“Jo chal raha hai, chalne do. Hum aur kar bhi kya sakhte hain, sivaye dekhne ke. (Let things happen the way they are happening. What else can we do besides watching silently)."

The helplessness in the voice of Najafzafar Jilani, son of now-deceased senior advocate Zafaryab Jilani who argued the Ram Janmabhoomi case, overrode his efforts to sound indifferent when asked about his thoughts on the hoopla surrounding the scheduled Ram Mandir consecration on January 22.

“What can we do or say when there is a Supreme Court judgment that gives legitimacy to all that is happening,” Jilani murmured.

Jilani was referring to the landmark November 2019 Supreme Court verdict which ordered the disputed 2.77-acre plot in Ayodhya to be handed over a Central government trust on which the Ram Temple is being currently built and allot an alternative plot to build a mosque to replace the demolished Babri Masjid.

“Right now all we can do is wait and watch,” Jilani said. “We will keep a keen eye on the government’s moves after January 22 and then decide whether or not we have a course of action to follow,” he continued.

Careful about his utterances on what he considered a “sensitive issue”, Jilani avoided speaking his mind for fear of persecution. “We don’t want to say anything that might stoke a fresh controversy. The government would most certainly be filing cases and causing us harassment if it found our opinions not to their liking. We have had enough of those and want to steer clear of them now,” he said.

Asked whether he felt included in the so-called frenzy sweeping across significant parts of the country over the Pran Pratishtha ceremony of Ram Lalla, Jilani answered: “Of course, we feel left out, but we have kept our mouths shut for fear of government backlashes.”

His brief response to how he hoped to get roped back into the nation’s mainstream: “We don’t have a solution in sight.”

Syed Ilyas Qasim Rasool, former convenor of the now-defunct Babri Masjid Action Committee (BMAC) was more forthcoming, though. Especially, when it came to questioning the Uttar Pradesh government’s role in the Pran Pratishtha ceremony.

“Why should the government get so deeply involved in a religious programme like this?” Rasool asked. “Shouldn’t it have been left entirely to the religious group concerned? It almost feels like the government has donned a particular religious colour with its full machinery deployed for the work. It defies the tenets of secularism enshrined in our Constitution and goes against the basic fabric of federalism,” he argued.

“The whole Ram Mandir movement has been done with political ambitions right from the start,” Rasool maintained. “Today that has become apparent even before the Shankaracharyas. Several priests from Ayodhya too have opposed the function. Only five people would be allowed inside the Ram Lalla Garbha Griha, four of whom are political Sangh Parivar political persons. The indications are there for all to see and interpret. This would be a one-party ceremony.”

Rasool believes that Apex Court judgment was laden with inherent contradictions which paved the way for Hindu groups to flock to courts of the land with similar petitions based on faith rather than facts. “The fundamental basis of the 2019 Supreme Court judgment was the rejection of the contention that the Babri Masjid was built after destroying a Ram Temple in that location. Despite the court not finding any scientific evidence to back that claim, it ruled in favour of the Ram Mandir petitioners,” the BMAC member said.

“It was a court decision which we have to adhere to. But justice wasn’t meted out,” he stated.

But unlike Jilani who feels “left out” and marginalized, advocate Iqbal Ansari, former Babri Masjid litigant, thinks the hatchet is already buried. Ansari has received an invitation for the consecration and confirmed to The Telegraph Online that he would be attending the ceremony. Setting an example of the Ganga-Jamuni Tehzeeb, Ansari has already gifted a miniature replica of the Ram Temple to one of his aides.

“The Muslim community of this entire nation welcomed the judgment of the top court. Not one untoward incident was reported following the order. Not even a demonstration took place against it. There are no differences between the Hindus and Muslims anymore. The construction of the temple is almost complete and Lord Ram would be taking his position in it. I am happy the way things have turned out and the community too feels in the same way,” Ansari told reporters earlier this month following the receipt of invitation.

Ansari has, since, slammed the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board for failing to build a mosque at the alternate site despite the five-acre plot awarded to it by the Supreme Court four years ago while, instead, only managing to come up with a proposed layout.

Syed Ahmed Bukhari, Shahi Imam of the Jama Masjid in Delhi and currently traveling abroad, preferred to remain guarded about voicing his opinion. “This is their own religious affair. Everyone in this country has the freedom to follow the path dictated by their own religion,” Bukhari said in the form of a statement when approached for his views.