Evidence for Ram Mandir in Ayodhya: BB Lal
The evidence marshaled by Dr. BB Lal is emphatic. (B.B. Lal, 2008,
The chapter in BB Lal's book is titled: 'Was there a temple in the Janmabhumi area at Ayodhya preceding the construction of the Babari Masjid?' See the vivid photos and read the remarkable Chapter II of BB Lal's work URL reference: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/19288715/Chapter-2ayodhyabblal
K.V. Ramesh's note on Ayodhya Vishnu-Hari temple inscription on a stone slab 115 cms x 55 cms. Read http://www.docstoc.com/docs/19263264/ayodhya1 Appendix from BB Lal's book (Inscription read by KV Ramesh) This is Appendix II referred to in Chapter II of BB Lal's book.
BB Lal's summing up is emphatic and unambiguous, expressed in anguish, but in subdued tones: "The evidence presented in the foregoing paragraphs in respect of the existence of a Hindu temple in the Janmabhumi area at Ayodhya preceding the construction of the Babari Masjid is so eloquent that no further comments are necessary. Unfortunately, the basic problem with a certain category of historians and archaeologists – and others of the same ilk – is that seeing they see not or knowingly they ignore. Anyway, in spite of them the truth has revealed itself."
Govt. should file affidavit in SC: Swamy.
December 11, 2009.
Statement of Dr. Subramanian Swamy, President of the Janata Party.
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 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.
The Allahabad High Court on VHP's petition in the year 2002 got extensive investigation done at the disputed site through scientific GPR Survey and archaeological excavations. Vide orders, dated August 01, 2002 and October 23, 2002, the High Court Bench asked the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to carry out Ground Penetrating Radar Survey/Geo-radiology Survey (GPR) 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 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 this 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."
Other observations of the Liberhan Commission too support the VHP case for a Rama temple at the disputed site:
In Chapter No.2 (Ayodhya & its Geography) page No. 23 the Liberhan Report says:
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."
Para 9.2: "Ancient Ayodhya was traditionally the epitome of Hindu life, culture and a paradigm of coexistence of a multi-religious society. It was a peaceful place with a regular influx of visitors pilgrims, Sadhus and Sants, monks, travelers, tourists."
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 26, Para-10.10: "The town is currently inhibited (sic) (means inhabited!) with a multi-religious population consisting of Muslims, Buddhist, Sikhs, Christians, Jains, etc., but the majority of the population is Hindu. The temples were open to public of all denominations."
Page 29, Para 12.1: "There are large numbers of temples, mosques, shrines, tombs, gardens and other religious monuments spread over a large area: rather, metaphorically it is said that in Ayodhya every house is a temple."
Page 29, Para 12.2: "Prominent temples were Sankat Mochan Mandir, Shakti Gopal Mandir, Shesh Avatar temple, Ved Mandir, Maniram Ki Chawni, Hanuman Garhi, Pr3eethi Ke Thakur, Kanak Bhawan, Rang Mahal, Anand Bhawan, and Kaushalya Bhavan……."
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."
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,
BEFORE THE VERDICT OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT ABOUT THE RAM JANMABHOOMI ISSUE PLEASE READ THIS REPORT BY ARCHEOLOGICAL DEPARTMENT OF INDIA.SPREADING THE TRUTH IS NEEDED.
The Archaeological Survey of India Report
The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) excavated the mosque site at the direction of the Lucknow Bench Bench of the Allahabad High Court in 2003. The archaeologists reported evidence of a large 10th century structure similar to a Hindu temple having pre-existed the Babri Masjid.
A team of 131 laborers including 29 Muslims - who were later on included on the objections of the Muslim side-, was engaged in the excavations.
On June 11th, 2003 the ASI issued an interim report that only listed the findings of the period between May 22nd
and June 6th, 2003.
In August 2003 the ASI handed a 574-page report to the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court.
The ASI, who examined the site, issued a report of the findings of the period between May 22nd and June 6th, 2003. This report stated:
"Among the structures listed in the report are several brick walls 'in east-west orientation', several 'in north-south orientation', 'decorated colored floor', several 'pillar bases', and a '1.64-metre high decorated black stone pillar (broken) with vaksha figurines on four corners' as well as "Arabic inscription of holy verses on stone" Earlier reports by the ASI, based on earlier findings,
also mention among other things a staircase and two black basalt columns 'bearing fine decorative carvings with two cross legged figures in bas-relief on a bloomed lotus with a peacock whose feathers are raised upwards'.
The excavations give ample traces that there was a mammoth pre-existing structure beneath the three-domed Babri structure. Ancient perimeters from East to West and North to South have been found beneath the Babri fabrication. The bricks used in these perimeters predate the time of Babur. Beautiful stone pieces bearing carved Hindu ornamentations like lotus, Kaustubh jewel, alligator facade, etc., have been used in these walls. These decorated architectural pieces have been anchored with precision at varied places in the walls. A tiny portion of a stone slab is sticking out at a place below 20 feet in one of the pits. The rest of the slab lies covered in the wall. The projecting portion bears a five-letter Dev Nagari inscription that turns out to be a Hindu name.
The items found below 20 feet should be at least 1,500 years old. According to archaeologists about a foot of loam layer gathers on topsoil every hundred years. Primary clay was not found even up to a depth of 30 feet. It provides the clue to the existence of some structure or the other at that place during the last 2,500 years.
More than 30 pillar bases have been found at equal spans. The pillar-bases are in two rows and the rows are parallel. The pillar-base rows are in North-South direction. A wall is superimposed upon another wall. At least three layers of the floor are visible. An octagonal holy fireplace (Yagna Kund) has been found. These facts prove the enormity of the pre-existing structure.
Surkhii has been used as a construction material in our country since over 2000 years and in the constructions at the Janma Bhumi Surkhii has been extensively used. Molded bricks of round and other shapes and sizes were neither in vogue during the middle ages nor are in use today. It was in vogue only 2,000 years ago. Many ornate pieces of touchstone (Kasauti stone) pillars have been found in the excavation. Terracotta idols of divine figurines, serpent, elephant, horse-rider, saints, etc., have been found. Even to this day terracotta idols are used in worship during Diwali celebrations and then put by temple sanctums for invoking divine blessings. The Gupta and the Kushan period bricks have been found. Brick walls of the Gahadwal period (12th Century CE) have been found in excavations.
Nothing has been found to prove the existence of residential habitation there. The excavation gives out the picture of a vast compound housing a sole distinguished and greatly celebrated structure used for divine purposes and not that of a colony or Mohalla consisting of small houses. That was an uncommon and highly celebrated place and not a place of habitation for the common people.
Hindu pilgrims have always been visiting that place for thousands of years. Even today there are temples around that place and the items found in the excavations point to the existence of a holy structure of North Indian architectural style at that place.
In the January 2003, Canadian geophysicist Claude Robillard performed a search with ground- penetrating radar. The survey concluded the following:
"There is some structure under the mosque. The structures were ranging from 0.5 to 5.5 meters in depth that could be associated with ancient and contemporaneous structures such as pillars, foundation walls, slab flooring, extending over a large portion of the site".
Claude Robillard, the chief geophysicist stated the following:
"There are some anomalies found underneath the site relating to some archaeological features. You might associate them (the anomalies) with pillars, or floors, or concrete floors, wall foundation or something. These anomalies could be associated with archaeological features but until we dig, I can't say for sure what the construction is under the mosque."
The final ASI report of August 25th, 2003 stated that there was an evidence of a large Hindu temple having pre-existed the Babri mosque. Midway into the excavations the courts ordered the removal of the head of the ASI excavations for not following the excavation norms .