THE LONG-AWAITED RAM JANMABHOOMI VERDICT OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT ON 24-9-2010-PART-I
‘Ayodhya is as holy to the Hindus as Mecca is to the Muslims; Muslims should respect the sentiments of their Hindu brethren and voluntarily hand over the structure for constructing the Rama Temple.’---- Shri K.K. Muhammad, formerly Deputy Superintendent Archaeologist (Madras Circle)
The besieged, battered and shattered Hindus of India are hoping to get some justice from the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court on the sensitive Ram Janmabhoomi issue on 24-9-2010. This long pending case is about the ownership of the Ayodhya land to which Hindus and Muslims have been making rival claims over the past one and a quarter century.
While the Hindus have always claimed the land to be the site of the birthplace of their most revered Lord Ram, the Muslims have asserted their right over the same as the site of a 16th century mosque, claimed to have been built by Mughal emperor Babur in the ancient town of Ayodhya, about 120 km from Lucknow. The Babri Masjid at the site was razed to the ground on December 6, 1992, by karsevaks and enthusiastic Hindu Devotees of Lord Rama who claimed that it was the sacred Ram Janmabhoomi site. Almost 10 years later, the Muslims of India used this very incident as a convenient ploy to set fire to the railway carriage at Godhra in Gujarat carrying Hindu karsevaks from Ayodhya in February 2002. 58 INNOCENT HINDU MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN WERE BURNT ALIVE ON THAT FATEFUL DAY. This mass murder of the Hindus has been completely suppressed by the anti-Hindu Mass Media—both print and electronic—in India and abroad.
What is deliberately overlooked by the Government of India, most of the State Governments and the men in the media is the solid fact of unprovoked, uncontrolled, unabashed and Islamic state sponsored destruction of Hindu Temples in India for a thousand years from the beginning of the 8th century AD to the end of the 18th century AD. For the one and only instance of Babri Masjid, totally relied upon by the traditional swordsmen and political wordsmiths of Islam today, the Hindus of India can furnish a list of at least 30,000 places in India where mosques had been built on original temple sites after completely demolishing those temples and often using the rubble of those damaged temples for the construction of mosques with Islamic fervour on those very sites. Dr.Sitaram Goel has fully documented the fact of Islamic destruction of Hindu Temples for 1000 years from 712 AD to 1800 AD in 2 volumes. I am presenting below the front covers of both these volumes.
Complete documentation ofdestruction of Hindu Temples
Babri Masjid was demolished by the Hindu Karsevaks on 6th December 1992. Suppressed oppressed and pent up feelings of millions and millions of Hindus in India — arising from the State sponsored Islamic destruction during Muslim rule for more than a thousand years from 712 AD to 1800 AD —— burst forth in a cataclysmic manner on that day. It was a spontaneous outburst of genuine religious feelings of the Hindus of India extending over a millennium and this sacred fact can neither be politicised nor trivialised by the brazen brigade of anti-Hindu pseudo-secularists. 10 Days later, Narasimha Rao government appointed the Justice Liberhan Commission to inquire into the episode of demolition of Babri Masjid. What has been deliberately suppressed by the Government of India and the anti-Hindu political / commercial mercenaries having a monopolistic hold over the mass media — both print and electronic — is the incontrovertible fact that 43 ancient Hindu Temples were destroyed within a period of 12 days in Kashmir Valley from 7 December 2009 to 18 December 2009. The demolition of ONE (1) Babri Masjid called for the immediate constitution of Justice Liberhan Commission. Savage Islamic destruction of 43 Hindu Temples in Kashmir Valley in a matter of 12 days did not call for the establishment of any Judicial Commission of Inquiry. Thus the Narasimha Rao Congress Government was guilty of blatant discrimination against the majority Hindus of India.
The disgraceful serpentine slothful Liberhan Commission took 17 years to do its shoddy job. Any one can see that it is a badly drafted report. There are two types of disgusting and irresponsible Judges in India. One, who knows the law and the other, who knows the law minister. Justice Liberhan belongs to the later category.
Last year, I spoke to Dr Subramanian Swamy and requested him to comment on the patent holes and flaws in the Liberhan Commission Report. Dr Subramanian Swamy gave a detailed statement to this effect: ‘The Report of the Liberhan Commission of Inquiry, unwittingly and ironically, supports the VHP’s case for a Ram temple in Ayodhya.
In Chapter 15 (Recommendations), Page 978, Para 176.5, the Liberhan Commission states: ‘…..The question whether a structure was a temple or a mosque can only be answered by a scientific study by archaeologists, historians and anthropologists.’ This is precisely the VHP’s stated position for the last 25 years. Other observations of the Liberhan Commission too support the VHP case for a Rama temple at the disputed site:
Para 9.1: ‘Ayodhya is accepted in popular Hindu tradition as the birthplace of the Hindu God Rama and is therefore regarded as a holy and historical city.’
9.3: ‘Ayodhya was also known variously as Vishala, Khosla (sic) or Maha Khosla, Ikshvaku, Ram Puri, Ram Janam Bhoomi.
9.4: ‘Ayodhya is of special and specific importance for the sect of Ram believers or those loosely term as the Ramanandis in Hindu Religion. The place was the place of unequaled pilgrimage for Hindus, Monks, travelers, pilgrims, sadhus & sants irrespective of their region & faith.’
9.5: ‘This place had become emotive issue owing to its position as the birth place of Ram, a theme present in every facet of the culture, connecting the past with the present & the future, this religious fervour had kept the town for centuries alive after successive rulers had gone by’’.
Page 25, Para-10.3: ‘On the East of Ayodhya is Faizabad town with a population of about 2,10,000. It has large number of temples mostly dedicated to the Hindu God Vishnu.’
Page 29, Para 12.1: ‘… metaphorically it is said that in Ayodhya every house is a temple.’
Paga 32, Para 12.12: ‘The topography and facts about Ram Katha Kunj, Ayodhya town or the Ram Janambhoomi complex or Ram Katha Kunj or the disputed structure are however not disputed. The facts are corroborated by NC Padhi in his statement with no contradiction.’
Finally Dr.Subramanian Swamy rightly concluded:‘Hence, since the Union Government has accepted the Liberhan Commission Report and this Report, read with the Supreme Court’s 1994 Constitutional Bench judgment in the Farooqui case, that a mosque is not an essential part of Islam but a facilitation center for reading of namaz, hence any government can acquire any mosque for a public purpose and even demolish it. I demand therefore the Government file an affidavit in the Supreme Court declaring that it will acquire the disputed area in Ayodhya and hand it over to the sants and sadhus associated with the VHP enable Hindus to organize a Rama temple restoration at the original birth site of Lord Rama.’
When the VHP moved the Allahabad High Court in 1992, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court (Vide orders, dated August 01, 2002 and October 23, 2002) asked the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to carry out Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) Search of the disputed land, so as to ascertain possibility of proof of remnants of some earlier structure. In compliance of these orders, the ASI, with the help of Tozo Vikas International Pvt. Ltd. undertook this exercise. The Allahabad High Court thereafter suo moto passed a detailed order on March 05, 2003, issuing a commission to ASI to investigate into the matter by excavating the relevant area of the disputed land. The ASI took about five months in carrying out the excavation work and thereafter submitted a bulky report in two volumes together with 45 site notebooks, 12 albums containing 329 black & white photographs, 28 albums having coloured photographs, 11 video cassettes, 6 DVD cassettes, registers of pottery, unsealed bones, architectural objects stored in tin-shed at the excavated site, individual list of 9 boxes containing bones, glazed wares, antiquities, day-to-day registers, antiquity register etc., etc..
In Its excavation report (Ayodhya 2002-03, Vol.1 text, Chapter-X, Summary of Results, Page Nos. 268-269, 270, 271 and 272), the ASI states in the last paragraph: ‘…….Now viewing in totality and taking into account the archaeological evidence of a massive structure just below the disputed structure and evidence of continuity in structural phases from 10th Century onwards up to the construction of the disputed structure along with the yield of stone and decorated bricks as well as mutilated sculpture of divine couple and carved architectural members including foliage patterns, Amlaka, Kapotapali, Door Jamb, and semi-circular plaster, broken octagonal shaft of black schist pillar, lotus motif, circular shrine having Pranala (water chute) in the North, 50 pillar bases in association of a hue structure, are indicative of remains which are distinctive features found associated with the temples of North India.’
THUS THE ASI TEAM, WHICH HAD UNDERTAKEN ITS WORK UPON SPECIFIC DIRECTIONS OF THE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, HAS CONFIRMED THE FACT THAT THE BABRI MASJID HAS BEEN RAISED OVER THE REMAINS/DEBRIS OF A HINDU TEMPLE. I have no doubt that the Hon’ble Judges of the Allahabad High Court will fully endorse this finding of the ASI and give an unqualified verdict in favour of the Hindus of India.
Dr B.B. Lal
Dr B.B. Lal, the former Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), is a world renowned archaeologist and his excavations cover a very wide range. At Kalibangan, Rajasthan, he unearthed a prosperous city of the Harappan Civilization. His excavations at Hastinapura established the fact that there was a kernel of truth in the Mahabharata, even though the great epic is full of interpolations. After his voluntary retirement from the ASI in 1972, he embarked upon his project ‘Archaeology of the Ramayana Sites’. He undertook this work under the auspices of Jiwaji University, Gwalior. Dr B.B Lal’s work relating to the archaeology of Ramayana sites was undertaken during the period from 1977 to 1986.
Front cover of Dr B B Lal’s book
I am quoting below some excerpts from Dr B.B Lal’s book.
‘WAS THERE A TEMPLE IN THE JANMA BHUMI AREA AT AYODHYA PRECEDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BABRI MASJID?’ (pp-54)
As mentioned earlier (pp-20), excavations were carried out in the Janma-Bhumi area at Ayodhya as part of the project ‘Archaeology of the Ramayana Sites’. Of the trenches laid out in this area, one was immediately to the South of and almost parallel to the boundary wall of the Babri Masjid, the intermediary space being hardly four metres. (pp-50) ... Attached to the piers of the Babri Masjid there were twelve stone pillars which carried not only typical Hindu motifs and mouldings but also figures of Hindu deities. It was self evident that these pillars were not an integral part of the Masjid but were foreign to it. Since, as already stated, the pillar-bases were penetrating into the Masjid complex, a question naturally arose whether these bases had anything to do with the above mentioned pillars affixed to the piers of the Masjid. (pp-55)
The excavations of Dr. B.B Lal at Ayodhya have shown that the Ramayana has a basis in history. Duly authenticating the findings of Dr B B Lal is this statement of Shri K.K. Muhammad, Deputy Superintendent Archaeologist (Madras Circle) which appeared in the English daily, Indian Express on 15 Dec 1990:
‘I can reiterate this (ie. The existence of the Hindu Temple before it was displaced by the Babri Masjid) with greater authority – for I was the only Muslim who had participated in the Ayodhya excavations in 1976-’77 under Prof. Lal as a trainee. I have visited the excavation near the Babri site and seen the excavated pillar bases. The JNU historians have highlighted ONLY ONE PART OF OUR FINDINGS WHILE SUPPRESSING THE OTHER.’
K.K MUHAMMAD went to add: ‘Ayodhya is as holy to the Hindus as Mecca is to the Muslims; Muslims should respect the sentiments of their Hindu brethren and voluntarily hand over the structure for constructing the Rama Temple.’
To reiterate once again, for the one and only Babri Masjid, totally relied upon by the traditional swordsmen and political wordsmiths of Islam today, the Hindus of India can furnish a list of at least 30,000 places in India where mosques had been built on original temple sites after completely demolishing those temples and often using the rubble of those damaged temples for the construction of mosques with Islamic fervour on those very sites. I have already explained above that this solid physical fact has been clearly brought out by Dr B.B. Lal, former Director General of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), in his great work, ‘Rama: His Historicity, Mandir and Setu: Evidence Of Literature, Archaeology And Other Sciences’.
When Dr B.B Lal after conducting detailed excavations at Ayodhya clearly brought to public view the fact that Babar had built his Babri Masjid upon an age old Hindu Temple site, the anti-Hindu pseudo-secular historians of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (Romila Thapar and her Marxist cabal!)) and the Aligarh Muslim University (Government sponsored jihadi scholars like Ifran Habib and others of anti-kaffir clan fame!) combined together on the same platform to run down Dr B.B Lal and his archaeological findings. But his detractors were silenced by the stern, grim, scorching and telling truth of Dr B.B Lal’s professional work as an outstanding archaeologist of international fame.
Let me now give a few quotations from Dr.B.B.Lal’s Book ‘Rama: His Historicity, Mandir and Setu: Evidence of Literature, Archaeology and Other Sciences’:
“... Attached to the piers of the Babri Masjid there were twelve stone pillars which carried not only typical Hindu motifs and mouldings but also figures of Hindu deities (Figs. 2.3 and 2.4). It was self evident that these pillars were not an integral part of the Masjid but were foreign to it. Since, as already stated, the pillar-bases were penetrating into the Masjid complex, a question naturally arose whether these bases had anything to do with the above mentioned pillars affixed to the piers of the Masjid.(pp-55)
- – - However, since these pillar-bases raised a question about their relationship with the pillars affixed to the piers of the Masjid, which evidently had originally belonged to a Hindu temple, these did draw public attention. The first reaction that came up from a certain category of historians [Eminent Historians] was to deny the very existence of these pillar-bases. Their approach was simple: if there were no pillar-bases, the question of their relationship with the pillars affixed to the piers of the Babri Masjid became automatically redundant. These ‘historians’ took recourse to publishing all sorts of unsavoury comments in the newspapers. However, when they were told that the pillar-bases were not someone’s fancy but their photographs (along with the negatives), taken at the time of the excavation, did exist in the photo-archives of the Excavations Branch of the ASI, they gave up their first exercise in denial, ... (pp-55)”
THE DEMOLITION OF BABRI MASJID WAS CARRIED OUT BY THE KAR SEVAKS ON DECEMBER 6, 1992, BROUGHT TO PUBLIC VIEW A GREAT DEAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL MATERIAL --- 200 SPECIMENS WHICH INCLUDED MANY SCULPTURED PANELS AND ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENTS WHICH CONSTITUTED PARTS OF THE DEMOLISHED HINDU TEMPLE --- FROM WITHIN THE THICK WALLS OF THE BABRI MASJID. ALL THIS MATERIAL THROWN UP AFTER THE DEMOLITION OF THE MASJID, HAVE ONLY CONFIRMED THE ABOVE FINDINGS OF DR B.B LAL ARRIVED AT AFTER HIS DETAILED ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATIONS AT THE SITE IN THE LATE 1970’S AND THE EARLY 1980’S.
As I have already mentioned earlier, the Allahabad High Court suo moto passed a detailed order on March 05, 2003, issuing a commission to ASI to investigate into the matter by excavating the relevant area of the disputed land on which the Babri Masjid has been built. As directed by the High Court, this task was undertaken by a team from the ASI under the leadership of Shri Mani, Joint Director of the ASI. HE SUBMITTED 2 DETAILED REPORTS TO THE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT 7 YEARS AGO. HIS REPORTS ALSO TOTALLY CONFIRM THE MAGISTERIAL FINDINGS OF DR B.B LAL DETAILED ABOVE.
The demolition of the Babri Masjid also brought to public light 3 INSCRIPTIONS. The largest of the inscriptions is engraved on a stone-slab measuring 1.10 x .56 meters, and consists of twenty lines. It has since been deciphered by Professor Ajaya Mitra Shastri of Nagpur University in the Puruttatva No. 23 (1992-93). Professor Shastri, who unfortunately is no more, was a distinguished historian and a specialist in Epigraphy and Numismatics. The relevant part of his paper reads as follows: “The inscription is composed in high-flown Sanskrit verse, except for a small portion in prose, and is engraved in chaste and classical Nagari script of the eleventh-twelfth century A.D. It has yet to be fully deciphered, but the portions which have been fully deciphered and read are of great historical significance for our purpose here. It was evidently put up on the wall of the temple, the construction of which is recorded in the text inscribed on it. Line 15 of this inscription, for example, clearly tells us that a beautiful temple of Vishnu-Hari, built with heaps of stones and beautified with a golden spire unparalleled by any other temple built by the earlier kings was constructed. This wonderful temple was built in the temple-city of Ayodhya situated in the Saketamandala showing that Ayodhya and Saketa were closely connected, Saketa being the district of which Ayodhya was a part. Line 19 describes God Vishnu as destroying King Bali (apparently in Vamana manifestation) and the ten headed personage (ie Ravana).”
The above inscription makes it abundantly clear that there did exist at the site a temple datable to circa 11th-12th century CE [A.D.]. The sculptures and inscribed slab that came out from within the walls of the Masjid after its demolition in December 1992, belonged to this very temple.
Another cheap allegation of the ‘Eminent Pseudo-secular and Anti-Hindu Historians’ is that the inscription has been forged. Unfortunately for these motivated and malignant Marxist vermin, all the reputed and outstanding epigraphists of the country have examined the inscribed slab and no one has doubted the authenticity or the genuineness of the inscription in question. Dr. K.V. Ramesh, the Director of Epigraphy, ASI, who is the highest authority on epigraphical matters in the country, has given an Official Summary of the inscription. According to him, this temple was built by Meghasuta who obtained the lordship of Saketamandala (i.e. Ayodhya) through the grace of the senior Lord of the earth viz Govinda Chandra, of the Gahadavala dynasty who ruled over a vast empire, from 1114 to 1155 CE.
I am not surprised at all by the ‘accuse and scoot’ guerilla tactics of the petty sordid and vicious Communist, Congress and Muslim Historians of today on this controversial issues. Their contention is absolutely baseless and only smacks of low level religious and communal party politics.
Soon after the demolition, India Today magazine published a photograph in the Issue of 31-December-1992 which clearly showed the Kar Sevaks carrying on their shoulders a huge stone sculpted with a long frieze, after having picked it up from the debris at Ayodhya immediately after the demolition of the Babri Masjid.
Against the above background, Dr B.B Lal has beautifully summed up the whole issue as follows, “the evidence presented in the foregoing paragraphs in respect of the existence of a Hindu temple in the Janma Bhumi area at Ayodhya preceding the construction of the Babri Masjid is so eloquent that no further comments are necessary.”
After presenting the views of Dr B.B Lal, let me present the views of Dr N.S Rajaram, a well known Mathematician, Historian and Indologist. He has written a brilliant article titled ‘The evidence at Ayodhya: Wasted 17 years of Liberhan’
To quote the words of Dr N.S Rajaram: “For all the sound and fury in the media about Ayodhya, the historical question is surprisingly simple: was there or was there not a Hindu temple at the spot known as Ram Janmabhumi that was destroyed to build a mosque? The answer is also equally simple — ‘yes’. There are two parts to the question: (1) was there a Hindu temple, and (2) was it destroyed and a mosque known as Babri Masjid built in its place. Again the answer is — ‘yes’ to both questions. It is as simple as that.”
No comments:
Post a Comment