Court rules mosque must go, ancient temple restored

It's a stunning court decision: An Islamic mosque must be removed from land that is considered sacred and it will be replaced with an ancient temple that reportedly once stood there.

This decision, however, is not about Jerusalem's Temple Mount and the admittedly unsolvable dispute between those who support the al-Aqsa Mosque there and those who believe it is the site of the former Jewish temples of history, and of the future Jewish temple of prophecy.

This one is about a situation in India, although reports confirm "some see this as a precedent paving the way for the return of a Jewish Temple."

It is Breaking Israel News that is reporting on the situation.

The report cites the decision from the Supreme Court of India, all 1,182 pages, that "ruled an ancient temple must be rebuilt and a mosque that was built in its place must be relocated elsewhere."

The decision came in a decades-long legal fight over the small parcel of land in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh.

The five judges agreed "to allow the rebuilding of the Hindu temple and the relocation of the Muslim mosque claimed to have been built on its ruins in 1528. According to the court's decision, all disputed territory would pass to the Hindu 'temple groups' as they are known in India."

The fight actually started back in the 1980s when Hindu groups claimed the right to rebuild their temple, originally built in the 10th century, on the site of an Islamic mosque that had been erected somewhere in the 16th century.

The first court decision was to divide the 2.8 acres of land into three parcels.

But given the fact a survey "determined that the remains of a 10th-century temple existed under the mosque," the high court said it should be handed over to Hindus.

The Muslims were provided an alternate site for their mosque, the report said.

Islamic officials refused to accept the result and "threatened a violent reaction," the report said.

"Justice was not done fully as Muslims cannot shift the mosque, therefore, accepting an alternative land for the mosque is absolutely out of the question," the Sunni Waqf board said in a statement. "While the legal option is available, there is also Shariah obligation to defend the masjid till the last breath."

Mordechai Kedar, of Bar-Ilan University, explained why such an issue is so important to Muslims.

"Islam is, at its core, replacement theology," Kedar told BIN. "Not only do they see themselves as the proper replacement for all previous beliefs, but they also believe that everything in those beliefs belongs to Islam. All of the figures in the Bible are Muslims. Muslims claim that Jesus and all of the figures in the New Testament are Muslim."

He said one of the practices of Islam is to "take over" the holy sites for other faiths.

Reported BIN, "Assaf Fried, the spokesman for the Temple Organizations, noted the unmistakable similarities between the case in India and the situation on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem."

He explained, "This is a powerful precedent. The situation is precisely like the one in Jerusalem. Though it cannot be used in Israeli jurisprudence, conceptually, it is compelling."

BIN reported, "Yaakov Hayman, chairman of the United Temple Movements, agreed that the case in India was identical to the situation at the Temple Mount but he did not feel the same tactic would work in Israel."