:Ram Janmabhoomi

{{Further|Baqi Tashqandi}}

File:Ayodhya disputed site map.png

The Ramayana, a Hindu epic whose earliest portions date back to 1st millennium BCE, states that the capital of Rama was "Ayodhya", which may not be the same as modern Ayodhya According to the local Hindu belief, the site of the now-demolished Babri Mosque in Ayodhya is the exact birthplace of Rama. The Babri mosque is believed to have been constructed during 1528–29 by a certain 'Mir Baqi' (possibly Baqi Tashqandi), who was a commander of the Mughal emperor Babur ({{reign}}1526–1530).{{Citation | last=Noorani | first=A. G. | title=The Babri Masjid Question, 1528–2003, Volume 1 | year=2003 | publisher=Tulika Books | isbn=81-85229-78-3 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4kJuAAAAMAAJ | at=Introduction (p. xvii) | quote=It asserts that the Mughal Emperor Babar's governor at Awadh, Mir Baqi Tashqandi, built the Babri Masjid (mosque) at Ayodhya ... The mosque was built in 1528 ... | access-date=22 January 2024 | archive-date=29 December 2023 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231229043018/https://books.google.com/books?id=4kJuAAAAMAAJ | url-status=live }}

In 1611, an English traveller William Finch visited Ayodhya and recorded the "ruins of the Ranichand [Ramachand] castle and houses". He made no mention of a mosque.{{sfnp|Jain, Rama and Ayodhya|2013|pp=9, 120, 164}} In 1634, Thomas Herbert described a "pretty old castle of Ranichand [Ramachand]" which he described as an antique monument that was "especially memorable".{{sfnp|Kunal, Ayodhya Revisited|2016|p=xv}} However, by 1672, the appearance of a mosque at the site can be inferred because Lal Das's Awadh-Vilasa describes the location without mentioning a castle, house or temple.{{sfnp|Kunal, Ayodhya Revisited|2016|p=xxvii}} In 1717, the Moghul Rajput noble Jai Singh II purchased land surrounding the site and his documents show a mosque.{{sfnp|Jain, Rama and Ayodhya|2013|pp=112–115}}

The Jesuit missionary Joseph Tiefenthaler, who visited the site between 1766 and 1771, wrote that either Aurangazeb ({{reign}}1658–1707) or Babur had demolished the Ramkot fortress, including the house that was considered as the birthplace of Rama by Hindus. He further stated that a mosque was constructed in its place, but the Hindus continued to offer prayers at a mud platform that marked the birthplace of Rama. In 1810, Francis Buchanan visited the site, and stated that the structure destroyed was a temple dedicated to Rama, not a house. Many subsequent sources state that the mosque was constructed after demolishing a temple. Buchanan also recorded that there was an inscription on the wall of the mosque stating it to have been built by Babur.

Police officer and writer Kishore Kunal, who examined Buchanan's documents, states that all the claimed inscriptions on the Babri mosque were fake. According to him they were affixed sometime around 1813 (almost 285 years after the supposed construction of the mosque in 1528 CE), and later repeatedly replaced.{{sfnp|Kunal, Ayodhya Revisited|2016|p=143}}

Before the 1940s, the Babri Masjid was called Masjid-i-Janmasthan ("mosque of the birthplace") in common parlance as well as official documents such as revenue records.{{cite book |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=w5SlnZilfMMC&pg=PA23 |title=The Ethics of Terrorism |editor1=Yakov Gilinskiy |editor2=Thomas Albert Gilly |editor3=Vladimir Sergevnin |chapter=Communal Violence and Terrorism in India: Issues and Introspections |author=K. Jaishankar |publisher=Charles C Thomas |year=2009 |isbn=9780398079956 |pages=25–26 |access-date=22 January 2024 |archive-date=29 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231229043019/https://books.google.com/books?id=w5SlnZilfMMC&pg=PA23#v=onepage&q&f=false |url-status=live }} Shykh Muhammad Azamat Ali Kakorawi Nami (1811–1893) wrote: "the Babari mosque was built up in 923(?) A.H. under the patronage of Sayyid Musa Ashiqan in the Janmasthan temple in Faizabad-Avadh, which was a great place of (worship) and capital of Rama's father."Shykh Azamat Ali Kakorawi Nami, Muraqqah-i Khusrawi or Tarikh-i Avadh cited by Harsh Narain The Ayodhya Temple Mosque Dispute: Focus on Muslim Sources, 1993, New Delhi, Penman Publications. {{ISBN|81-85504-16-4}}. pp. 9–10.

H.R. Neville, the editor of the Faizabad District Gazetteer (1870), wrote that the Janmasthan temple "was destroyed by Babur and replaced by a mosque." He also wrote "The Janmasthan was in Ramkot and marked the birthplace of Rama. In 1528 A.D. Babur came to Ayodhya and halted here for a week. He destroyed the ancient temple and on its site built a mosque, still known as Babur's mosque. The materials of the old structure [i.e., the temple] were largely employed, and many of the columns were in good preservation."H.R. Neville, Fyzabad District Gazetteer, Lucknow, 1905, pp. 172–177) cited by Harsh Narain The Ayodhya Temple Mosque Dispute: Focus on Muslim Sources, 1993, New Delhi, Penman Publications. {{ISBN|81-85504-16-4}}(H.R. Neville in the Barabanki District Gazetteer, Lucknow, 1905, pp. 168–169)

Al-Hind-u fi al – ‘Ahd al-Isami, by Maulana Shams Tabriz Khan describes "And among them is the great mosque that was built by the Timurid king Babar in the sacred city of Ajodhya. It is believed that Rama Chandra, considered to be the manifestation of God, was born here. There is a long story about his wife Sita. There was a big temple for them in this city. At a certain place Sita used to sit and cook food for her consort. Well, the said king Babar demolished it and built a mosque at that very place with chiseled stone in 923 A.H."{{Cite book |last=Narain |first=Harsh |title=Ayodhya Temple Mosque Dispute. Focus on Muslim sources |pages=16 |language=English}}

{{see also|Ayodhya dispute}}

File:Map of Ram Janmasthan at Ayodhya (1717 CE) cropped.png

A section of historians, such as R. S. Sharma, state that such claims of Babri Masjid site being the birthplace of Rama sprang up only after the 18th century and Janmabhoomi's location given in the various Ayodhya-mahatmyas does not tally with the Babri Masjid location.{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hEOFAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA1 |title=Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property |author=Robert Layton and Julian Thomas |publisher=Routledge |year=2003 |isbn=9781134604982 |pages=2–9 }}{{Cite book |last=Noorani |first=A.G. |title=The Babri Masjid Question, 1528-2003: 'A Matter of National Honour' |publisher=Tulika Books |isbn=9789382381457 |volume=1 |pages=49}} Sharma states that Ayodhya emerged as a place of Hindu pilgrimage only in medieval times, since ancient texts do not mention it as a pilgrim centre. For example, chapter 85 of the Vishnu Smriti (contains the earliest list of tirthas) lists 52 places of pilgrimage, which do not include Ayodhya.{{cite news| url = http://www.countercurrents.org/comm-sikand050806.htm| title = Ayodhya's Forgotten Muslim Past| first = Yoginder| last = Sikand| author-link = Yoginder Sikand| publisher = Counter Currents| date = 5 August 2006| access-date = 12 January 2008| archive-date = 21 December 2007| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20071221032934/http://www.countercurrents.org/comm-sikand050806.htm| url-status = live}}

Many critics also claim that the present-day Ayodhya was originally a Buddhist site, based on its identification with Saketa described in Buddhist texts. According to historian Romila Thapar, ignoring the Hindu mythological accounts, the first historic mention of the city dates back to the 7th century, when the Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang described it as a Buddhist site.{{harvnb|Thapar|2000|loc=A historical perspective on the story of Rama}}{{cite book |last=Panikkar |first=K.N. |chapter=A Historical Overview |editor=Sarvepalli Gopal |title=Anatomy of a Confrontation: The Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhumi Issue |publisher=Penguin |date=1991 |pages=22–37 |isbn= |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/san_0972/page/25 }}{{rp|25}}

{{see also|Ram Mandir|Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas}}

In 1853, a group of armed Hindu ascetics belonging to the Nirmohi Akhara occupied the Babri Masjid site, and claimed ownership of the structure.{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CJOUDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA275 |title=Wording the World: Veena Das and Scenes of Inheritance |author=Roma Chatterji |publisher=Fordham University Press |year=2014 |isbn=9780823261857 |page=275 |access-date=29 December 2023 |archive-date=29 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231229043005/https://books.google.com/books?id=CJOUDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA275#v=onepage&q&f=false |url-status=live }} Subsequently, the civil administration stepped in, and in 1855, divided the mosque premises into two parts: one for Hindus, and the other for Muslims.{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=47AARF595dUC&pg=PA65 |title=Anatomy of a Confrontation: Ayodhya and the Rise of Communal Politics in India |author=Sarvepalli Gopal |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |year=1993 |isbn=9781856490504 |pages=64–77 |access-date=22 January 2024 |archive-date=29 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231229042937/https://books.google.com/books?id=47AARF595dUC&pg=PA65#v=onepage&q&f=false |url-status=live }}

In 1883, the Hindus launched an effort to construct a temple on the platform. When the administration denied them the permission to do this, they took the matter to court. In 1885, the Sub Judge Pandit Hari Kishan Singh dismissed the lawsuit. Subsequently, the higher courts also dismissed the lawsuit in 1886, in favour of status quo. The lawsuit was dismissed on the grounds that creating a Hindu temple in close proximity to mosque would create a serious law and order issue. The District Judge held that it was ―most unfortunate that the Masjid should have been built on the land especially held sacred by the Hindus but since the construction had been made 358 years earlier, it was too late in the day to reverse the process.{{Cite web |date=9 November 2019 |title=Supreme Court Judgement on Babri Masjid |url=https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2010/36350/36350_2010_1_1502_18205_Judgement_09-Nov-2019.pdf |website=Supreme Court of India}}

In December 1949, some Hindus placed idols of Rama and Sita in the mosque, and claimed that they had miraculously appeared there. Home Minister Vallabhbhai Patel and Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru directed the state's Chief Minister Govind Ballabh Pant to remove the idols, however Pant was not willing to remove the idols and added that "there is a reasonable chance of success, but things are still in a fluid state and it will be hazardous to say more at this stage".{{cite book | last=Godbole | first=M. | title=Unfinished Innings: Recollections and Reflections of a Civil Servant | publisher=Orient Longman | year=1996 | isbn=978-81-250-0883-5 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ItQF4g08KbwC&pg=PA332 | access-date=2024-01-04 | pages=332–333 | archive-date=4 January 2024 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240104142502/https://books.google.com/books?id=ItQF4g08KbwC&pg=PA332 | url-status=live }}{{cite book | last=Gehlot | first=N.S. | title=Current Trends in Indian Politics | publisher=Deep & Deep Publications | year=1998 | isbn=978-81-7100-798-1 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=P-c0nGTRxRIC&pg=PA203 | page=203 | access-date=22 January 2024 | archive-date=4 January 2024 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240104142502/https://books.google.com/books?id=P-c0nGTRxRIC&pg=PA203 | url-status=live }} By 1950, the state took control of the structure under section 145 CrPC and allowed Hindus, not Muslims, to perform their worship at the site.{{cite book | last=Chatterji | first=Roma | title=Wording the World: Veena Das and Scenes of Inheritance | publisher=Fordham University Press | series=Forms of Living | year=2014 | isbn=978-0-8232-6187-1 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CJOUDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT408 | page=408 | access-date=22 January 2024 | archive-date=4 January 2024 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240104110659/https://books.google.com/books?id=CJOUDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT408 | url-status=live }}

In the 1980s, the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and other Hindu nationalist groups and political parties launched a campaign to construct the Ram Janmabhoomi Mandir ("Rama birthplace temple") at the site. In 1985, the Rajiv Gandhi government allowed Hindus to access the site for prayers.{{cite web |url=http://www.outlookindia.com/article/what-if-rajiv-hadnt-unlocked-babri-masjid/224878 |title=What If Rajiv Hadn't Unlocked Babri Masjid? |publisher=Outlook |access-date=2012-06-20 |archive-date=27 January 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160127100259/http://www.outlookindia.com/article/what-if-rajiv-hadnt-unlocked-babri-masjid/224878 |url-status=live }} On 6 December 1992, Hindu nationalists demolished the mosque, resulting in communal riots leading to over 2,000 deaths.{{cite news | url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11436552 | publisher=BBC News | title=Timeline: Ayodhya holy site crisis | date=30 September 2010 | access-date=9 June 2023 | archive-date=26 December 2018 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181226123626/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11436552 | url-status=live }}

In 2003, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) conducted excavations of the site on court orders.{{cite journal |last=Ratnagar |first=Shereen |date=April 2004 |title=Archaeology at the Heart of a Political Confrontation: The Case of Ayodhya |url=http://dro.dur.ac.uk/5696/1/5696.pdf |journal=Current Anthropology |volume=45 |issue=2 |pages=239–259 |doi=10.1086/381044 |jstor=10.1086/381044 |s2cid=149773944 |access-date=9 June 2023 |archive-date=24 July 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180724224106/http://dro.dur.ac.uk/5696/1/5696.pdf |url-status=live }} The ASI report indicated the presence of a 10th-century north Indian style temple under the mosque.{{cite news | url=http://www.tribuneindia.com/2003/20030826/main6.htm | last=Suryamurthy | first=R | title=ASI findings may not resolve title dispute | newspaper=The Tribune | date=26 August 2003 | access-date=9 June 2023 | archive-date=11 April 2009 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090411193402/http://www.tribuneindia.com/2003/20030826/main6.htm | url-status=live }} Muslim groups and the historians supporting them disputed these findings, and dismissed them as politically motivated.{{cite news|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article809521.ece| title=Ayodhya verdict yet another blow to secularism: Sahmat|date =3 October 2010|work=The Hindu|access-date=1 November 2010|location=Chennai, India| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20101006063051/http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article809521.ece| archive-date= 6 October 2010 | url-status= live}}{{cite news|url=http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2019/stories/20030926005412900.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071117033841/http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2019/stories/20030926005412900.htm|url-status=usurped|archive-date=17 November 2007|author=Muralidharan, Sukumar|date=September 2003|title= Ayodhya: Not the last word yet|publisher=Frontline}} The Allahabad High Court, however, upheld the ASI's findings.{{cite news|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/How-Allahabad-HC-exposed-experts-espousing-Masjid-cause/articleshow/6716643.cms|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121104114435/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-10-09/india/28254384_1_asi-excavations-experts-waqf-board|url-status=live|archive-date=4 November 2012|title=How Allahabad HC exposed 'experts' espousing Masjid cause|date=9 October 2010|author=Abhinav Garg|work=The Times of India|access-date=1 November 2010}} The excavations by the ASI were heavily used as evidence by the court that the predating structure was a massive Hindu religious building.{{cite web|url=http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/ayodhyafiles/hondvsj-gist-vol1.pdf|title=Issues For Briefing|access-date=11 June 2012|archive-date=25 December 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181225023953/http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/ayodhyafiles/hondvsj-gist-vol1.pdf%20|url-status=live}}

In 2009, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) released its election manifesto, repeating its promise to construct a temple to Rama at the site.{{cite web|url=http://www.care2.com/news/member/576059368/1105825|title=BJP Lok Sabha Election, 2009 Manifesto – Naresh Kadyan – Care2 News Network|publisher=Care2.com|access-date=6 March 2012|archive-date=7 March 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120307101720/http://www.care2.com/news/member/576059368/1105825|url-status=live}}{{cite web|url=http://www.bjp.org/images/pdf/election_manifesto_english.pdf|title=Bhartiya Janta Party: Manifesto (Lok Sabha Election 2009)|year=2009|publisher=Bhartiya Janta Party official website|access-date=19 July 2013|archive-date=9 April 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090409220942/http://www.bjp.org/images/pdf/election_manifesto_english.pdf|url-status=dead}}

In 2010, the Allahabad High Court ruled that the {{convert|2.77|acre}} of disputed land be divided into 3 parts, with {{1/3}} going to the Ram Lalla or Infant Lord Rama represented by the Hindu Mahasabha for the construction of the Ram temple, {{1/3}} going to the Muslim Sunni Waqf Board and the remaining {{1/3}} going to a Hindu religious denomination Nirmohi Akhara.[http://www.allahabadhighcourt.in/ayodhyabench4.html Ram Janm Bhumi Babri Masjid: Gist of Judgments] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110928085435/http://www.allahabadhighcourt.in/ayodhyabench4.html |date=28 September 2011 }} All the three parties appealed against the division of disputed land to the Supreme Court.{{cite news |title=Court orders 3-way division of disputed Ayodhya land |url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article804632.ece?homepage=true |newspaper=The Hindu |date=30 September 2010 |location=Chennai, India |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101003104001/http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article804632.ece?homepage=true |archive-date=3 October 2010 |url-status=live}}{{cite web |url=http://scobserver.clpr.org.in/cases/babri-masjid-ram-janmabhoomi-case/ |title=Ayodhya Dispute Case Background |website=Supreme Court Observer |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180106063612/http://scobserver.clpr.org.in/cases/babri-masjid-ram-janmabhoomi-case/ |archive-date=6 January 2018 |url-status=dead}}

The five judges Supreme Court bench heard the title dispute cases from August to October 2019. The court inferred that the foundation of the mosque was based on the walls of a large pre existing structure dating back to the 12th century whose architectural features are suggestive of Hindu religious origin. The Supreme Court however concluded that there is time gap between the existence of the pre existing structure in 12th century and the construction of mosque in 16th century and no archaeological evidence on the cause of destruction of the underlying structure from this era is available. On 9 November 2019, the Supreme Court ordered the land to be handed over to a trust to build the Hindu temple. It also ordered to the government to give alternate 5 acre land to Sunni Waqf Board to build the mosque. On 5 February 2020, the trust known as Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra was created by the government of India.

Those who believe that Rama was a historic figure, place his birth around 1800 BCE. However, the archaeological excavations at Ayodhya have not revealed any significant settlement before 500 BCE. Consequently, a number of other places have been suggested as the birthplace of Rama.{{cite book |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hEOFAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA127 |title=Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property |editor=Robert Layton and Julian Thomas |chapter=The Ayodhya Issue |author=Ram Sharan Sharma |publisher=Routledge |year=2003 |isbn=9781134604982 |pages=127–137 }}

In November 1990, the newly appointed Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar made an attempt to resolve the Ayodhya dispute amicably. Towards this objective, he asked Hindu and Muslim groups to exchange evidence on their claims over Ayodhya. The panel representing the Muslim organization Babri Masjid Action Committee (BMAC) included R. S. Sharma, D. N. Jha, M. Athar Ali and Suraj Bhan. The evidence presented by them included scholarly articles discussing alternative theories about the birthplace of Rama. These sources mentioned 8 different possible birthplaces, including a site other than Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, Nepal and Afghanistan.{{cite book |author=Ram Sharan Sharma |title=Ramjanmabhumi-Baburi Masjid: A Historians' Report to the Nation |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=369JAAAACAAJ |year=1991 |publisher=People's Publishing House |isbn=978-81-7007-138-9 |access-date=29 December 2023 |archive-date=29 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231229042955/https://books.google.com/books?id=369JAAAACAAJ |url-status=live }} One author – M. V. Ratnam – claimed that Rama was Ramses II, a pharaoh of ancient Egypt.{{cite book |editor=D. P. Mishra |title=The Search for Laṅkā |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XTpJAAAAIAAJ |year=1985 |publisher=Agam Kala Prakashan |page=15 |access-date=22 January 2024 |archive-date=18 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220418060706/https://books.google.com/books?id=XTpJAAAAIAAJ |url-status=live }}

In his 1992 book Ancient geography of Ayodhya, historian Shyam Narain Pande argued that Rama was born around present-day Herat in Afghanistan.{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9npuAAAAMAAJ |title=Śyām Nārāyan Paṇde |publisher=Arihant International |year=1992 |pages=25–43 |isbn=9788172770242 }} In 1997, Pande presented his theory in the paper "Historical Rama distinguished from God Rama" at the 58th session of the Indian History Congress in Bangalore. In 2000, Rajesh Kochhar similarly traced the birthplace of Rama to Afghanistan, in his book The Vedic People: Their History and Geography. According to him, the Harriud river of Afghanistan is the original "Sarayu", and Ayodhya was located on its banks.[http://www.iisc.ernet.in/currsci/feb252001/581.pdf Review of The Vedic People: Their History and Geography] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200920115642/http://www.iisc.ernet.in/currsci/feb252001/581.pdf |date=20 September 2020 }}. Current Science. Volume 80, Issue 4. 25 February 2001. p. 584.

In 1998, archaeologist Krishna Rao put forward his hypothesis about Banawali being Rama's birthplace. Banawali is an Harappan site located in the Haryana state of India. Rao identified Rama with the Sumerian king Rim-Sin I and his rival Ravana with the Babylonian king Hammurabi. He claimed to have deciphered Indus seals found along the Sarasvati rivers, and found the words "Rama Sena" (Rim-Sin) and "Ravani dama" on those seals. He rejected Ayodhya as the birthplace of Rama, on the grounds that Ayodhya and other Ramayana sites excavated by B. B. Lal do not show evidence of settlements before 1000 BCE. He also claimed that the writers of the later epics and the Puranas got confused because the ancient Indo-Aryans applied their ancient place names to the new place names as they migrated eastwards.{{cite news |url=http://www.rediff.com/news/1998/jul/06rama.htm |title=Archaeologist questions Ram Janambhoomi being in Ayodhya |date=6 July 1998 |work=rediff.com |access-date=9 June 2023 |archive-date=12 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220812111758/https://www.rediff.com/news/1998/jul/06rama.htm |url-status=live }}

A team from the Archaeological Survey of India under B. B. Lal conducted a survey of the land in 1976–77.{{Cite news|date=4 August 2020|title=Did you know seven evidences unearthed by ASI proved a temple existed at Ayodhya? Details here|work=Timesnow News|url=https://www.timesnownews.com/india/article/did-you-know-seven-evidences-unearthed-by-asi-proved-a-temple-existed-at-ayodhya-details-here/631910|access-date=15 December 2021|archive-date=6 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211206162404/https://www.timesnownews.com/india/article/did-you-know-seven-evidences-unearthed-by-asi-proved-a-temple-existed-at-ayodhya-details-here/631910|url-status=live}} They found 12 pillars of the mosque that were made from the remains of a Hindu temple. The base of the pillars had a Purna Kalasha which was a 'ghada' (water pitcher) from which foliage would be coming out. These symbols were found in almost all the temples of the 12th and 13th Century. For Hindus, it is one of the eight auspicious symbols of prosperity also known as Ashtamangala Chinha.{{Cite web|title=About The Eight Auspicious Symbols|url=http://www.buddhistinformation.com/about_the_eight_auspicious_symbo.htm|url-status=live|access-date=15 December 2021|website=buddhistinformation|archive-date=13 January 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080113213231/http://www.buddhistinformation.com/about_the_eight_auspicious_symbo.htm}} The excavation team found many terracotta sculptures that depicted human beings and animals, a characteristic of a temple, not a mosque.

In 2003, A 50 plus member team of Archeological Survey of India did the second excavation. They found over 50 pillars, hinting that below the mosque stood a Hindu temple that could be dated back to the 12th Century AD.[https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/ram-temple-existed-before-babri-mosque-in-ayodhya-archaeologist-kk-muhammed/articleshow/71391712.cms Ram temple existed before Babri mosque in Ayodhya: K. K. Muhammed] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230118221506/https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/ram-temple-existed-before-babri-mosque-in-ayodhya-archaeologist-kk-muhammed/articleshow/71391712.cms |date=18 January 2023 }}, The Times of India, 1 October 2019.

The excavators further found a temple system that depicted a crocodile (a symbol of the Holy Ganga{{Cite web|date=28 September 2019|title=Crocodiles in Hindu Mythology|url=https://jeevoka.com/crocodiles-in-hindu-mythology/s|url-status=live|access-date=15 December 2021|website=jeevoka|archive-date=15 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211215113643/https://jeevoka.com/crocodiles-in-hindu-mythology/s}}) to signify a symbolic bath in the holy rivers of the Ganges, Yamuna and Saraswati to wash off one's sins. They also got the temple 'pranali' (system). We have to bathe the deity and the 'abhisheka jal' flows through 'pranali'. This 'makara pranali' was also excavated.

The ASI team unearthed several remains of a temple's 'shikhara' (tower) from the mosque's premises, adding to the evidences of a Hindu structure underneath ASI team also found another architectural member known as 'amalka'. Below the 'amalka' there is the 'grivah' and also the 'shikhara' portion of the temple in North India.

The ASI archaeologists found 263 pieces of terracotta objects of gods, goddesses, human figures, female figurines that consolidated the theory that it was the site of a temple.

An inscription of 'Vishnu Hari Shila Phalak' was found on two remains found at the site that proved to be an important circumstantial evidence that stated the existence of a Hindu temple there.

2023 excavations to construct new Rama Temple

In 2023, during excavation to make Rama temple after Supreme Court order, remains of ancient temple, idols, and pillars were found.{{Cite web |date=2023-09-13 |title=Evidence Of Ram Mandir? Remains Of Ancient Temple, Idols, Pillars Discovered During Excavation At Ram Janmabhoomi In Ayodhya |url=https://www.timesnownews.com/india/remains-of-ancient-temple-idols-pillars-discovered-during-excavation-at-ram-janmabhoomi-in-ayodhya-evidence-of-ram-temple-ram-mandir-article-103623944 |access-date=2024-01-31 |website=TimesNow |language=en}}

In 2024, BR Mani, the archaeologist who led the 2003 excavations urged the central government to release the ASI report to put all the doubts regarding the report to rest.{{Cite web |title='Make Ayodhya report public': Archaeologist who led excavations urges Centre {{!}} Exclusive |url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/ayodhya-ram-mandir-janmabhoomi-archaeological-survey-of-india-asi-excavations-report-court-br-mani-2494335-2024-01-27 |access-date=2024-01-30 |website=India Today |language=en}} He also interprets the evidence from excavations to claim that there was human force involved in the destruction of the found structure and the structure was not destroyed because of any natural calamity. He claims the destruction took place at about the same time when mosque was being built. Further, he says the court didn't comment on whether the destruction took place because ASI report was only meant to report findings and not interpret those findings. He said that excavations show that the history of the site can be traced back to 17th century BCE which contradicts the earlier scholarly claim that history of Ayodhya started at 7th century BCE{{Cite web |title=Was a temple razed in Ayodhya? What the stones say |url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/ram-mandir-temple-janmabhoomi-babri-masjid-asi-excavations-babur-ayodhya-archaeological-evidence-history-2494442-2024-01-30 |access-date=2024-01-31 |website=India Today |language=en}}

{{main|Ram Mandir}}

File:The Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi performing Bhoomi Pujan at ‘Shree Ram Janmabhoomi Mandir’, in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh on August 05, 2020.jpg

The Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra trust began the first phase of construction of the Ram Mandir in March 2020.{{cite news |url= https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2020/03/23/1st-phase-of-ram-temple-construction-begins-in-ayodhya.html |title= 1st Phase of Ram temple construction begins at Ayodhya |access-date= 9 June 2023 |archive-date= 30 March 2023 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20230330175900/https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2020/03/23/1st-phase-of-ram-temple-construction-begins-in-ayodhya.html |url-status= live }} Prime Minister Narendra Modi performed Bhoomi Pujan and laid the foundation stone of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya on 5 August 2020.{{cite web |title=PM Modi performs Bhoomi Pujan and lays foundation stone of Ram Temple in Ayodhya |url=http://newsonair.com/News?title=PM-Modi-performs-Bhoomi-Pujan-and-lays-foundation-stone-of-Ram-Temple-in-Ayodhya&id=396514 |website=All India Radio news service |publisher=AIR |access-date=5 August 2020 |archive-date=29 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231229043036/https://newsonair.gov.in/default.aspx?aspxerrorpath=/Main-News-Details.aspx |url-status=live }}

{{Wikiquote}}

• Ram Ki Janmabhoomi, an Indian film which deals with the controversial issue of Ram Mandir
• Rama Setu
• Balak Ram, deity of Rama at Ram Janmabhoomi temple of Ayodhya

{{Clear}}

{{Reflist}}

• {{cite book |last=Jain |first=Meenakshi |author-link=Meenakshi Jain |title=Rama and Ayodhya |publisher=Aryan Books |location=New Delhi |year=2013 |isbn=978-8173054518 |ref={{sfnref|Jain, Rama and Ayodhya|2013}}}}
• {{citation |first=Kishore |last=Kunal |author-link=Kishore Kunal |title=Ayodhya Revisited |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gKKaDAAAQBAJ |publisher=Prabhat Prakashan |year=2016 |isbn=978-81-8430-357-5 |ref={{sfnref|Kunal, Ayodhya Revisited|2016}}}}
• {{cite book|last=Narain|first=Harsh|year=1993|isbn=978-8185504162|title=The Ayodhya Temple Mosque Dispute: Focus on Muslim Sources|location=Delhi|publisher=Penman Publishers|ref={{sfnref|Narain, The Ayodhya Temple Mosque Dispute|1993}}}}
• {{cite book|last=Thapar|first=Romila|author-link=Romila Thapar|chapter=A Historical Perspective on the Story of Rama|editor=Thapar, Romila|title=Cultural Pasts: Essays in Early Indian History|location=New Delhi|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2000|isbn=0-19-564050-0}}

{{refbegin|30em}}

• {{cite book|editor-last=Engineer|editor-first=Asghar Ali|title=Babri Masjid Ramjanambhumi Controversy|publisher=Ajanta Publications|location=Delhi|year=1990}}
• {{cite book|editor-last=Bajaj|editor-first=Jitendra|title=Ayodhya and the Future of India|year=1993|location=Madras|publisher=Centre for Policy Studies}}
• {{cite book|last=Dubashi|first=Jay|year=1992|title=The Road to Ayodhya|location=Delhi|publisher=South Asia Books}}
• {{cite book|last=Jain|first=Meenakshi|title=The Battle for Rama: Case of the Temple at Ayodhya|publisher=Aryan Books International|year=2017|isbn=978-8173055799}}
• {{cite book|last1=Jha|first1=Krishna|last2=Jha|first2=Dhirendra K.|title=Ayodhya: The Dark Night|publisher=HarperCollins India|year=2012|isbn=978-93-5029-600-4}}
• {{cite book|title=Rāma, His Historicity, Mandir, and Setu: Evidence of Literature, Archaeology, and Other Sciences|author=B. B. Lal|publisher=Aryan Books|year=2008|isbn=978-81-7305-345-0|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vYBwPgAACAAJ}}
• {{cite book|first=R.|last=Nath|title=Babari Masjid of Ayodhya|location=Jaipur|publisher=The Historical Research Documentation program|year=1990}}
• {{cite book|last1=Nandy|first1=A.|author-link1=Ashis Nandy|first2=S.|last2=Trivedy|first3=S.|last3=Mayaram|first4=Achyut|last4=Yagnik|title=Creating a Nationality: The Ramjanmabhumi Movement and Fear of the Self|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1998|isbn=0-19-564271-6}}
• {{cite book|last=Rajaram|first=N. S.|author-link=N. S. Rajaram|year=2000|title=Profiles in Deception: Ayodhya and the Dead Sea Scrolls|location=New Delhi|publisher=Voice of India}}
• {{cite book|editor-last=Sharma|editor-first=Ram Sharan|title=Communal History and Rama's Ayodhya|editor-link=Ram Sharan Sharma|publisher=People's Publishing House|edition=2nd|year=1999|location=Delhi}}
• {{cite book|last=Srivastava|first=Sushil|title=Disputed Mosque, A historical inquiry|url=https://archive.org/details/disputedmosqueh00sriv|url-access=registration|publisher=Vistaar Publication|location=New Delhi|year=1991|isbn=978-81-7036-212-8 }}
• Arun Shourie, Arun Jaitley, Swapan Dasgupta, Rama J Jois: The Ayodhya Reference: Supreme Court Judgement and Commentaries. 1995. New Delhi:Voice of India. {{ISBN|978-8185990309}}
• Arun Shourie, Sita Ram Goel, Harsh Narain, Jay Dubashi and Ram Swarup. Hindu Temples – What Happened to Them Vol. I, (A Preliminary Survey) (1990) {{ISBN|81-85990-49-2}}
• {{cite book|editor-last=Thacktson|editor-first=Wheeler M.|title=Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor|year=1996|location=New York and London|publisher=Oxford University Press}}
• {{cite book|last1=Varma|first1=Thakur Prasad|first2=Swarajya Prakash|last2=Gupta|title=Ayodhya ka Itihas evam Puratattva – Rigveda kal se ab tak (History and Archaeology of Ayodhya – From the Time of the Rigveda to the Present)|language=hi|publisher=Bharatiya Itihasa evam Samskrit Parishad and DK Printworld|location=New Delhi}}
• History versus Casuistry: Evidence of the Ramajanmabhoomi Mandir presented by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad to the Government of India in December–January 1990–91. New Delhi: Voice of India.
• {{cite book|last=van der Veer|first=Peter|title=Gods on Earth: The Management of Religious Experience and Identity in a North Indian Pilgrimage Centre|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=1989|isbn=0485195100}}

{{Refend}}

{{Faizabad division topics}}

Category:Ayodhya

Category:Rama

Category:Divya Desams

Category:Tourism in Uttar Pradesh

Category:Ayodhya dispute