My talk in Sun News TV as a guest on live coverage of Prana Pratishtha

I was invited by Sun News TV channel to be a guest in their live coverage of Prana Pratistha of Bhagawan Shri Rama in his Janmasthan in Ayodhya on 22nd January 2024. They asked me a few questions for which some of my answers were muted - you can guess why. What was telecast is given in two videos below.

In this recorded version, I have spoken in the beginning and from 29 minutes onwards. I have spoken on Rama's connection to Tamilnadu, his temples in Tamilnadu right from his time, how Ravana was hated by Tamils and on Valmiki's knowledge of Tamil. 

In the next video you can hear me from 1.39 minutes onwards answering a question on what I think about the image of Rama. I started stating that I can see the image in three ways.

1. It fulfils the Saamudrika lakshana described for Rama by Hanuman to Sita in Ashoka Vana.

2. It signifies the home coming of Rama - that Rama is back in his birth place.

3. I quoted the version of the other guest in the programme that Rama lived lakhs of years ago in Treta Yuga which makes Rama a mythical and imagined character. So I talked about the two types of Yugas- namely Divya Yuga and Dharma Yuga in which Divya Yuga measured by planetary conjunction is not applicable to human life.

By then my voice was muted and we were not allowed to talk further and there was no proper closure of the talk either. After waiting for 45 minutes or so, we left the studio on being told that the programme involving us was over. I expected this but accepted their invitation to make my point. I did talk about how Ravana was hated by Tamils. I did talk about Rama as the ancestor of the Cholas and the like which this TV group could not have stomached. 

After I spoke about Ravana factor, my next answer about Skanda and how the Supreme court accepted the evidence from Skanda Purana in determining the location of Janmasthan which had actually pointed to the location of the Babri masjid was muted even before I could start giving the details. Facts cannot be hidden always. 

Now coming to the third point which I wanted to tell but couldn't tell was this:

In Dharma Yuga measurement, the amount of Dharma decides the Yuga.

If 3/4th of the Dharma is present, it is Treta Yuga. Rama lived in that kind of period. 

If 1/2 of Dharma is present, it is Dwapara Yuga.

If 1/4th of Dharma is present, it is Kali Yuga.

Now we are in Kali Yuga both in terms of amount of Dharma and in planetary measures. 

However, in Valmiki Ramayana, Maalyavaan, the maternal grandfather of Ravana had given a different point. He scolded Ravana that he was adharmic. In that context he said that when Dharma is high, there is Krita yuga. If Adharma is high, that is Kali Yuga. Maalyavaan said that Ravana was Adharmic and therefore there was Kali yuga then. In other words, in the so-called Treta yuga of Rama, the adharmic activities of Ravana brought Kali Yuga wherever he went. But wherever Rama went, there was Treta Yuga with 3/4th of Dharma.

Today Rama has come back to Ayodhya to his own palace. This means we now have Treta yuga in Kali Yuga. This beautiful idea of hope and positivity could not be told in this TV. 

However the listeners to All India Radio the opportunity to listen to me speak about this as I also got a call to talk in the live coverage of Prana Pratistha in AIR on that day. I answered two questions - one about this yuga issue and Rama's birth year. The audio clippings of my talk are available but I have no idea of how to make them public. Those wanting to listen to it can drop a mail to jayasreebooks@gmail.come. I will share them. 

Did Rama suspect Sita's fidelity? (My talk in Thamarai TV)

This video was recorded and uploaded a year ago but not documented by me in my blog. Hence doing it now.

In this interview I am replying questions on

* protection of Ram Setu from destruction

* age of Setu built by Rama

* the events leading to Agni pariksha of Sita probing the question whether Rama suspected Sita's fidelity.

* the circumstances leading to the exile of pregnant Sita.

* Was Rama right in abandoning her?

* How Rama became a prisoner of circumstances and Sita, a victim of circumsatnces.

History of Ayodhya, Ram Janmasthan and the struggle to reclaim it (My talk in Thamarai TV)

In connection with the Prana Pratistha of Rama in his Janmasthan, I gave an interview to Thamari TV channel on the day before Prana Pratistha in which I spoke about the following:

* The history of Ayodhya right from the time it was founded by Manu * The destruction of Ram Janmasthan and subsequent developments. * Prana Pratistha of Ram Lalla * Why Modiji is the best choice to inaugurate the temple

ராமனைப் போற்றும் தமிழ்நாடு (My talk in Twitter spaces #Dharmic Indians)

On 20th January, 2024, just a day before the Prana Pratistha, I spoke in Twitter spaces hosted by Dharmic Indians. The topic was ராமனைப் போற்றும் தமிழ் நாடு.

Before I started the talk, I recalled the sacrifices done by countless unknown people in the last 500 years for the sake of reclaiming Janmasthan. We observed silence for a few seconds for their sake. 

In continuation of that I was given the honour to release a video on the sacrifices of those people.

Then I started speaking on Rama's connection to Tamilnadu particularly through temples. 

I spoke about three groups with 5 temples each. They are the 5 temples on Rama among the Vaishnava Divya Desams and Pancha Rama kshetras around Thiruvarur and Thiruvannamalai.

Additionally, I spoke about the importance of Madhurantakam temple and how Rama and Lakshmana appeared to the British Collector, Lionel Blaze.

Another temple was Thiruchitrakootam also known as Chidambaram and how Kulashekara Alwar's verses show the existence of Rama's shrine within the temple of Natarajar in Chidambaram. Today it is not there. In the 12th century, the Chola king Kulottunga-II removed the Vishnu shrine, popularly known as Lord Govindaraja which was depicted in the film, Dasavatara. The Alwar's verses show that there did exist a sannidhi for Rama with Hanuman in Pattabhisheka set up. The temple's original history was linked with Rama and the Deekshitars brought Lord Nataraja 3500 years ago due to loss of land. Further explanations and question- answer session that went on till 11 pm can be heard in the following link. 

https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1YqxoDBDgEkKv?s=20

Evidences of Ramayana - My talk in #Teams News Hour (twitter spaces)

On the 19th January, 2024, a few days before the Prana Pratistha, I was a speaker in the spaces hosted by Mr. Amit Bhatia. The event that started at 9 pm IST went on till 1 am and had to be closed due to time constraint. 

I began with just two issues to establish that Ramayana was not myth.

* about Vanaras as human beings in disguise and 

* the interaction between Rama and Samudra Raja when Rama was waiting to cross the sea occurred in Rama's dream, as per the description in the Mahabharata.

After nearly 40 minutes of my talk on these two issues, I started answering a volley of questions on Ramayana, Ravana, Lanka, Setu and many more. The entire talk can be heard in this link on twitter. 

https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1kvJpvLeoaZKE?s=20

Rama's date and the rationale of 11,000 year-rule of Rama (My talk in Pesu Thamizha Pesu)

 In the 3rd and last part of the series on Ram Janma Bhumi given to Pesu Thamizha Pesu I answered questions on the following issues:

* Evidence for Rama as a true character

* Rama's birth year in 5114 BCE

* Rama's Tamilnadu connection

* The age of Rama and Sita when they married and also when they went on exile

* Tamil as Manushya bhasha (Human tongue) spoken by Sita and Hanuman

* Why Ravana was known as 'Dasaananan" (ten-headed)

* Tamil proverb in Valmiki Ramayana.

* The rationale of Rama's rule for 11,000 years.

* Rama's fame outside Bharata Desam.

* Sita's Agni pravesha.

Was Ram temple issue politicised? (My talk in Pesu Thamizha Pesu)

In the 2nd part of the interview on Ram Janma Bhumi issue given to Pesu Thamizha Pesu, I focused on the following features:

* BJP or congress or both - who politicised the temple issue?

* Boycott of the Prana Pratistha function by political parties

* Criticism by Shankaracharyas on prana Pratistha being done before the completion of the temple.

The history of struggle to reclaim Ram Janma Bhumi (My talk in Pesu Thamizha Pesu)

 In connection with the Prana Pratishtha of Bhagawan Shri Ram, I gave a series of interviews on various topics in Pesu Thamizha Pesu Channel days before the Prana Pratishtha.

In this 1st part, I have given the details of the 500 years of struggle to reclaim the Janmasthan.

In what way Bhagawan Shri Rama is connected with Tamilnadu (my talk-series in Mediyaan)

In connection with the Prana Pratistha of Bhagavan Shri Rama in his Janma Bhumi, I have given a series of short interviews to Mediyaan channel days before the Prana Pratistha. The links to all of them are given here along with a brief note on what I have spoken in each video. 

Part 1: The connection between Rama and Tamilnadu is highlighted by citing the inscription of Veera Rajendra Chola which claims that the Cholas were the descendants of Rama. Literary sources stating the same are also given besides explaining how this connection existed. 

Part 2: 

* The 'Kula dhanam' given by Rama to Vibhishana is identified * The epigraphic evidence of Rama having made Setu to cross the ocean. * Chola connection to Rama * 'Sangrama Raghava' and 'Kodandarama' in Chola dynasty.

Part 3:

* Rama guarded the tank in Madhurantakam * Did Rama appear in person to the British collector in Madhurantakam? * Evidence on how the ancient Tamils had known Valmiki Ramayana.

Part 4:

* Significance of Pattabhisheka Raman. * Rare temples of Pattabhisheka Rama in TN. * Dakshina Ayodhya at Vaduvur & Injimedu. * Why Madhurantakam Ram temple is special. * Pancha Rama kshetras in TN.

Part 5:

* the proof for Ayodhya as the birth place of Rama.
* Rama's presence widespread in TN with examples of Naga kudaiyaan & Semponsei koyil * central govt's involvement in the temple

My interview to Chanakya TV on history of Kashi Vishvanatha and Gyanvapi

 My interview to Mr. Arun in Chanakya TV covers 

* the antiquated history of Kashi

* the history of the Swayambhu lord Vishvanatha

*the oldest evidence for the temple in the Mahabharata

* the evidence from the life of Tulsidas who presented his Epic poem Ram Charit Manas to Lord Vishvanatha on whose temple now stands a mosque

* frequent destruction of the temple since the 11th century ending with the final destruction by Aurangzeb in the 17th century

and many more...

Watch here  

Ram Janma Bhoomi verdict: How Historic moments are defined by the Cosmos!

As we are passing through a rare Historical moment in Time and Space of restoring the Palace of Rama to Rama Himself, the celestial signatures in the sky must reflect the rarer of the rarest for this event to happen. This blog is written to record what it looks like when a rare event of Dharma re-establishing itself takes place.

We have for comparison two judgments separated by 9 years (half the cycle of the nodes) of which the second gave a decisive outcome paving the way for correcting a historical wrong. The first was given on 30^th September 2010 at 3-30 PM. The plus and minus witnessed at the celestial sphere was discussed and recorded in this link.

For Dharma to manifest, the 9^th and 10^th lord in the Universal zodiac (starting from Aries) which are none other than Jupiter and Saturn and the 9^th and 10^th lords at the moment of the event must be associated with 9^th and 10^th houses and in auspicious connection. During 2010 verdict Jupiter and Saturn were in mutual aspect, but with Jupiter in retrogression in its own house. The 9^th and 10^th lords were in their own houses from the lagna of the event (judgement delivery begin time). In Navamsa though Sun exalted, Saturn was in inauspicious position in Navamsa. So what was achieved was a half way mark.

Momentous point of the judgement at that time was recognition of a temple below the Masjid. However the judgement sounded more ‘secular’ reflecting the mind of the government of the day by dividing the land among three instead of handing over the entire land to Rama, the rightful owner.

Now the final judgement has come out and one can see a huge leap in the way the heavens positioned themselves.

The Universal Dharma –Karmadhipati lords, namely Jupiter and Saturn have joined together in the universal 9^th house owned by Jupiter. They are joined with Ketu, the signifactor of Dharma kind, a trigger planet for outcomes. The 9^th and 10^th planets of the lagna (judgement delivery start time) Sun and Mercury had joined together at 11^th house, the outcome of the 10^th house.

In Navamsa, the Sun (the 9^th lord in event time and signifactor for Government) and Saturn (Universal 10^th lord and signifactor for citizens) are exalted with Jupiter (Universal 9^th lord) joining the Sun in friendly disposition. Mercury (10^th lord in event time) is also well fortified by occupying its own house in Navamsa.

This gives a picture perfect combination for restoration of Dharma or manifestation of Dharma. It is indeed a combination that comes rarely. This kind of perfect combination didn’t exist on 2010 judgement day.

A curious question remains how the heavens looked when Adharma was reigning.

The Adharmic historical wrongs can happen when Saturn passes through Aries and Taurus or when it goes in retrogression in seven stars starting from Krittika. Saturn, the Universal Karmadhipati planet and the giver of fruits of action becomes weak in such transits. If we look at the time of destruction of Ram Janma Bhoomi, Saturn was transiting Aries in 1528 and entered Krittika in early 1529. When we look back at times of gory wars and destruction such as the destruction of World Trade Centre, Saturn was invariably transiting those signs and stars. When Mars also joins Saturn in those stars and signs, or transits alone, once again transgression of Dharma can be seen.

For an Adharmic act that destroyed Ram Janma Bhoomi, a strong combination of the Dharma- karma lords were needed to be positioned in right places to undo Adharma. Indeed this is vindication of the age-old concept of Dharma- Karmadhipati planets.

Why we need a Ram temple in Ayodhya - Chetan Bhagat

From

http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31807&articlexml=THE-UNDERAGE-OPTIMIST-Why-we-need-a-Ram-02042017016011

Why we need a Ram temple in Ayodhya.

By

Chetan Bhagat

It has become a fashion in some elite Indian circles to bash Hinduism or issues related to it. It has also been taboo in these same intellectual circles to discuss what I think is a very reasonable request -we should have a Ram temple in Ayodhya. Elites, particularly in the English media, have bullied almost all voices that desire a temple at the sacred site into silence.

Hence, just to be clear I would like to state this: peacefully , but definitely, I support the construction of a beautiful Ram temple in Ayodhya. It is frankly ridiculous that we have to beg to restore a temple at one of Hinduism's greatest sites.

Of course, something needs to be clarified here. Violence of any form, including the kind that happened in 1992, cannot be supported. It was wrong, illegal, unfortunate and should never happen again. However, this does not take away the reasonableness of the request to restore a temple in one of the holiest sites of Hindu religion. This article seeks to make a case for a temple and debunk the various theories that have prevented the same from happening for all these years.

The first argument against the temple is `why disturb the status quo?' Its proponents say there is an issue, but it is dormant. So why disturb it and risk destroying the peace? Well, there is no reason why peace should be disturbed in the first place. I think the Muslim community , or the various leaders that claim to represent it, should give its blessing to the temple in any case. This is no ordinary site. As per Hindu faith, it is the birthplace of Lord Rama, one of the most worshipped gods in the religion. Diwali is India's biggest festival.

Thousands of mosques stand on erstwhile temples in India, courtesy Mughal rulers. Nobody is asking to restore those. But this is Lord Rama's birthplace, replaced by simply one more mosque. That mosque can be shifted. The holy site of Lord Rama's birthplace is a matter of centuries of faith. We can't shift that. The mosque can, and a grander one can be made nearby, or even right next door. Why wouldn't the Muslim community accommodate such a reasonable appeal? Is it because some of their self-styled leaders are politically instigated not to do so? I am sure the general Muslim population of this country will approve of such a request. We just need to approach them directly . In the age of social media, we can.

`Build a hospital instead' is the second argument made against building the temple. We should make hospitals, yes, but it doesn't have to be at the same site! Hospitals should be located based on criteria like where do people need them most. They can also be made on any piece of land. Why on such a holy site? Frankly , why can't we make a temple at the site as well as a great hospital somewhere else?

The third argument against the temple is the modern `But God is everywhere, so why here?' Related to this is: `But what is the proof Lord Rama was born here?' Well, God is everywhere. But we still need places of worship. So that when we go there, we can focus on God and God alone. As far as proof of Lord Rama's birth goes, there is none. But we do have proof that this site has been known as the birthplace of Lord Rama for centuries, and excavations have shown that there was a temple here before the mosque.

India is a nation that respects all religions. To prove that, sometimes we tend to become extra sensitive to issues related to minority religions, but ignore any issues the majority religion may have. The Ram temple is just one of them. Previous governments, particularly , had a policy of appeasement for the Muslim community , which took things to the extent that even a reasonable request was made to look like a form of Hindu bullying.

This temple can be a symbol of understanding between the two dominant religious communities of India. Restoring one temple because of the unique nature of the site and shifting a mosque to a nearby location (and making it grander) does not tarnish the glory of Islam in any manner. In fact, the surge in tourism it will create in Ayodhya when this project is complete will bring jobs for both Hindus and Muslims.

The only thing we have to bear in mind is keeping a lid on any form of violence or communal incitement this project may create. Today, in the age of better digital communication, the risks are minimal. This is a request from the Hindu community at large to the Muslim community at large, the elites and the intellectuals -let us have our temple. Bless its restoration and the building of a grander mosque nearby, so that we can, peacefully , create one of the greatest sites of religion and cooperation in the whole world.

Circumambulation for Ram Janma Bhumi temple.

Circumambulation for Ram Janma Bhumi temple.   

84 Kos Parikrama announced by Sant-Mahatmas (Aug. 25 to Sep. 13, 2013)

"OM"

VISHVA HINDU PARISHAD

Sankat Mochan Ashram, Ramakrishna Puram Sector-6, New Delhi - 110 022 Bharat (India)

TeleFax (00-91) (011) 2610 3495, 2617 8992; Emails: hinduvishwa@gmail.com , vhpintlhqs@gmail.com

Visit - http://vhp.org ; http://shreeramjanmabhoomi.org ; www.vhpsampark.org

FORTHCOMING EPISODES/CHAPTER OF THE SRI RAMA JANMA BHUMI TEMPLE CONSTRUCTION MOVEMENT

JOINT MEDIA STATEMENT OF VEN. SWAMI CHINMAYANAND SARASWATI, EX-MINISTER OF STATE FOR HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF BHARAT, AND MA. SRI ASHOKJI SINGHAL, CHIEF PATRON, VISHVA HINDU PARISHAD

New Delhi, August 03, 2013 -  Leading figures of the Sant Fraternity from all the States of Bharat came together in a meeting of the Central Margdarshak Mandal held at Haridwar on June 11-12, 2013. The meeting ran for two days and the issue of Sri Ram Janma Bhumi Temple construction determined the agenda of both the days of cogitations and its four sessions saw three action items that were prescribed by the Sant Community.   

The first action item would see the participation of the Sant Fraternity itself whereby, for the cause of national awakening, they would be undertaking a 20-day Yatra programme between 25th August and 13th September, 2013, covering the scriptural/traditional spirituo-cultural boundary of Ayodhya which is also known as the 84-Kos Parikrama. It is their view that the circumambulation of a Teerthsthan (Ford of Liberation) in the country can be undertaken at any time of the year as any time is a good time for such a purpose – this they asserted as a rebuff to those uninformed ones who hold that 'A Parikrama has a specific Tithi". This tradition of all time Parikrama has been in vogue in the Northern, Southern, Eastern, Western and Central parts of Bharat for thousands of years – in spite of the fact that during the Muslim Raj it was hindered at times – but again during the British Raj it gained currency all year round – in many forms, e.g.., the famous Giri Govardhan Parikrama in Braj Mandal, Kamadgiri Parikrama in Chitrakoot, Thiruvannamalai Parikrama of the sacred Arunachala Hill in Tamil Nadu, &c. As per a tight itinerary, Sants from all the States of Bharat would register their live participation for a day each in the Parikrama Yatra. There would also be many a Sant who would cover the entire Yatra. As per the tradition, Bhajans-Kirtans, Pravachans, Sangat-Pangat, holy dips and Darshans of holy sites, temples, water bodies, forests, etc., would be the highlight of the Parikrama Yatra. During this 20-day Yatra forty camping sites for lunch, dinner and overnight stay have been fixed. The date-wise Yatra itinerary is attached hereby.        

This Yatra would also underline the point that 485 years ago in 1528 CE the Temple of Nativity of our National Protagonist Sri Ram at His birthplace in Ayodhya was demolished by an antagonist invader to undermine our national culture and he parked an offensive structure at our temple site as a statement of his victory. Ever since, in their efforts to liberate the site from foreign occupation, 300,000 lion-hearts of our country sacrificed their lives in 76 field battles that continued for 400+ years. The battle for the site in the Courts of Law also continued for 60+ years. Finally, the Allahabad High Court (Special Bench, Lucknow) gave the verdict that: "1. The disputed site is the birth place of Lord Rama. Place of birth is a juristic person and is a deity. It is personified as the spirit of divine worshipped as birth place of Lord Rama as a child. Spirit of divine ever remains present everywhere at all times for anyone to invoke at any shape or form in accordance with his own aspirations and it can be shapeless and formless also. 2. The disputed building was constructed by Babar ………….. it was built against the tenets of Islam. Thus, it cannot have the character of a mosque. 3. The disputed structure was constructed on the site of old structure after demolition of the same. The Archaeological Survey of India has proved that the structure was a massive Hindu religious structure…". The Hindu society has got this victory after 485 years of field and court battles. It would, therefore, never accept any new mosque or Muslim monument or Islamic Cultural Centre within the scriptural/traditional boundaries of Ayodhya as Ayodhya is to Hindus as Mecca is to Muslims and sure enough any such new structure would remind the antagonistic character of the Babri structure to our national protagonist and become a perpetual point of Hindu-Muslim spat.  

This Yatra is being undertaken for the cause of Peace and Dharma Jagaran and the Sant Fraternity would lead it from the beginning to the end. The world knows that the Sants are by nature Peace-loving. We would therefore request the Uttar Pradesh Government and the Administration not to either allow any obstruction to this Yatra or obstruct it themselves.  

Reminding the Central Government of its commitment given through an affidavit to the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 14th September, 1994 that read: "... If the question referred (Presidential Reference to the Apex Court –Ed.) is answered in the affirmative, namely, that a Hindu temple/structure did exist prior to the construction of the demolished structure, government action will be in support of the wishes of the Hindu community…" the Sants want that the Government should honour its word by introducing a legislation to the effect in the Monsoon Session of Parliament starting from 05th August, 2013. If the Government does not do it, then the Hindu society would take a Maha-Sankalp to express its resolve on the banks of the holy Sarayu at Ayodhya on 18th October, 2013.

In between these two programmes, the Venerable Sants from all the Southern States would undertake Panch-Kosi Parikrama along with the Ram Devotees from the South for the cause of construction of a grand temple at Sri Rama Janma Bhumi. 

- Released by

Prakash Sharma, Advocate

Spokesperson – Vishva Hindu Parishad

---------------------------------------------------------

Encl.: Date-wise Yatra itinerary as mentioned above.        

Three years have since passed when the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court (Special Bench, Lucknow) gave its verdict asserting that: "1. The disputed site is the birth place of Lord Rama… 2. The disputed building was constructed by Babar ………….. it was built against the tenets of Islam. Thus, it cannot have the character of a mosque. 3. The disputed structure was constructed on the site of old structure after demolition of the same. The Archaeological Survey of India has proved that the structure was a massive Hindu religious structure…" and the Government of Bharat had promised through an affidavit to the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Bharat that: "... If the question referred (Presidential Reference to the Apex Court –Ed.) is answered in the affirmative, namely, that a Hindu temple/structure did exist prior to the construction of the demolished structure, government action will be in support of the wishes of the Hindu community…" and not even the hearing of Sri Ram Janma Bhumi case has started yet in the Hon'ble Apex Court and everybody knows with the levers, handles, screws, knobs and switches of the present laws the court proceedings could be lengthened and delayed ad infinitum, i.e., without ever coming to an end and in the intervening time the Governments concerned have activated their Dirty Tricks Departments to hatch a conspiracy to put up a new mosque or celebratory monument or Islamic Cultural Centre at Ayodhya – the place of our National Protagonists – in order to reinstall and perpetuate the memories and antagonistic designs of the invader Babar. Any such move is totally unacceptable to the collective memory of the national society of Bharat. By virtue of its being the first of the seven Mokshdaayini Teerthas (Fords of Liberation) of Bharat, Ayodhya is a spirituo-cultural capital of Hindus and it is also the celebrated birthplace of not less than five Jain Teerthankars. It is to Hindus as Mecca is to Muslims. In order to bring to light the spirituo-cultural significance of Ayodhya and its neighbourhood and that of its traditional 84 Kos Parikrama (Circumambulation) in Hindu history and ethos for the Central and State Governments, the people of the country and the natives within the area to understand and appreciate it and get awakened to it, the Sant-Mahatmas from all over the country will undertake circumambulatory Yatras covering the scriptural and traditional Parikrama Paths of Ayodhya Mandal from August 25 to September 13, 2013. 

YATRA ROUTES

DATE		ITINERARY
25 August 2013 Ven. Sants ofKanpur, Jaipur Prant		Ø      10 A.M.: Sarayu Poojan at Ayodhya; Introductory and Keynote Address; Media Conference Ø      Padyatra starts from Naya Ghaat; Walks across the Sarayu Bridge Ø      Mount vehicles for Katra Kuti (Gonda); Prasad lunch at Chinmay Maharajji's Ashram (6 km); 03 P.M. departure by vehicles for Makhawda (Basti).  Ø      04 P.M.: Havan-Yagna at Makhawda; 05 P.M.: Meeting; Night Halt (15 km)
26 Aug Ven. Sants of Madhya Bharat Prant		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. Makhawda; Rajwapur 7 kms – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      Chhawni 9 kms – Meeting 5 P.M., Ramrekha 3 km Dinner (to be served by local Sants); Overnight stay; Makhawda to Ramrekha (Basti) 19 kms.
27 Aug Ven. Sants of Kashi Prant		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Ramrekha; Yatra via Sriram-Janki Marg Vishesharganj Bazar to Devkali Hanuman Mandir 6 km – Meeting, Lunch; Dep 3 P.M. Ø      Hanuman Baug, (Basti) 7 km – Meeting, Prasad Ø      Back to Ayodhya for overnight stay (Ramrekha to Ayodhya 30 kms)
28 Aug Ven. Sants of Jharkhand Prant		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Ayodhya Ø      Yatra via Harkara Purwa and Police Booth # 5 to Darshan Nagar - Welcome Ø      Sarairasi 5 km –  Welcome – Return after Darshan of Dasrath Samadhi Ø      Pura Bazar 4 km – Noon Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      Pura Bazar to Bakarganj (4 km) to Maya Bazar 4 km to Dilasiganj 5 km (Welcome) to Sringi Rishi 3 km (Sorwaghaat) Night – Meeting, Prasad, Sri Krishna Janmashtami Utsav (Ayodhya to Sringi Rishi 30 kms)
29 Aug Ven. Sants of Awadh Prant		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Sringi Rishi Ø      Yatra via Mahboobganj Chowraha to Vairagi Ashram Bhitowra (7 km) – Meeting, Lunch Ø      03 P.M.: Dep., Gosainganj 7 km – Meeting, Prasad, Rest Ø      Shringi Rishi to Gosainganj (Faizabad) – 14 kms
30 Aug Ven. Sants of Mahakaushal, Chittor		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Gosainganj to Tikri 9 km –Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      Taarun 7 km – Meeting, Lunch, Rest; Gosainganj to Tarun (Faizabad) 16 kms
31 Aug Ven. Sants ofMeerut Prant		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Tarun to Rampur Bhagan 9 km – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      Sitakund Darabganj 4 km – Welcome; Bikapur 8 km – Evening Meeting, Dinner, Rest Ø      Tarun to Bikapur (Faizabad) 21 km
01 Sept Ven. Sants of Vidarbh and Indraprasth Prants		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Bikapur Ø      Yatra via Bhagautiganj to Roorookhas 8 km – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      Dhema Vaishya 3 km – Welcome; Aastikan 4 km – Evening Meeting, Dinner, Rest Ø      Bikapur to Astikan (Faizabad) 15 km
02 Sept Ven. Sants ofNorth Bihar		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From ASTIKAN TO Inayat Nagar 5 km – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. for Adhiyana – Welcome, Janmejay Kund (Sid-Sid) 14 km – Evening Meeting, Prasad, Rest Ø      Astikan to Janmejay Kund (Faizabad) 19 km
03 Sept Ven. Sants of Goraksh and Konkan Prants		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Janmejay Kund Ø      Yatra via Anjrouli Chowraha to Amarganj 7 km – Noon Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      Amarganj to Govind Nagar 5 km - Welcome Ø      From Amarganj a team of Sants shall go to Amaaniganj 4 km - Meeting Ø      Another team from Amarganj shall go via Govind Nagar direct to Rudowli - Meeting Ø      The Amaniganj team after the meeting shall come to Rudowli Ø      Dinner and Overnight stay at Rudowli (Faizabad)
04 Sept Ven. Sants of Malwa andWestern Maharashtra		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Rudowli to Rowjagaon 4 km - Welcome Ø      Mawai Chowraha 5 km – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      Patranga 10 km – Evening Meeting, Prasad, Rest Ø      Rudowli to Patranga (Faizabad) 19 km
05 Sept Ven. Sants ofSouth Gujarat and Devgiri Prants		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Patranga Ø      Belkhara 9 km (via Aliyabad) – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      Tikait Nagar 11 km – Evening Meeting, Lunch, Rest Ø      Patranga to Tikait Nagar (Barabanki) 20 km
06 Sept  Ven. Sants of Braj andJodhpurPrants		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Tikait Nagar Ø      Badosaiai 13 km (Via Kotwadham, Parijat Tree) – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      Ramnagar (Barabanki) 11 km - Welcome Ø      Ramnagar to Jarwal Road 18 km – Evening Meeting, Dinner, Rest (District – Bahraich) N.B.: Two Teams will be formed at Badosarai. One Team will go to Ramnagar – hold a meeting and return to Jarwal Road. Prasad and Rest at Jarwal Road (Tikait Nagar to Jarwal Road 42 kms)
07 Sept Ven. Sants ofPunjab and Haryana		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Jarwal Road to Bargadi (Gonda) 11 km Ø      Shahpur Dhawawa – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      (Shahpur Dhanawa is on the way between   Ayodhya – Nayaghat Bridge –Nawabganj – Tarabganj – Belsar – Paraspur and Bhowriganj Ø      Paraspur 12 km (Via Bhowriganj) – Evening Meeting, Dinner, Rest Ø      Jarwal Road to Paraspur (Gonda) 23 km
08 Sept Ven. Sants ofNorth Gujarat and Himachal		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Paraspur to Rajapur 10 km – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      (Yatra from Ayodhya to Tarabganj – Paraspur – Rajapur) Ø      Rajapur to Paska 13 km (Sukar Kshetra  Brahma Kshetra) – Evening Meeting, Dinner, Rest Ø      Paraspur to Paska (Gonda) 23 km
09 Sept Ven. Sants of Uttarakhand Prant		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Paska to Bhairon Baba 2 km - Welcome Ø      (Banua) Bakhriya 7 km – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M.; Barahi Devi 5 km Ø      Umri 3 km – Evening Meeting, Dinner, Rest (Monday – Barahi Devi Mela) Ø      Paska to Umri (Gonda) 17 km
10 Sept Ven. Sants ofBengal and Jammu-Kashmir		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Umri to Belsar 9 km – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. (Ayodhya to Nawabganj thru Tarabganj to Belsar 40 km) Ø      Tarabganj 8 km – Evening Meeting, Dinner, Rest [Umri to Tarabganj (Gonda) 17 km]
11 Sept Ven. Sants ofSouth Biharand Odisha		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Tarabganj to Durjanpur 9 km – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      Nawabganj 9 km – Evening Meeting, Dinner, Rest Ø      Tarabganj to Nawabganj (Gonda) 18 km
12 Sept Ven. Sants of Chhattisgarh and Saurashtra		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Nawabganj to Rehli 7 km – Meeting, Lunch; Dep. 3 P.M. Ø      Sikandarpur (Basti) 7 km – Evening Meeting, Dinner, Rest Ø      Nawabganj to Sikandarpur 14 km
13 Sept		Ø      09 A.M.: Dep. From Sikandarpur to Makhowda 7 km – Meeting, Lunch Ø      Yatra finale at Makhowda (Basti). Makhowda to Ayodhya return 24 kms.

Babri demolition: How HC verdict discredited 'eminent' historians - by Prof R. Vaidyanathan

From

 

http://www.firstpost.com/india/babri-demolition-how-hc-verdict-discredited-eminent-historians-547549.html

 

Babri demolition: How HC verdict discredited 'eminent' historians

 by

By R Vaidyanathan

It runs to more than 8,000 pages and it contains is a marvelous set of documents on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri case. On the 20th anniversary of the demolition, it is worth looking at some aspects of the judgment delivered by the full bench of the Allahabad High Court in September 2012.

The judgment, which awarded two parts of the disputed land to Hindu groups and one to the Muslim one, is now being contested by the parties in the Supreme Court, but it offers an extraordinary insight in to our culture, history, and civilisational ethos. It dwells at length on Persian sources, German writings, French observations, Urdu literature and, of course, Sanskrit evidence. It deals with archeology, history, linguistics, anthropology, zoology, literature, the puranas, the jataka tales and many other subjects and disciplines.

The sweep of the judgment and the canvas covered is mind-boggling and it makes one proud of our judiciary. This judgment will be quoted discussed and dissected by legal as well as academic experts for several decades.

But we shall not discuss the judgment's core aspects, and focus instead on what it has to say on our "eminent historians" who were shown to be not so eminent, and their attitudes fairly unacademic.

Many "independent experts", historians and archeologists appeared on behalf of the Sunni Waqf Board but in the end the special bench of three judges unanimously dismissed the objections raised by them about the ruins of a temple under the demolished structure. It was Justice Sudhir Agarwal who put their claims to judicial scrutiny.

Interestingly many of these "experts" had deposed twice in the court - once before the ASI excavations and another after. Before the excavations they asserted that there was no temple beneath the disputed structure and after it was dug up they began to claim that what was unearthed was a mosque or stupa. Not only that, they found themselves withering under judicial scrutiny in spite of writing signed articles and issuing pamphlets and long public letters.

The judge asked pointed queries which might never been asked by their students.

The cross-examination covers several pages and a gripping reading. It shows the levels to which our academics have fallen and become hand maidens of the political machinery. Let us look at some of their statements, and how they do nothing to enhance their profession's reputation.

]

Activists of the Bajrang Dal Party hold torches while standing behind a model of Ram Temple on the 14th anniversary of the demolition of the Babri Masjid. AFP

Supriya Verma an, "expert" who challenged the excavations done by the ASI, had not read the radar survey report on ground penetration that led to the court order for excavation. Verma and Jaya Menon, another "expert," were not present at the time of actual excavations but alleged that pillar bases at the excavated sites were planted.

Suvira Jaiswal says: "Whatever knowledge I gained with respect to the disputed site is based on newspaper reports or what others told." She also confessed that she "prepared a report on the Babri dispute after reading newspaper reports and on the basis of discussion with my medieval history expert in my department".

Jaiswal made an important clarification: "I am not giving (my) statement on oath regarding Babri Mosque without any probe and not on the basis of my knowledge; rather I am giving the statement on the basis of my opinion."

When opinion can be history why are they all screaming that "faith" cannot be an equally relevant criterion?

Archaeologist Shereen Ratnagar admitted she did not have any "field" experience as far as Babri was concerned and had written an "introduction" to the book of another "expert" who deposed before the court, namely Prof D Mandal. This expert witness for the Waqf Board admitted he wrote his "Ayodhya: Archaeology after Demolition" without even visiting Ayodhya and with an eye to the presidential reference to the Supreme Court. Mandal also admitted that "Whatsoever little knowledge I have of Babur is only that Babur was (a) ruler of the 16th century. Except for this I do not have any knowledge of Babur." The judge, Agarwal, was sufficiently moved to say about Mandal that "the statements made by him in cross-examination show the shallowness of his knowledge on the subject".

Suraj Bhan was providing evidence based on medieval history but another expert of Muslim parties, namely Shireen Musavi, says that Bhan is an archeologists and not a historian.

The ASI report submitted to the court after an excavation of the site had brushed aside the so-called Historians' Report to the Nation authored by RS Sharma, M Athar Ali, DN Jha and Suraj Bhan, released in May 1991. This document was a plea to the government of India "to include impartial historians in the process of forming judgment on historical facts". As an example of this "impartial" history, it was argued that "the full blown legend of the destruction of a temple at the site of Rama's birth and Sita ki Rasoi is as late as the 1850s. Since then what we get is merely the progressive reconstruction of imagined history based on faith." But Bhan confessed that the grandly titled Historians' Report to the Nation was written under "pressure" in six weeks and "without going through the record of the excavation by BB Lal".

Shireen Musavi suggested that "the legend of Ayodhya being the birthplace of Rama is found from the 17th century, prior to which there is no legend about Rama's birthplace in medieval history". However, during cross-examination, Musavi admitted: "It is correct that in Sikh literature there is a tradition that Guru Nanak had visited Ayodhya, had darshan of Ram Janmasthan and had bathed in the River Saryu."

Prof Mandal retired from the Department of Ancient History and Archaeology, Allahabad University. He was appointed on an ad hoc basis as Lecturer in 1972 but prior to that he claimed to have worked as exploration assistant since 1960. Initially he appeared as an expert to depose that there was no archaeological evidence to show either the existence of any temple at the disputed site or that a temple was demolished before construction of the disputed structure. The statements made by him in cross-examination show the shallowness of his knowledge and provide a sample about all these "eminences"

A few of his quotes:  "I never visited Ayodhya". "I do not have any specific knowledge of the history of Babur's reign." "Whatsoever little knowledge I have about Babur is only that Babur was the ruler of the 16th century. Except for this I do not have any knowledge of Babur. I do not have knowledge of anything in 2nd Para of the editorial preface to my book (exhibit 63) in which Romila Thapar has written that Vishwa Hindu Parishad, BJP and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, for the first time, raised the issue of the Babri Masjid being located on the place which was earlier Rama's birth place. I also do not know whether or not it is correctly written on page 10 of the aforesaid preface that Ayodhya is a site of pilgrimage for adherents of Ramanand school." "The Communist Party issues a red card, and I am its holder. It is true that I have no faith in religion."

Further: "It is true that I have not seen the disputed building as yet. I did not make any physical investigation of stone used in inscriptions carved out in the disputed building. Likewise, I also did not make physical investigation of basalt stone." "My finding in my book (exhibit 63) is not based  on any article. My finding is based on materials written in this connection and given in the book (paper no.118C-1/35) filed in Suit No.5/89 and chiefly on the photograph (paper no118C-1/36) depicting the excavation undertaken by Prof BB Lal near the Babri Mosque. It is also correct to say that I drew findings, taking the brief report of BB Lal, as given in paper no.118C-1/35 (Ram Janambhumi: Ayodhya) and the reproduction of the photograph taken by him to be sacrosanct." "Many of my colleagues inspired me to write the book (exhibit 63)."

Mandal also said: "It is also true that I had requested one of them to write an introduction to my book, and the colleague thus requested was Miss Shereen Ratnagar."

The learned Judge rightly observes: "A bare perusal of the above makes it clear that he virtually made a critical analysis of the book that is Paper No.118C1/36, a small booklet published by Prof BB Lal and beyond that made no further study/research, etc. Only on that basis, he wrote a book, and analyzed the belief of the people whether the disputed structure was constructed after demolishing a temple or that there existed any temple of 11th or 12th century which was demolished before its construction. The own admissions and clarification this witness has given, we find that the entire opinion of this witness is short of the requirement under Section 45 of the Evidence Act, 1872, to qualify as an opinion of an expert which may be considered relevant on a fact in issue, by this court. "

The list goes on. Justice Agarwal refers to the signed statement of these experts and notes that "instead of helping in making a cordial atmosphere, it tends to create complications, conflict and controversy. The experts carry weight with public opinion and conclude that 'one cannot say that though I had made a statement I am not responsible for its authenticity since it is not based on my study or research, but what I have learnt from what others have uttered."

Clearly, the expertise of eminences has been exposed. If such a thing had happened in physics or chemistry or medicine or accounting, the concerned person would have been taken to task by their professional associations. Unfortunately, the social science disciplines in India are under the grip of Left charlatans and they are not accountable to any. It is important that they are made accountable. Many of the things they said hardened positions on both sides, and they cannot now wriggle out and claim what they said was not their expert opinion.

Their respective universities would do well to initiate action against them or take other disciplinary steps to improve the reputation of the profession of historian. The textbooks written or edited by them for schools and colleges should be revoked and other books of less eminent - but more honest - historians should be prescribed

They need to be made accountable and brought to book, howsoever highly networked or "eminent" they are. Is the HRD ministry, and various universities, listening?

The author is Professor of Finance and Control, IIM Bangalore, The views are personal and do not reflect that of his organisation.