Those close to him say his cryptic answers are proof that the Shankaracharya may still play a big role if and when a next initiative materialises. This despite declaring that he is "not making any more efforts to solve the issue". He told Outlook: "I am neither happy nor unhappy. It is the poor innocent people who will be killed if there are communal clashes." Having failed twice, he now holds the AIMPLB responsible for the current impasse. Says he, "After I sent them the June 16 letter, they asked for clarifications. In the process of clarifying, I amplified certain things and this was distasteful to them. If they had accepted the five-point formula, the issue could have been settled by now." The sub-text being that the board should not have sought any clarifications.
The Shankaracharya can’t quite fathom the AIMPLB objections too. "If a tenant occupies a property for more than 12 years, he can claim ownership. Lord Rama has been in the disputed area for more than that. This is even accepted by the court." He insists "it’s the AIMPLB that is against the court". He also criticised the way the board made his secret proposal public. "The AIMPLB leaked the contents of the correspondence. So many people came and met me in between, Jaswant Singh, George Fernandes, the RSS chief. I didn’t discuss what went on between me and the AIMPLB with them."
But he isn’t disheartened yet. "My doors are open if they (Muslims) want to discuss further. " However, he also believes the Muslims should be "broadminded, magnanimous", understand "the House of Allah should be a holy, religious place and not a monument for a king".
