AYODHYA, India -- Hiramani Kewat has spent the past decade hunched over bathtub-size blocks of rosy sandstone in an open-air workshop here, chiseling bas-relief images from Hindu mythology with a rhythmic tap-tap-tap of his wooden hammer.
The hundreds of stones he and 50 fellow artisans have fastidiously carved are intended to be assembled like Lego toys on a nearby field, giving rise to a massive temple to the Hindu god Ram on the spot where Hindus demolished a 16th-century mosque in 1992.
But these days, the chunks of rock are still stacked up in the workshop. After the destruction of the mosque, which set off religious riots that left more than 2,000 people dead across India, the Supreme Court prevented the stones from being moved to the site until the court finished hearing appeals from Muslim groups, who want permission to rebuild a mosque there.
Now, however, the hard-line Hindu organization that orchestrated the storming of the mosque says it will no longer wait for the court to rule. The group, the World Hindu Council, has announced that it will go ahead with plans to build a temple, starting with a prayer ceremony and the laying of a cornerstone on Friday.
"Nobody listens to the courts in India," said Sharad Sharma, a spokesman for the council. "Why should we?"
Although the council said it would limit construction to land surrounding the grounds of the former mosque, the decision to start building the temple has turned into a defining moment for India's secular democracy, stoking fears of a new wave of religious violence and the possible collapse of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's government.
A group of Hindu council activists returning home from Ayodhya 10 days ago picked a fight with several Muslims at a train station in western India, leading the Muslims to set fire to a packed train car, killing 58 people. The incident sparked several days of Hindu revenge attacks against Muslims across Gujarat state that claimed more than 500 lives.
Political analysts said a full-fledged construction effort could further rile India's 140 million Muslims, who already are enraged that the national government, led by Vajpayee's Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), did not move faster to quell the violence. At the same time, the analysts said, efforts to prevent the Hindu council from starting construction could lead members to lash out at Muslims or storm the grounds of the former mosque.
Hindus believe that Ram was born in Ayodhya. The Hindu council contends that in the 12th century, a small temple was erected on the spot where he was born, but that it was torn down in the 16th century by Muslim invaders, who built a mosque on the site dedicated to their emperor, Babur.
At issue is whether India, an officially secular but predominantly Hindu country of 1 billion people, is willing to cede to the wishes of nationalistic Hindus, who want to promote their religion over others. A key component of their agenda is the restoration of ancient temples even if it means tearing down mosques.
The country's Muslim minority and many moderate Hindus oppose such efforts, arguing that centuries-old places of worship should not be destroyed, no matter what might have been there before.
Although the Ayodhya issue helped the BJP come to power, it has been a source of tension for Vajpayee and other party leaders.
The controversy in Ayodhya has had dramatic repercussions 300 miles to the northwest, in the capital, New Delhi. After the mosque was toppled, Muslims deserted the long-ruling, secular Congress party, faulting it for not protecting their interests. Those defections aided the BJP, whose fortunes were boosted by a simultaneous tide of Hindu nationalism.
But since taking office in 1996, Vajpayee has been forced to balance the demands of the Hindu council, which springs from the same Hindu-revivalist parent organization as his political party, with those of other parties in his coalition government that oppose building the temple. For the past few years, Vajpayee has avoided dealing with the issue, but now the Hindu council has insisted on starting construction on Friday, which they regard as an astrologically auspicious day.
Some of the BJP's coalition partners have threatened to pull out of the government if it condones construction efforts, raising the possibility that Vajpayee's already beleaguered government will collapse. "We are not happy with what is happening," said C. Ramachandriah, a member of the Telegu Desam Party, the BJP's largest coalition ally. "The prime minister knows that his government will fall if the construction begins."
Opposition parties also have increased their criticism of the BJP following the Gujarat riots, calling for the resignation of two top BJP officials, Home Minister L.K. Advani and Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi.
Rajiv Pratap Rudy, a BJP member of Parliament and a cabinet minister in Vajpayee's government, acknowledged the temple issue had become an "embarrassment at times to the government," but predicted that the coalition would hold if the temple did not extend onto the site of the former mosque.
BJP officials have been engaged in frantic negotiations with Hindu council officials and Muslim leaders to find a compromise. On Friday, one of the country's top Hindu priests, Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati, who had been trying to broker a deal, said he had persuaded the Hindu council to limit Friday's event to a prayer ceremony.
Saraswati said the construction of the temple would start only after the council obtained the consent of government officials and Muslim leaders. The temple, he said, would be placed on land acquired by the government next to the site of the former mosque, unless the court rules that Hindus can have exclusive use of the site.
On Sunday, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, an umbrella organization of Muslim leaders, rejected Saraswati's proposal, saying it wants a written guarantee from the Hindu council that it will not build on the site of the mosque without court approval. The Law Board said the temple dispute has "baneful and perilous repercussions for Indian society."
Muslim leaders contended that building a temple on the surrounding land violates a Supreme Court ruling ordering that the status quo be maintained on the site.
"The courts have ruled that they have no right to the site," said Khaliq Ahmed Khan, a Muslim leader in Ayodhya. "They are disregarding the rule of law and pushing our nation toward anarchy."
The Supreme Court plans to rule Wednesday on an emergency petition to prevent the prayer ceremony, but Hindu council officials said they would go ahead with the event regardless of the judges' decision.
"How can any court stop a prayer ritual?" said Praveen Togadia, the council's general secretary. "Conducting a religious ritual is our fundamental right."
The Hindu council's plans for the temple call for an imposing, two-story structure with 212 pillars and a sanctuary on the site of the destroyed mosque. Despite its promise to stay away from the mosque grounds, the group said it would not alter the design because it expects a favorable Supreme Court ruling.
But Muslim leaders said they fear that once construction begins, there will be no way to stop encroachment on the disputed land. They also said they worry about another part of the government's deal with the Hindu council: that thousands of council members will be allowed into Ayodhya for the prayer ceremony.
"In 1992, they promised to perform a [prayer] but they destroyed the mosque," Khan said. "What will they do this time? Who will stop them if they want to shift the stones and build the temple on the disputed site?"
Khan's concerns have been buttressed by council members like Anil Singrama who have begun gathering in Ayodhya over the past few days. Singrama boasted that he had participated in the demolition of the mosque and now wants to take part in the raising of a temple.
"We will take the stones there," he said. "There will be thousands of us. How can the police stop us?"
As a lawyer, Singrama said he respects the role of the courts in Indian society. But as a Hindu, he said there are some issues that should not be decided by judges.
"This is a matter of faith," he said. "The court has no business in this matter. Even if they say we can't build the temple, it will not stop us."
Kewat, the stone carver, said he would be willing to walk into a hail of police bullets to help carry the sandstone pieces from the workshop to the disputed site. "I've been here since 1992 to build a temple," he said, "not just to carve stones."