134 "Presenting" the Pastbecoming clear that there would not be much evidence of a preexisting
temple in Ayodhya, the VHP challenged Muslims to give up their claims
over the Kashi and Mathura sites, as the Hindus had enough evidence of
preexisting temples.
By mid-April 2003, it was indeed clear that the month-long excavation
at the disputed site in Ayodhya had not revealed any temple remains,
though the ASI had dug to early historic levels. On the contrary, the find-
ing of glazed ware in substantial quantity in the upper and middle layers
of all three trenches dug thus far indicated the existence of Muslim habi-
tation before the mosque construction, according to a report prepared by
the Aligharh Historians Society and the Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust
(SAHMAT) in Delhi.
In June 2003, even as Prime Minister Vajpayee made a ludicrous plea
that politics be kept out of the Ram-temple issue, the Kanchi sankaracharya
claimed that 90 percent of Muslims were in favor of a temple on the dis-
puted site. But the AIMPLB and other Muslim organizations termed both
these statements an attempt to run away from a judicial verdict. In the
meantime, the Supreme Court rejected a petition challenging the March
5 order of the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court directing the
ASI to excavate the disputed site. The petitioner submitted that the exca-
vation order would set a bad precedent that anybody could demand an
excavation of any religious site on the pretext that another religious struc-
ture preexisted the present one.
In the second campaign within a year to boost their temple-construction
plans, the VHP began a ritual to enlist the support of 50 million people.
Some 200 bags with Ramraksha Sankalp Sutra (sanctified thread), a map
of the proposed temple, and soil from the disputed site were consecrated
at a yagna near Ayodhya and would be distributed all over the country
between July and October 2003. Those who received the thread would take
a pledge to keep it on their wrists till the Ram temple was constructed. In
June 2003, the Sunni Central Waqf Board, a plaintiff in the Babri Masjid-
Ramjanmabhumi title suit, and a few other Muslim parties accused the
ASI of fabricating archaeological evidence and selectively collecting the
artifacts being found at the site. According to them, the ASI team collected
molded bricks, sculpted stone fragments, and terra-cotta figurines, but
threw away glazed pottery, glazed tiles, and animal bones.
With a lack of archaeological evidence to support the preexisting-
temple theory staring at its face, the VHP claimed that it would not come
in the way of the temple campaign. As reported in the Hindu, a VHP sec-
retary claimed that "our faith is that it was the place of Rama's birth."^89
So the VHP started advocating legislation by Parliament as the only way
to resolve the issue. The top VHP leadership castigated the BJP and its
government for betraying the Ramjanmabhumi movement that had cata-
pulted them into power. The VHP said they were not reclaiming all 30,000