Fundamentals of the Sri Ram Temple at Ayodhya – Subramanian Swamy

Sri Rama

Dr. Subramanian SwamyIt is well-established by GPRS-directed excavations done under the Allahabad High Court monitoring and verification in 2002-03, that a large temple did exist below where Babri Masjid structure once stood. – Dr Subramanian Swamy

True and devout Hindus believe Lord Sri Rama was born in Ayodhya, the then capital of a flourishing kingdom of the Suryavansha dynasty. Rama is venerated as Maryada Purushottam, and worshipped by Hindus of the north. As an avatar of Vishnu, he was first propagated by Tamil saints Nayanmars and Alwars; the north later came to accept Rama, especially thanks to the saint Tulsidas. In that sense, Sri Rama was the first truly national king of India, supra region, supra varna or jati.

The exact spot where Rama was born has been and remains firmly identified in the Hindu mind and is held as sacred. This is the very area where stood from 1528 till December 6, 1992, a structure that came to be known as Babri Masjid, put up in 1528 by Babur’s commander Mir Baqi.

Baqi was a Shia Muslim, and hence he intended it to be a place for Shias to perform namaz. Today, interestingly, the Shia clerics have made it clear to Hindu organisations that they would agree to have the site restored as a Ramjanmabhoomi. It is the Sunni Waqf Board, which entered the legal dispute as late as 1961, that has been claiming the title to the land on which the structure once stood. I call it a “structure” since it cannot be strictly called a mosque by Sunni edicts—because it did not have the mandatory minarets and wazu (water pool).

In Skanda Purana (Chapter X, Vaishnav Khand) the site is vividly described. Valmiki Ramayana also describes it beautifully. Less than two decades before Mir Baqi carried out the horrible demolition of the Ram Temple, Guru Nanak had visited the Ramjanmabhoomi and had darshan of Ramlalla in the mandir at the spot. Guru Nanak himself records in 1521 the barbarity of Babar’s invasions (in Guru Granth Sahib at p.418). In Akbar’s time, Abul Fazal wrote the Ain-i-Akbari in which he describes Ayodhya as the place of “Ram Chandra’s residence who in Treta Yuga combined spiritual supremacy and kingship” (Translated by Colonel H. S. Jarrett and published in Kolkata in 1891).

In Chapter X of the Report of the Archeological Survey of India, NW, and Oudh (1889) it is mentioned (p.67) that Babri Mosque “was built in AD 1528 by Mir Khan on the very spot where the old temple of Janmasthan of Ram Chandra was standing.”

It is recorded in many official and judicial proceedings. In 1885, for example, Mahant Raghubar Das in a Suit No 61/280 of 1885 filed in the court of the Faizabad sub-judge against the Secretary of State for India (who was based in London), prayed for permission to build a temple on the chabutra outside the mosque. His suit was dismissed on March 18, 1886.

However, in his order, the sub-judge, an Englishman, stated: “It is most unfortunate that a Masjid should have been built on land specially held sacred by the Hindus. But as the event occurred 358 years ago, it is too late now to remedy the grievance.”

It is well-established by GPRS-directed excavations done under the Allahabad High Court monitoring and verification in 2002-03, that a large temple did exist below where Babri Masjid structure once stood. Inscriptions found during excavations describe it as a temple of Vishnu Hari who had killed the demon king Dasanan (Ravana).

The Sunni Waqf Board does not accept these findings. It does not however matter if all this was indeed so or not, since under Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) it is prescribed that “Whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons, with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement as an insult to their religion, shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.” – The New Indian Express, 3 October 2010

Ramlalla Temple on the Babri Masjid site after the demolition

Ramjanmabhumi Graphic

 See also

Advertisements

5 Responses

  1. The problem is that Hindus are asking for so little and they will get nothing. If they had asked for every single temple destroyed by Muslim invaders, they could have gotten back Ayodhya, Kasi and Mathura.

  2. BJP senior leader Subramanian Swamy at the flagging-off ceremony for the Tiranga Yatra in Jamshedpur on Thursday.

    Talks won’t work, Ram Mandir will be built by 2024 through legislation: Swamy – Manoj Choudhary – Hindustan Times – Jamshedpur – 10 March 2017

    Senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) parliamentarian Subramanian Swamy on Thursday claimed that the Ram Mandir will be constructed at Ayodhya by 2024.

    Flagging off a ‘Tiranga Yatra’ organised by local BJP leader Amarpreet Singh Kale to honour those martyred in the Indian freedom struggle, Swamy said his party will ensure that the structure is constructed even if it’s through “parliamentary legislation”.

    The feisty Rajya Sabha member didn’t seem to favour the Supreme Court’s recommendation of an out-of-court settlement in the matter. “Bilateral talks are not enough to pave the way for the Ram temple,” he said. “I spoke to various Muslim leaders on the issue, but couldn’t arrive at a conclusion. The six-decade-old dispute can be resolved only through parliamentary legislation.”

    Swamy said the BJP will have a clear majority in the Rajya Sabha by 2018, a development that could pave the way for enacting a law in this regard. “At present, we have a majority only in the Lok Sabha. For passing a law, we also need to secure a majority in the Rajya Sabha. Once that happens, we will ensure that the Ram Mandir is constructed by 2024,” he added.

    He said the minority community should forsake its claim over the disputed site, and cooperate with Ram devotees in constructing the temple. “We will give them some space to construct a mosque on the other side of the Saryu river in Ayodhya,” Swamy added.

    Swamy cited a 2003 geological survey report placed before the Allahabad high court to buttress his claim that Lord Ram was born on the disputed site. “Hence, the temple will be constructed on that very spot while the mosque can be set up elsewhere,” he said.

    Ayodhya dispute: Babri action panel rejects SC advice of amicable solution, BJP hails offer – Hindustan Times – New Delhi

    • What a sad state of affairs!

      Laws can be manipulated to allow forbidden blood sports like jallikattu, but a prime minister with alleged Hindutva propensities cannot issue an executive order to build a temple in the national interest!

      Hindus are still doing back-seat driving. When are they going to get into the front driver’s seat?

    • bmac will never accept any solution. government must hand over the site to Hindus through legislation

  3. Reblogged this on Voices and Visions.

Comments are moderated

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: