status of "spiritual guru" have been picked, just like Gandhi picked Nehru, to decide on legitimacy of "ownership" of sacred geography of Hindus. Why does this "spiritual guru" solely represents Hindu thoughts?

What is the rationale behind the dangerous precedence of courts deciding who a "spiritual guru" of the Hindus is, and who isnt? how do courts decide relative rankings of importance or representativeness of Hindus by "gurus"?

Ravishankar has made commendable efforts in meeting various sections to work out what he calls a "mediation" effort, and was charged with "hurting minority sentiments" by Muslim orgs for speculating on potential "Syria-like" situation if temple was prevented from being built.

that very remark gives a peculiar mindset. In Syria the violence was entirely a planned jihadi operation, backed by a transnational network/coalition targeting Iran/Shias/Russia on behalf of Sunnis. The victims were Yazidi women as captive slaves and Yazidi men butchered.

If temple was not allowed to be built, saying it wd give rise to "Syria"-like situation, is actually equivalent to saying Hindus will behave like Sunni jihadis and capture muslim women as slaves and butcher Muslim men. Is this his estimate and esteem of the majority Hindu?

If a small group of self-selected ("collegium model of selection" which wasnt there in letter and spirit of Constituent Assembly - much cited nowadays to justify why nothing can ever be changed by citizens from the original Consttn) can play bargain with Hindu sacred geography

any individual Hindu too can declare her/his position on the Hindu sacred geography: for ex, that any individual giving away even angulipramana land of Hindu sacred geography to invader religions that have always and still openly maintain their aim of erasing Hinduism,

then they will be deemed to be traitors to matribhumi and Hindus by future generations, and no decision of parliaments/kings/rulers/dictators/cabinets/prime-ministers/courts are permanent: its ppl who obey them or trash them depending on time and opportunity.

They gave land to invaders on behalf of Hindus, and we hv sovereign bases of jihad on our flanks. This land is not theirs to give whose families wr not displaced, women not looted, wealth never diminishes through riots& genocides-yet who gift Hindu sacred geography to jihadis.