திரு. மலர் மன்னன் அவர்கள் என்னுடைய வாரனாசி என்ற பதிவையும் இந்தியாவின் வர்ணங்கள் என்ற பதிவையும் படித்துவிட்டு அதற்கு அவருடைய கருத்தை எழுதியிருந்தார். என்னுடைய பதிவை அவராக படிக்கவில்லை. நான் தான் என்னை ஆசிர்வாதியுங்கள் என்று என் பதிவை அனுப்பிருந்தேன். அவரின் நேர்மையும் தைரியுமும் என்னை கவர்ந்தது. அதில் எந்த மாற்றமும் இல்லை. அவர் மீண்டும் ஒரு முறை தான் நேர்மையானவர் என்று நிரூப்பித்துள்ளார். நான் அவரை மதிப்பதால் என் மரியாதை குறையும் என்று சிலர் எச்சரிக்கை விடுத்துள்ளனர், எனக்கு மரியாதை இருப்பதாக நான் நினைக்கவில்லை. நான் சில முடிவுகள் என்னை நம்பி எடுக்கிறேன் மற்றவர்களிடம் மரியாதைப் பெற அல்ல. திரு மலர் மன்னன் அவர்கள் என்னுடைய பதிவில் இட்ட பின்னூட்டத்தை இக்னோர் செய்து இந்த விளக்கங்களைப் படிக்கவும். திரு மலர் மன்னன் அவர்களின் விளக்கங்கள் இதோ:
One of your commentators wanted to know as to where Gandhi had saidMohmeddan is a bully. I do NOT NOT record anything without documentary evidence. I'm attaching the full text in which Gandhi talks about the behaviour of Hindus and Mohmeddans.
Pl send this to Sri Nesa Kumar also, as he wanted to find it out.
Now, I have proved several times that Babur memorial was NEVER NEVER a mosque. Having minarets on four corners is a mandatory for Mohmeddan place of worship stricrtly followed always to qualfy for being called as mosque. These minarets are intended to call the believers form all sides to come for joint forship. The common place of worship called mosque should also have a small waterbody or facility to wash hands, mouth, and face to faclitate even if a worshipper breaks wind at the time of attending the common worship!
Babur memorial DID NOT have minarets and a water tank to qualify to be called a mosque.
The disgracing Babur memorial(Mohmeddans of Bharath should be equally happy for the removal of that memorial because the frist Panipat battle was fought between the alien Babur and Ibrahim Lodi who had already become a Bharatiya Mohmeddan by that time!)was built by Mir Pakky, one of his commanders to celebrate the victory of his master.
Mohmeddans have only real estate value for Babur memorial whereas for Hindus, it is a sacred place according to their faith.
The locality is called Janmasthan in all revenue and survey records and the post office of the locality is also named Ayodhya Janmasthan sub post office. This name is NOT NOT given by any Hindu organisation but is being in force from time immemorial.Hindus were always demanding construction of a temple at the site of Babur memorial, as they were demanding in Varanassi and Somnath. At the time of Wajid Ali Shaw, Nawab of Audh, Hindus were allowed to construct a place of worship at the platform of the memorial to worship Maryada Purushottam Sri Ramachandra Moorthy, as infant Rama, that is Ram Lalla.Seeing this, Mohmeddans immediately started having their worship inside the memorial in order to establish their supremacy. The building was called Masjid by them in default!
During the 1857 rebellion, many records of Audh princely state were destroyed by the British troops but still some documentary evidenceds are available for my information in the revenue records of Audh. You have to go there to get satisfied, as I went and gathered information.
See, I have to narrate all this to justify the removal of Babur Memorial and constructuon of a temple for my Ram Lalla at his birth place according to my faith in my own motherland which is basically the land of Hindus! This is the ground reality (forefathers of most of Bharatiya Mohmeddans and Christians are Hindus only)! Just imagine whether it could happen in any Mohmeddan or Christian country!
As for Godhra, the truth is now being supressed by the new regime at the Centre in accordance to their vote bank policy. I do NOT need any vote form anybody and therefore I have no hesitation to call a spade a spade. The initial stage of the riot between Hindus and Mohmeddans at that time went in favour of Hindus' spontaneous anger.
Then came the govt. forces to quell the riots. It was NOT like Premier Surahwardy's encouragement to Mohmedddans to kill Hindus in Calcutta and whole of Bengal at the time of Muslim Leagues's Direct Action Day for the demand of Pakistan obsrved in 1946. At that time, Surahwardy, the Mohmeddan premier of Bengal encouraged Mohmeddans to loot rape and kill Hindus. This kind of inhuman behaviour was NOT found among the persons responsible for manitaning law and order in Gujarath. Gujarath riot is highly exagerated. In recent localbody elections in Gujarath, even in Mohmedddan localities, BJP has won. At Godhra itself, as it is a Mohmeddan majority town, the municipality has more Mohmeddan members and they have supported Narendra Modi's BJP for the post of Municipal Chairman without asking! These are NOT fiction but plain truths.
In Mandaikkadu, the trouble was the handiwork of the church to stop the festival of Mandaikadu Bhagawati Amman because even tradition bound women of fisherfolk despite being RC Christians used to worship Amman. Most of the fisherfolks in Kanyakumari district are RC Chritians and they are stronger than Hindus and they also had the support of influential church and missionaries. My work in Mandaikadu was to infuse confidence among Hindus and to prepare them to safeguard themselves. I was also helpful to represent their grievances to the authorities. I did NOT go there to create trouble.
I was NOT angry just because one person had doubted my stay at Su.Ra's at that time. The way I was called a liar and my account a bluff seemed indecent in healthy debates and therfore I wantd to withdraw to maintain the dignity of the forum. As the editorial board of Thinnai has ensured some sort of organised debates, I have agreed to write again for them. I don't become angry because I know even my own society will NOT shed a drop of tear if I am hurt because of my openness. That is the Hindu mentality! IT will only find fault with me as to why I did NOT keep quiet minding my business!
See what is happening in Iraq. Sunnies bomb Shias' mosques at the height of worship, killing several believers despite the fact that Shias are also of the same faith but with a difference. Shias will do the same on Sunnis when they have the upper hand. In the circumstances, do Mohmeddans have any moral standing to regret and go wild even if their place of worship is demolished (though it did NOT occur at Ayodhya)?
I wish you publish this message in full and also the attachment so that the visitors of your blog spot will know the truth.
"There is no doubt in my mind that in the majority of quarrels the Hindus come out second best. But my own experience confirms the opinion that the Mussalman as a rule is a bully, and the Hindu as a rule is a coward. I have noticed this in railway trains, on public roads, and in the quarrels which I had the privilege of settling. Need the Hindu blame the Mussalman for his cowardice? Where there are cowards, there will always be bullies. They say that in Saharanpur the Mussalmans looted houses, broke open safes and, in one case, a Hindu woman's modesty was outraged. Whose fault was this? Mussalmans can offer no defence for the execrable conduct, it is true. But I, as a Hindu, am more ashamed of Hindu cowardice than I am angry at the Mussalman bullying. Why did not the owners of the houses looted die in the attempt to defend their possessions? Where were the relatives of the outraged sister at the time of the outrage? Have they no account to render of themselves? My non-violence does not admit of running away from danger and leaving dear ones unprotected. Between violence and cowardly flight, I can only prefer violence to cowardice."
"Hindu-Muslim Tension: Its Cause and Cure", Young India, 29/5/1924;
Reproduced in M.K. Gandhi: The Hindu-Muslim Unity, p.35-36.