Wednesday, April 24, 2024
HomeReportsAyodhya dispute: A farce created by left historians

Ayodhya dispute: A farce created by left historians

Also Read

Speak for Nationalist Rationale ! Without fear or favour. Masters in History & Economics, graduate of Law..! Politics, international politics, strategic and security issues are subjects of interest..

Ayodhya is regularly formed derivation of ‘Yudh‘ to fight, to wage war ’Yodha’ is a future passive participle meaning ‘to be fought’ the prefix ‘a’ is a negative which changes the meaning to ‘not to be fought’or more idiomatically in English as ‘ invincible‘!

The Atharvaveda attests this meaning and refers it as ‘unconquerable city of Gods’, Jain Granth, AdiPurana also mentions it. It is also known by the name of Saketa attested by Jain, Buddhist, Greek and Chinese records. It is established that Ayodhya, Saketa is an ancient city with habitation over 3000 years old.
Hans T Bakker says it is Saketu attested by Vishnu Purana.

However, the present controversy over Ram Mandir wants to white wash history with an Islamic brush post independence. A concerted effort to destroy the faith and establish the supremacy of the left interpretation of history is the sole aim of this insidious design. There is cartloads of historical evidence to conclusively prove that a Grand Ram Temple stood where the Babri Masjid was constructed by Mir Baqi, if ever such a Mosque was constructed, a General in Babur’s Army in 1528 AD.

It is said that Babur had visited Delhi and other places in India while on a reconnaissance mission prior to his attack on India as a Qalandar, a Sufi. (Ref: Abdul Gafoor, Gumgamastah Halat i Ajodhia).

This is yet another piece of fabrication of 18 century. It says that, Syed Musa Ashiqan had taken a pledge from Babur to break the Temple of Ram at Ayodhya if he was successful in his endeavour to Hindustan. The 1981 edition by Hari Narain doesn’t include this incident but the Persian versions of the book has mentioned this in detail. (Ref: Abdul Gafoor, Gumgamastah Halat i Ajodhia)

Lala Sitaram, who had an older version of this book too mentions this promise by Babur given to the Sufi Faqirs. (Ref: Sitaram, 1932 & Van der Veer, 1989)

Two facts established so far, firstly, Ayodhya/Saket was an ancient city, which historically had an important place till the Gupta Age and was again raised to its former glory by the Gahadvals of Kannauj in 12 CE. Hans T Bakker says that Gahadvals were Vaishnavas and made many temples in Ayodhya during their reign. He says, five of these temples survived upto the reign of Aurangzeb. (Ayodhya: A Hindu Jerusalem, 1991)

These were Vishnu Hari Temple at Chakratirtha Ghat, Hari Smriti at Gopratara Ghat, Chandra Hari on the east side of Swargadwara Ghat, Dharma Hari on the west side of Swargadwara Ghat and a Vishnu Temple at RamJanmBhoomi. Aurangzeb destroyed three of these temples including the one at RamJanmBhoomi, while one was swept away by floods of Sarayu.

The first reference to a Mosque in Ayodhya at the site of Ram Mandir comes in Sahifa i Chihil Nasai Bahadur Shahai written by a daughter of Bahadur Shah and granddaughter of Aurangzeb in early 18 CE. She mentions Mosques being built after demolishing Temples in Banaras, Mathura and Awadh, “the Temples of Awadh called ‘Sita Ki Rasoi, Hanuman Garhi ‘ were demolished to make Mosque“!

She doesn’t mention anything about Babur or any mosque built by him. It is interesting to note that she speaks of the Mosque at Ayodhya in the same paragraph as about the Mosques at Banaras and Mathura.

Interestingly, there’s absolutely no contemporary historical evidence or primary sources of history which speak of a Mosque built in Ayodhya but there is enough evidence of a pre existing Ram Temple at Ayodhya.

Tulsidas, who started writing his his RamcharitManas in 1574 does speak of a great celebration on Ram Navmi at the birthplace of Lord Ram but doesn’t mention any Mosque in Ayodhya, where he was residing while writing his magnum opus.

Abu’l Fazl who wrote the Akbarnama around same time has no mention of a Mosque made by Babur at Ayodhya but speaks of Festival on Ram’s Birthday at ‘residence of Ram’. William Finch, an English traveler who visited Ayodhya in 1611 speaks nothing about a Mosque at RamJanmBhoomi but writes about “ruins of castle of Ranichand (Ramchand) where the Great God took human form to witness the Tamasha of the world“! (Ref:Jain,2013, P.102).

Jesuit priest Joesph Tieffenthaler visiting Awadh in 1766-1771 wrote, “Emperor Aurangzeb destroyed the fortress called Ramcot or Ramkote and build a Muslim temple with three domes, some said it was built by ‘Babor’. Fourteen black stone pillars are visible of which twelve are now supporting the interior arcades of the Mosque”. This is a significant piece of puzzle, whether it was built by Babur or it was built by Aurangzeb, as described by ‘Sahifa i Chihil Nasai Bahadur Shahai’ attested by writings of both William Finch in 1611 and Tieffenthaler in 1766-1771 during their visits to Awadh.

He also wrote that, “Hindus worshiped at raised ground of 5” called Bedi, the reason for this is that once upon a time there was a house where Beschan (Vishnu) was born in form of Ram”. He recorded that Rama’s birthday was celebrated there which was “so famous throughout in India” (Ref:Jain, 2013,& Layton and Thomas, 2003,P.8-9).

Interestingly, the first mention of a Mosque at Janmasthan comes in the records of Jai Singh II or Sawai Jai Singh of Jaipur. Jai Singh established various Jaisinghpuras at Hindu centres of pilgrimage in Mathura, Ayodhya, Vrindavan. He bought the land around RamJanmsthan, the records of this particular location are kept at City Palace Museum, Jaipur in the KapadDwar collection. Prof R Nath has examined the records and states that the land around the Janmasthan was purchased by Sawai Jai Singh in 1717. The ownership of the land was vested in the Deity. The hereditary title of the land was recognised and enforced by the Mughal State in 1717 AD. Prof Nath also found correspondence from one Trilok Nath, a Gumashtah dated 1723, stating that Mughals had previously prevented Hindus from taking bath in Sarayu but after establishment of Jaisinghpura the impediments have been removed.(Ref: Meenakshi Jain, 2013, Rama & Ayodhya).

Surprisingly, this mountain of evidence has been ignored by the Marxist historians who have denied any Temple at th site of the disputed structure at Ayodhya.

Another, very interesting development has been the non existent Mosque during earlier years as no historical evidence is produced to substantiate the fact that a Mosque was built by Mir Baqi in 1528 AD. Baburnama has no record of any such building of Mosque at RamJanmsthan, neither do historical records of any Mughal Emperor prior to Aurangzeb speak of a Mosque at Ayodhya built by Babur or in Babur’s name by Mir Baqi. The silence is magnified by the inability of our Marxist historians to provide a shred of evidence in support of Babri Masjid.

Babri is a pure concoction of 18 Century Policy of Aurangzeb, whose wrath fell on the Hindu places of pilgrimage and led to the destruction of important Temples in the holy towns of Kashi, Ayodhya, Mathura, Vrindavan and others.
Archeological Survey Of India in its investigations of the site of the razed structure has found enough evidence to conclude that a massive Temple stood over the Babri site in Ayodhya.

  Support Us  

OpIndia is not rich like the mainstream media. Even a small contribution by you will help us keep running. Consider making a voluntary payment.

Trending now

Speak for Nationalist Rationale ! Without fear or favour. Masters in History & Economics, graduate of Law..! Politics, international politics, strategic and security issues are subjects of interest..
- Advertisement -

Latest News

Recently Popular