Posts Tagged ‘historicity’

“Glimpses of Srimad Bhagavatam” – National seminar held at Vijayawada on October 14th and 15th, 2017.

October 16, 2017

“Glimpses of Srimad Bhagavatam” – National seminar held at Vijayawada on October 14th and 15th, 2017.

Location of Hyndavi, Vijayawada

“Glimpses of Srimad Bhagavatam” – National seminar held at Vijayawada: Bharatiya Itihasa Sankalana Samiti[1](hereinafter mentioned as BISS), Andhra Pradesh conducted two National Seminars on Ramayanam – Historicity and Maha Bharatam – Historicity in 2013 and 2015 in Ongole and Rajamundhry respectively.  In 2017, the BISS conducted a national seminar at Vijayawada on October 14th and 15th on “Glimpses of Srimad Bhagavatam”. Now that “Historicity” was dropped might be noted. The venue was “Haindavi” Bhavan, Street besides Lotus Land Mark[2], Ramalingeswara Peta, Vijayawada-3. Actually, it is in Sector-5, and the location is known as “near Ice Factory”. Hyndavi building, Vijayawada - photo Rajesh PadmarOutstation delegates had some difficulty to reach the venue. Incidentally, the multi-storied building was built, completed and inaugurated last year[3]. Sri Siddheswarananda Bharati Swamy of Sri Siddheswari Peetham (Tamil Nadu) and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) All India Organising Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale inaugurated the RSS’s regional office ‘Hyndavi’ at Ayodhya Nagar here on August 5th, 2016 (Thursday)[4]. RSS office inaugrated 05-08-2016 Vijayawada

The seminar hall has been equipped with Power point and other provisions. The organizers had made good arrangements – food, accommodation etc., for the delegates. Sri Koti Lakshmana Rao, secretary, BISS has been instrumental in bringing different researchers, scholars and others together.

Haindavi Bhawan -L-R view

Theme of the Seminar: Research Papers were received from scholars, Research Students and people who were interested in History of ancient India / Bharat and its culture, tradition, heritage and civilization. The organizers expressed in their circular specifically that the Samiti desired that the main focus of the presentations in the seminar should be on historical, geographical, political, social, and cultural as well as Dharmic and ethical perspectives. They suggested the following topics in the context:

1.       Viswa srushti

2.      Propositions on Dharma

3.      Astronomical perspectives

4.      Geographical references

5.      Rivers, Mountains, Forests

6.      Piligrimages

7.      Life style of forest dwellers, common people & kings (rulers)

8.     Status & significance of Women.

9.      Systems of Education

10.  Customs & Rituals

11.   Sculpture, Architecture & Fine Arts

12.  Kings, kingdoms, Royal dynasties,

13.  State craft & politics, Systems of State And Governance

14.  Sages, establishments and their influence

15.   Upakhyanas and their influence etc.,

16.  Other related topic also may be considered.

Bhagawata seminar banner on the gate

About 40 papers were presented on the topics suggested, but overlapping. Most of the papers delved upon the devotional, descriptive, narrative, legendary aspects and discourses of Bhagawatham. Perhaps, only one paper delved upon the historical perspective, which touched upon the “Archaeological Evidences for the existence of “Historical Krishna”. In the present-day context, as ideology has been working at the Universities, schools and all other academic institutions and forums, it could be answered and countered only by ideology and not by devotional discourses. Of course, it is required and may be mandatory also at earlier stages of curriculum, hitherto followed as “Moral period / class” provided till 1970s. The “Moral period” was removed and of course, the degradation of sacademics could be noted thereafter in different aspects.

Bhagawata seminar - breafast

Critical edition of Bhagawatam has to be brought out: Critical editions of Ramayana and Mahabharat have been prepared and published by the Baroda Oriental Rearch Institute and Bhandarkar Oriental Rearch Institute respectively[5]. Similarly, critical edition of Bhagawatapurana should be published, so that researchers, scholars and students could conduct their research in the historical perspective. Approaching Bhagawatam in Sanskrit and other regional languages show how the work had been so popular and common among the common people for 2000 years. Though, the narrative, legendary and mythical details vary, the core of the subject matter remains intact and specific. The study / process of manuscripts to determine the original or most authoritative form of a text, especially of a piece of literature and thus arriving at an acceptable version and publication of it is known as “critical edition”. In Literary criticism it is stressing close reading and detailed analysis of a particular text. In such determination of determining the original or most authoritative form of a text, all the available manuscripts are subjected to study. Notably, in “India”(pre-colonial, pre-Mohammedan) thousands and millions of manuscripts had been available, as they were nothing but just like present-day printed books. In spite of the taking away, looting and burning libraries of temples, mutts and Universities, still millions of manuscript are available in thousands of archives, libraries – prove the fact. Perhaps, no other literature of any nation, language or society has been existing in this manner. Therefore, the variance found in Indian literature has been unique, interpolations incidental (other than internal nature of Jains, Buddhists etc) and differences inadvertent. Thus, a critical edition can be prepared.

Bhagawata seminar - hall where held

The hall where seminar was held.

Bhagawata seminar - Limited audience

Limited audience – LHS view.

Bhagawata seminar - Limited audience.RHS

Limited audience – RHS view.

Bhagawata seminar - Mohana, Balamukund, Koti, TVR

Inaguration of the seminar by lighting a lamp.

Bhagawata seminar - paper presenters

Scholars presenting papers.

Bhagawata seminar - paper presenters.more

Researchers presenting papers.

Demythologization in Indian context: In Indian historiographical context, much of “demythologization” is also required. Demythologization as a hermeneutic approach to religious texts seeks to separate cosmological and historic claims from philosophical, ethical and theological teachings. Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976) introduced the term demythologization (in German: Entmythologisierung) in this context[6]. It is to provide an explanation of something, or to present something, in a way that removes any mystery surrounding it. Here, actually, history has been mythologized to reach all and common people with easy understanding. The following have been generally noted as feature of mythologization of different aspects and subjects of humanity:

  1. Deification of personalities raising them to Godhead and God.
  2. Attributing miracles, grand feats, great exploitation, controlling nature etc.
  3. Recording Natural disasters (floods, volcanic eruptions, earth-quakes, submergence of land mass and other land disturbances) in their own fashion of divine scourge, punishment of God and so on.
  4. Good would always prevail over Bad, evil, injustice etc.
  5. “Cakravarti-kshetra” i.e, a king ruling vast area with unlimited or traditional boundaries (Himalsyas in the north, Kanyakumari / ocean in the south, Eastern Ocean in the east and the western ocean in the west)[7].
  6. Concept of dwelling land, continent changing from island (Jambudwipam, Navalanthivu) to the above boundaries.
  7. Movement of asterisms, planets etc., and their attribution to great personalities and gods.
  8. Synchronization of rites, festivals and celebrations with days, weeks, 15-days, 30-days, year and so on (Lunar calendar).
  9. Attribution of cyclic periods, growth of plants and trees, flowers and fruits top a particular god or Goddess.
  10. Existence of personalities for many years – 100, 1,000 etc., denoting existence of such ashrams, mutt etc.

Bhagawata seminar - second day started with prayer

Second day seminar – starting with a prayer.

Bhagawata seminar - second day -audience

Methodology adopted and adapted by the Puranic writers – a way of historiography: They are nothing but Puranas and they were updated during the course of time many times. The updating is nothing but adding details upto the date of updating, thus, if one Purana was uptated in 1500 CE, it would contain details upto 1500 CE from the beginning. Revising, renewing and modernizing Puranas was considered as imortant in those days. All the above topics would havealso been updated depending upon the acumen of the updating experts. However, reading such revised editions of Puranas (in manuscript forms), the wesern researchers and European colonial history writers presumed that such and such Purana was written in 1500 CE instead of 300 BCE, 500 BCE or even 1000 BCE. The Jaina[8] and Buddhists[9] had resorted to update in their own fashion by including their affairs and thus, they could bee seen in the manuscripts of Ramayana and Mahabharat also. But, no historian would accept that the dates of Jainism and Buddhism could go back to those periods. Though, the date of Ramayana has been entangled with “Yuga” calculations, the date of Mahabharat has been fixed to c.3102 BCE[10].

© Vedaprakash

16-10-2017

Bhagawata seminar - paper presenters receiving certificate-1

The paper presenters were given certificates.

Bhagawata seminar - paper presenters receiving certificate-2

This lady-researcher from Rastriya Sanskrit Vidhyapit, Tirupati presented paper in Sanskrit.Bhagawata seminar - paper presenters receiving certificate-3

This researcher from Rastriya Sanskrit Vidhyapit, Tirupati also presented paper in Sanskrit.  His way of presentaion, expression and body language had been so articulative conveying mesage to the listeners.

[1] A society for collection of data for history writing for Bharat, that is India.

[2] This created confusion for auto drivers and they took the coming delegates in opposite direction and the reaching the venue.

[3] The Hindu, RSS’s regional office ‘Hyndavi’ inaugurated, Vijayawada, August, 05, 2016 00:00 IST; Updated. August, 05, 2016 06:06 IST

[4] http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-andhrapradesh/RSS%E2%80%99s-regional-office-%E2%80%98Hyndavi%E2%80%99-inaugurated/article14552939.ece

[5] Critical edition is an authorized sort of version of Itihasa, after going through available thousands of manuscripts by hundreds of Pundits, scholars, historians etc., separating interpolated verses and arriving at acceptable version.

[6] Though, he used in the biblical context, in India, we can use in Indian context. For us, the Puranic writers have themselves have shown the methodology of mythologization and demythologization of history for the different groups of audience.

[7] D. C. Sircar pointed out in his book on epigraphy.

[8] Jains created 24-tirtankaras and made them existing in Ramayana and Mahabharat periods.

[9] Buddhists had created the concept of “Adi Buddha” existing in every yuga.

[10] This has traditional date but recorded in inscriptions and now proven by atronomical and planetary pisition software. Incidentally, this date has been associated with – starting of Kaliyuga, subnergence of Dwaraka, Niryana of Krishna, and other events.

Advertisements

“Happy to bleed” campaign, Nikita Azad and Vedaprakash – four days correspondence!

November 30, 2015

“Happy to bleed” campaign, Nikita Azad and Vedaprakash – four days correspondence!

Happy to bleed - campaign against sabarimalai entry deenial to women

On November 24, 2015, I came across one “Happy to bleed” campaign started by one Nikita Azad in the Facebook.

So I have gone through their column, read all the postings, comments and responses, I posted my first comment briefly as follows:

I have carefully gone through the thread.

As usual, the comments have been drifting to different directions with the intruding varied opinion.

The prohibition of menstruating women to enter religious places, participate in Eucharist and rituals etc., has been there throughout the world among the

Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus and others, even today.

Therefore, hope you bleed more happily and reasonably with secularism.

 

Very often the so-called, modern, western, progressive, broad-minded, forward-looking, feminist, and other varieties of ideologists attack Hindu religion, beliefs, etc., under the guise of attacking certain practices, where, ironically, many non-Hindus participate happily. So I started responding and replying many, where, certain specific points were raised. They again and again stressed their point of “right to bleed” etc., with photos of girls holding sanitary napkins in their hands, menstrual blood soaking their jeans, holding menstrual blood in tubes, such blood falling on fingers…….with different comments!

Meena Kandasamy - God do not look between my legs okay

“GOD DO NOT LOOK BETWEEN MY LEGS OKAY” have been the words of one “Meena Kandasamy”!

Happy to bleed - campaign - come and see the blood on my skirt

“Come and see blood on my skirt”, a red banner held by two girls and some girls standing around on the road!

Happy to bleed - campaign - priyanka Sharma and Aina Singh

Are your God would be seduced by women, if they enter?

What would happen if a woman enters with a pad?

Travelling Ayyappa baktas not behaving properly with women.

Janaki Venket How many of the men going to sabarimala actually follow the rules. I have seen many flaunting it! Travelled in a train once with a bunch of these men in black dress ogling at the ladies, passing comments & drinking in the night!

 ………………

I pointed out the propaganda of Muslims there proclaiming that Islam treats women ….gives rights and so on. When pointed out, in the context of menstruation, Islam does not allow women inside mosques, then, some accepted and retracted. Nikita also accepted mentioning my name and declared that they also against Islam, as they are involved in genital mutilation etc.

Happy to bleed campaigners - Sukhjeet Singh and Aman Jalwehra Singh

Two Sikhs holding placards also supported. I asked, “Tell me honestly, whether menstruating women are allowed in the Harmandarsahib”, they did not reply, but, some women responded, and clarified that the point is not that menstruating women are allowed inside mosques of Gurudwaras, but the entry of such women inside temples! So in India, though, women talk about the rights of women etc., they worry about Hindu women only in this way and they do not bother about non-Hindu women like Muslims, Christians, Sikhs etc.!

Happy to bleed campaign - photo

However, she could relish with my responses and answers and therefore, come out as follows:

Friends, this is an IMPORTANT statement.

Many people are continuously trying to defame the campaign by irresponsibly raising religious quarrels, even after we have repeatedly clarified that we oppose all religions, and practices that discriminate on gender grounds. When we openly posted that we are against Muslim communities that practice female genital mutilation, and do not let men and women pray together, the Brahaminical fundamentalists chose another method of maligning the campaign. They started using patriarchal words like ‘decency’ ‘decorum’ etc and even said that ‘have your mothers seen these posts’, which actually clarifies that their agenda is not to have any positive discussion, but defame the campaign. These fanatics simply cannot accept that women have spoken up in whatever manner they find correct. They wish to dictate in the manner of protest also.

Also, these indiviuals have gone to the extreme, and called our activists as prostitutes, that we should be gang raped, that’s what we are good for, and must remain in kitchens.

With only one day left for the social media campaign, we reject such irresponsible criticism, and urge everybody to share this message widely. Because till now we have launched a social media campaign only, and we are gifted with threats like stated, who knows what will happen when we take ground campaign.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I APPEAL TO ALL OUR SUPPORTERS NOT TO USE ANY OFFENSIVE WORD AGAINST THE TEMPLE OR AUTHORITIES, RATHER GIVE THEM IDEOLOGICAL FIGHT WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS. That will actually improve the campaign

Happy to bleed campaign - Nikita Azad accepts that now Islam also does not allow menstruating women inside mosques

Though, many things were not related to me, I responded point by point as follows:

As I have already mentioned that I have been reading your campaign column and responding not only to you, but also other campaigners. Through this comments, as you have unnecessarily have indulged in slandering me, through your remarks, “the Brahaminical fundamentalists chose another method of maligning the campaign. They started using patriarchal words like ‘decency’ ‘decorum’ etc and even said that ‘have your mothers seen these posts’”, I have to point out the following facts:

1.       The so-called “religious quarrels” have been going on in your campaign carried on by your Christian and Muslim friends, as could be noted from their accusing one particular religion, while appreciating their religious “goodness” and all (in fact, they are false, untruth and myth).

2.      we have repeatedly clarified that we oppose all religions, and practices that discriminate on gender grounds, bogey has come out now, obviously, as I started responding to those campaigners and you have also realized mentioning my name specifically in your reply. Ironically, now you want to “bleed with secularism”!

3.      which actually clarifies that their agenda is not to have any positive discussion, but defame the campaign – As you, including all your campaigners, have indulged in such denigrating, disparaging with indecent depiction, portrayal of women etc., your are now trying to defend yourself, by saying all these things.

4.      any positive discussion – Perhaps, it is me who initiated positive discussion and that is why you have realized your mistake of attacking “one particular religion” and started, “we also condemn muslims……………………….” and so on. You also referred to my name in one discussion about “menstruating women entering mosques……………”

5.      These fanatics simply cannot accept that women have spoken up in whatever manner they find correct – what is this? What right you have to call me “brahmanical fundamentalist”, “fanatics” etc?

a.      What is your agenda?

b.      If you do not have guts to respond the points raised me, accept your inefficiency or yur ignorance about the subject matter discussed.

c.       Do not indulge in this type of attack.

d.      In fact, you get exposed yourself, the language you have been using.

6.      started using patriarchal words like ‘decency’ ‘decorum’ etc – Yes, I recorded as follows:

“I am 65, with much anxiety only I have been responding to you and your friends of this campaigning.

You could note that I have been pointing the facts about ‘menstruating women entering the places of worship’.

But you have decided to attack only Sabarimalai movement.

Moreover, when the reporters ask such mischievous questions as to how you check the women entering, only he responded.

Perhaps, you might have known about the case of Jaymala actress who entered the temple.

Today, internet is viewed by children, boys and girls therefore, definitely, some amount of decency and decorum is required in depicting pictorially or otherwise.

7.      Though the other comments are not directed against me, Also, these indiviuals have gone to the extreme, and called our activists as prostitutes, that we should be gang raped, that’s what we are good for, and must remain in kitchens”…………., etc, I want to point out, that Newtons’s third law only worked here! To cite one example, that photo “GOD DO NOT LOOK BETWEEN MY LEGS OKAY”

8.     I APPEAL TO ALL OUR SUPPORTERS NOT TO USE ANY OFFENSIVE WORD AGAINST THE TEMPLE OR AUTHORITIES, RATHER GIVE THEM IDEOLOGICAL FIGHT WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS – so now, you say this! But your entire campaign has been against the temple, temple authorities, customs and practices, beliefs etc. So now you are afraid of some legal action for your defaming, disparaging, denigrating……………..campaign?

9.      Oh campaigners, be calm, relaxed and thing about everything.  I hope most of you are young girls and women studying in schools and colleges with a lot of hopes and ambitions in your minds. So concentrate in your studies, instead of indulging in such campaigns, as such acts would make you imbibed wih ideology, as prompted by Nikita Azad – RATHER GIVE THEM IDEOLOGICAL FIGHT WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS. That will actually improve the campaign.

10.  So, now only after all drum-beating, she has realized that, “That will actually improve the campaign.” Great on Friday, that is the last day of your campaign.

I wish MOTHER GODDESS would bless all of you with all prosperity and good future!

Vedaprakash

27-11-2015.

For this, she could not respond, but, banned me from participating in the campaign expressing views, questioning their way and methodology of the campaign. So, this has become my last response.

Ironically, they talk about rights of freedom of thinking, expression, speech and so on, but when others come to think, express or talk, they ban!

What type of attitude is this?

Is this, the way of having dialogue or group discussion?

Is this the mode of exhibiting their tolerance?

I understand that she has extended the campaign till December 4, 2015!

Vedaprakash

30-11-2015.

Hindu Temples of Tamilnadu under systematic destruction!

June 19, 2011

Hindu Temples of Tamilnadu under systematic destruction!

T. S. Subramanian has pointed out the deteriorating condition of murals in temples many times[1]. He should be congratulated to bring out such facts with concerned feelings expressed in his writings. However, the concerned and connected people have not taken any action to annul such vandalizing processes going on in the name of renovation, administration and other actions. The recent article “Targets of destruction” has been provoking, but we have to wait and see the response of the authorities.

Target of destruction: He starts with the appropriate beginning[2]: “Art, in more than 50 temples and three palaces in Tamil Nadu, is being mutilated” and explains the condition as follows: “Temples in Tamil Nadu are repositories of history, with inscriptions, sculptures, murals, bronzes, carvings, architecture and so on. The inscriptions provide valuable insights into the history of the period during which the temples were built, the village administration that prevailed, elections conducted for its assemblies, taxes collected, boards set up for the maintenance of lakes, ponds and canals, donation of land for Brahmin settlements, gifting gold for temple maintenance, etc.  There are more than 50 temples and three palaces in Tamil Nadu with murals. The palaces are Ramalinga Vilasam in Ramanathapuram and those at Bodinayakanur near Madurai and Padmanabhapuram in Kanyakumari district. While just four or five temples have murals dating back to the Pallava period (seventh to ninth century CE) and the Chola period (10th and 11th century CE), the majority of the murals belong to the Vijayanagar and the Nayak periods (14th to 17th century CE). The Brihadeeswara temple in Thanjavur have murals belonging to the Chola, the Nayak and the Maratha reigns.

Visual archivesThe mural masterpieces are visual archives on the history of the period, coronation rituals, the dress or the jewellery that men and women of those days wore, their hairstyle, musical instruments, the battles that they fought, the weapons used and so on. There are several Jain temples that have wonderful murals based on the Jain traditions, the Tirthankaras and the Yakshis. A favourite subject of many of the artists of those times was episodes from the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, and some of the artists even took care to write the labels for the episodes (captions) in Tamil or Telugu. Unfortunately in Tamil Nadu, the murals, the inscriptions, the sculptures and carvings have become targets of destruction and vandalism. The officials of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR and CE) Department, who administers the temples, are to be blamed for this state. Most often, these officials fail to appreciate and preserve these splendid works due to lack of knowledge of history.

How Meenakshi Temple was targeted? In the famous Meenakshi temple, Madurai, several historic mandapams have become shopping complexes. The Pudhu mandapam, the Ashta Sakti mandapam, Veera Vasantharayar mandapam and Meenakshi Nayakar mandapam teem with hundreds of shops, obstructing from view pillars with incredibly beautiful sculptures. A scholar on the history of the Meenakshi temple was displeased that its 1,000-pillared mandapam, with superb sculptures, has become ‘a studio’ now, with an incongruously gleaming granite floor, skewed focus lights and a big sculpture of Nataraja painted in black! Several years ago, the earthen bed of the temple’s famous ‘Golden Lotus’ tank (Pottramarai Kulam) was cemented up, with the result that no water stays in the tank now and it looks barren now. The HR and CE officials of the temple also whitewashed hundreds of beautiful murals, painted on the walls of the northern corridor of the Golden Lotus tank, portraying the ‘Tiruvilaiyadal,’ in the first quarter of 1996.

In a state of disrepair: While sculptures and carvings can survive for centuries because they have been chiselled out of granite, murals are vulnerable to nature. Since these murals were painted with natural dyes on mandapam walls or ceiling, they easily lend themselves to vandalism from devotees. Besides, they are exposed to sun or seepage of water from rain. Gaps between the granite slabs that form the roof of the mandapams lead to seepage of water due to rain and the sidewalls begin to ‘sweat.’ The lime plaster which forms the base for the murals has a tendency to absorb the water. When rain water falls on the murals painted on the ceiling or walls, fungus develops and the murals start peeling off. Smoke from the camphor (lit by the devotees) and from the oil lamps damage the paintings. Besides, they suffer from desecration at the hands of the HR and CE officials and devotees. Officials have fixed scores of metres of electric wires on the murals on the walls of the mandapams, installed switch boxes and tube lights on them, as it has happened in several places on the splendid murals in the Devaraja Swamy temple at Kanchipuram, portraying the 108 Divya Desam murals.

Other examples of vandalism: Extremely rare murals painted on wood in the Tirukkutraleeswarar temple at Tirukkutrala Chitra Sabha in Tirunelveli district have been vandalised. At the Siva temple at Patteeswaram, paintings were sandblasted in 1998 in the name of cleaning the surfaces on which they were painted. The paintings portrayed Lord Siva presenting a palanquin studded with pearls to the Saivite saint Tirugnana Sambandar because he could not bear to see his devotee walking in the sun. Temple officials sandblasted another row of paintings narrating the life of a mythical king who had no child but was blessed with a child after praying to Siva at Patteeswaram. Officials of the Lakshminarasimhar temple at Sevilimedu, near Kanchipuram, whitewashed them. They do not exist today.  Tales of destruction and desecration of these invaluable murals in temples in Tamil Nadu do not end with this list. What happened to the paintings at the Meenakshi temple at Madurai, the Trilokyanatha Jaina temple at Tiruparuttikunram near Kanchipuram, another Jaina temple at Karanthai near Kanchipuram and the Ramalinga Vilasam Palace in Ramanathapuram town take the cake.

Why this targested vattcks of vandalism? What the Mohammedan and the Europeans rulers could have done during their reigns is carried on in India, that too, after “independence” by the Indians by themselves. Ironically, “Hindu Religious & Endowment Board” under the control of proclaimed atheist, rationalist and particularly anti-Hindu ideologists for the last 70 years. The staff and officers entering into the department of HR&CE have been ideologists of all sorts of such category and some non-Hindus have also been there. And this vandalism is not done on one day, but carried on systematically. Whenever any official function comes, they carry out such destruction easily under the guise of celebration. The moment the temple comes under the control of HR&CE, any official comes into a temple, an office is constructed inside temple, that office is converted into some sort of lodge and then star-type accommodation, the temples start losing their sanctity. Perhaps, God is leaving the place. Under such circumstances, these modern day vandals, ideologists and rulers start their destruction.


Ramajanmabhumi-Babarimasjid, evidences and Court or Hisorians as witnesses and Sunni Wakf Board Experts!

October 16, 2010

Ramajanmabhumi-Babarimasjid, evidences and Court or

Hisorians as witnesses and Sunni Wakf Board Experts!

Vedaprakash

Ramajanmabhumi-Babarimasjid and eminent hisorians: The eminent historians would appear immediately, whenever “Rama” appears in the headlines of Indian media. They start interpreting historicity of “Ramayana” according to their own way without any regard for the other view or perspective[1]. Even in the case of Sethu-samuthram, they started writing in “the Hindu” and EPW grinding their mills as usual[2]. Of course, the left media does / did not want the opinion of the others[3]. They vociferously lecture and write that they would appeal against the judgment and so on, but disappear thereafter. They exploit every forum like IHC etc., only to project their viewpoint[4]. Romila Thapar roared, “We would appeal against this jugment”, when the so-called “Hindutva judgment” came[5], but nothing happened! And the faithful readers of “The Hindu”, Frontline, EPW and the devoted members of IHC etc., also do not bother as to why their eminent historians tell lies or play such dubious games? Why they believe the eminent historians, because of their eminence or for their duplicity? Have they ever thought about them as to why they behave like that? Now, again these left / eminent intellectuals / historians have been busy with issuing statements. Besides, historians and experts others too join!

130 experts sign – ASI report should be made public, says appeal to Chief Justice[6] (14-10-2010): Now 130 experts have come out with an open letter addressed to the Chief Justice of India! The news reports say like this, “The Allahabad High Court based a significant part of its judgment in the Ayodhya case on the evidence provided by the Archaeological Survey of India’s report on its excavations at the site, submitted to the court in 2003. They accuse that the report is still hidden from the public eye, and a virtual gag order placed on archaeologists who acted as observers during the excavation[7]. Now that the judgment has been pronounced, a group of 130 academics, activists and intellectuals have demanded that the ASI report be published. In an open letter[8] to the Chief Justice of India and the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, they urged that the report “be made available for scrutiny in the public domain, especially to scholars, as it is now a part of the public judicial record.” The ASI report, which concluded that a temple had existed at the site, has been criticised by many archaeologists for ignoring evidence such as animal bones, which would not have been found in a temple for Ram, and the existence of glazed pottery and graves at all levels which indicated Muslim residence”[9].

Shereen Ratnagar and D. Mandal were slapped with contempt of court charges by the Allahabad High Court: “In May, archaeologists Shereen Ratnagar and D. Mandal were slapped with contempt of court charges by the Allahabad High Court for sharing their observations in a book, titled “Ayodhya: Archaeology After Excavation”, published by Tulika in 2007. The orders in that case have been reserved”. That means they know the implications of the law. That is why they have been keeping quite since 2003!

The open letter and signatories: “The open letter notes that, “the world at large is equally constrained to silence. Such a judicially ordained zone of uncertainty curbs freedom of expression and fair comment.” Indians have never seen them in other caes where such issues have been involved. Thus, they want to selective!

Signatories: “The letter was signed by well-known Indian academics such as Sumit Sarkar, Uma Chakravarti, K.N. Pannikkar, K. Satchidanandan, Ajay Dandekar and filmmakers such as Anand Patwardhan, as well as less well-known Indian citizens – a software engineer, a textile design consultant, a teacher[10]. Academics from abroad – including those from universities in London, Chicago, Stockholm and Copenhagen – have also signed the letter, as friends of India”. This type of letters have been issued since 1992 and many times, the so-called signatories say that they have simply agreed to include their names in such letters. In some cases, they did / do not know also about the inclusion of their names!

Romila Thapar and others: Statement issued through Sahamat (01-10-2010): Another report goes like this: “Questioning the verdict of the Allahabad High Court on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suits, a group of left-leaning intellectuals on Friday said the judgment was “yet another blow to the secular fabric of the country” and the “repute of our judiciary”.  The scholars, including Romila Thapar, K M Shrimali, K N Pannikar, Irfan Habib, Utsa Patnaik and C P Chandrasekhar, said in a statement through the platform of Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust (SAHMAT) that the verdict had raised “serious concerns” because of the way history, reason and secular values had been treated in it. “The view that the Babri Masjid was built at the site of a Hindu temple, which has been maintained by two of the three judges, takes no account of all the evidence contrary to this fact turned up by the Archaeological Survey of India’s own excavations — the presence of animal bones throughout as well as the use of ‘surkhi’ and lime mortar (all characteristic of Muslim presence) rule out the possibility of a Hindu temple having been there beneath the mosque,” the statement noted.

The verdict on Ayodhya: a historian’s perspective[11] (01-10-2010): Under this caption, the view of romila thapar appeared in “The Hindu”. It goes like this, “It has annulled respect for history and seeks to replace it with religious faith.

“The verdict is a political judgment and reflects a decision which could as well have been taken by the state years ago. Its focus is on the possession of land and the building a new temple to replace the destroyed mosque. The problem was entangled in contemporary politics involving religious identities but also claimed to be based on historical evidence. This latter aspect has been invoked but subsequently set aside in the judgment.

“The court has declared that a particular spot is where a divine or semi-divine person was born and where a new temple is to be built to commemorate the birth. This is in response to an appeal by Hindu faith and belief[12]. Given the absence of evidence in support of the claim, such a verdict is not what one expects from a court of law. Hindus deeply revere Rama as a deity but can this support a legal decision on claims to a birth-place, possession of land and the deliberate destruction of a major historical monument to assist in acquiring the land?

“The verdict claims that there was a temple of the 12th Century AD at the site which was destroyed to build the mosque — hence the legitimacy of building a new temple.

“The excavations of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and its readings have been fully accepted even though these have been strongly disputed by other archaeologists and historians. Since this is a matter of professional expertise on which there was a sharp difference of opinion the categorical acceptance of the one point of view, and that too in a simplistic manner, does little to build confidence in the verdict. One judge stated that he did not delve into the historical aspect since he was not a historian but went to say that history and archaeology were not absolutely essential to decide these suits! Yet what are at issue are the historicity of the claims and the historical structures of the past one millennium.

“A mosque built almost 500 years ago and which was part of our cultural heritage[13] was destroyed wilfully by a mob urged on by a political leadership. There is no mention in the summary of the verdict that this act of wanton destruction, and a crime against our heritage, should be condemned. The new temple will have its sanctum — the presumed birthplace of Rama — in the area of the debris of the mosque. Whereas the destruction of the supposed temple is condemned and becomes the justification for building a new temple, the destruction of the mosque is not, perhaps by placing it conveniently outside the purview of the case.

Has created a precedent[14]: The verdict has created a precedent in the court of law that land can be claimed by declaring it to be the birthplace of a divine or semi-divine being worshipped by a group that defines itself as a community. There will now be many such janmasthans wherever appropriate property can be found or a required dispute manufactured. Since the deliberate destruction of historical monuments has not been condemned what is to stop people from continuing to destroy others? The legislation of 1993 against changing the status of places of worship has been, as we have seen in recent years, quite ineffective.

What happened in history, happened. It cannot be changed[15]. But we can learn to understand what happened in its fuller context and strive to look at it on the basis of reliable evidence. We cannot change the pas[16]t to justify the politics of the present. The verdict has annulled respect for history and seeks to replace history with religious faith. True reconciliation can only come when there is confidence that the law in this country bases itself not just on faith and belief, but on evidence”.

Earlier stand – Irfan Habib (01-10-2010): “With the three judges pronouncing differing opinions on the historical and archaeological aspects of the case in the Allahabad High Court’s judgement on the disputed land in Ayodhya, many leading historians have been left bemused. “It’s not a logical judgement with so many parts going 2-1. One does not accept the logicality of the judgement,” said Irfan Habib, a noted historian and a former Chairman of the Indian Council of Historical Research who earlier taught at the Aligarh Muslim University. He noted that the verdict seemed to legitimise the events of 1949[17], when an idol was placed inside the mosque, by constant references. On the other hand, by minimising any mentions of the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992, the court seemed to be disregarding it, he said. He also expressed surprise that two judges questioned the date of construction of the Babri Masjid, as well as the involvement of emperor Babar or his commander Mir Baqi, since there had been clear inscriptions to this effect before the demolition. “Things that are totally clear historically, the court has tried to muddy,” he said[18].

D. N. Jha: “The historical evidence has not been taken into account,” said D.N. Jha, history professor at the Delhi University. Noting the judgement’s mention of the “faith and belief of Hindus” in reference to the history of the disputed structure, Dr. Jha asked why the court had requested an excavation of the site.“If it is a case of ‘belief,’ then it becomes an issue of theology, not archaeology. Should the judiciary be deciding cases on the basis of theology is a question that needs to be asked,” he said.

Supriya Verma, one of the observers: Professional archaeologists also noted that the judges did not seem to rely heavily on the Archaeological Survey of India’s court-directed excavation of the site in 2003, at least in the summaries of their verdict available on Thursday evening. “Somewhere, there is doubt about the credibility of that report,” said Supriya Verma of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, who acted as an observer during the ASI excavation. She noted that neither Justice Sudhir Agarwal nor Justice Dharam Veer Sharma even referenced the ASI report to support his conclusion on the existence of a temple on the site before the mosque was built. “It is almost as though they themselves were not convinced by the evidence. They are clearly conceding that there was no archaeological evidence of a temple or of its demolition…It is a judgement of theology,” she said.

Jaya Menon, one of the observers: Another observer of the ASI excavation, Jaya Menon of the Aligarh Muslim University, noted that the ASI report itself did not provide any evidence of a demolition, and only asserted the existence of a temple in its conclusion. “So I don’t know on what basis they made their judgements,” she said. The ASI report had been criticised by many archaeologists for ignoring evidence such as animal bones, which would not have been found in a temple for Ram, and the existence of glazed pottery and graves which indicated Muslim residents.

The eminent historians as witnesses of Muslims in the Allahabad case: The eminent historians, historical experts  and leftist manufacturers never bother about their secular credentials.  It is not known as to why these coteries should always support for the Masjid or Muslim cause. Ironically, the following have been the witnesses of the case in question, which is criticised by them:

Sl.No Witness no Name of the witness
1 Witness No. 63 R.S. Sharma
2 Witness No. 64 Suraj Bhan
3 Witness No. 65 D.N. Jha[19]
4 Witness No. 66 Romila Thapar
5 Witness No. 70 Irfan Habib
6 Witness No. 72 B.N. Pandey
7 Witness No. 95 K.M. Shrimali
8 Witness No. 99 Satish Chandra
9 Witness No. 102 Gyanendra Pandey

Then, where is their loci standi in criticising the judgment and Court? As witnesses, definitely, they could have deposed before the judges presenting their “historical facts” as they only know how to interpret! The public perhaps, even today do not know that in secular India, these historians stood witnesses to the Muslims! Why none has appeared for Hindus or temple cause? When the cold-blooded terrorist and heinous killer like Kasab is given legal aid, why none appeared for the non-Muslim and non-mosque group? Where is secularism? Would they come out in the public what they told to the judges in the Court? However, the poor show showed in the court by them raises many questions.

HC judge exposed experts espousing Masjids cause: Waqf Board Line-Up Accused Of Having Ostrich-Like Attitude:  The role played by independent experts, historians and archaeologists who appeared on behalf of the Waqf Board to support its claim has come in for criticism by one Allahabad High Court judge in the Ayodhya verdict. While the special bench of three judges unanimously dismissed objections raised by the experts to the presence of a temple, it was Justice Sudhir Agarwal who put their claims to extended judicial scrutiny. Most of these experts deposed twice. Before the ASI excavations, they said there was no temple beneath the mosque and, after the site had been dug up,they claimed what was unearthed was a mosque or a stupa. During lengthy cross-examination spread over several pages and recorded by Justice Agarwal, the historians and experts were subjected to pointed queries about their expertise, background and basis for their opinions.
To the courts astonishment, some who had written signed articles and issued pamphlets, were withering under scrutiny and the judge said they were displayed an ostrich-like attitude to facts. He also pointed out how the independent witnesses were connected one had done a PhD under the other, another had contributed an article to a book penned by a witness.

The vociverous historians could not give evidences properly as witnesses with all their extertise[20]: Some instances underlined by the judge are[21]:

  • Suvira Jaiswal[22] deposed whatever knowledge I gained with respect to disputed site is based on newspaper reports or what others told (other experts). She said she prepared a report on the Babri dispute on basis of discussions with medieval history expert in my department.

  • Supriya Verma[23], another expert who challenged the ASI excavations, had not read the ground penetration radar survey report that led the court to order an excavation. She did her PhD under another expert Shireen F Ratnagar.

  • Verma and Jaya Menon[24] alleged that pillar bases at the excavated site had been planted but HC found they were not present at the time the actual excavation took place.

  • Archaeologist Shereen F Ratnagar has written the introduction to the book of another expert who deposed, Professor Mandal. She admitted she had no field experience.

Normally, courts do not make adverse comments on the deposition of a witness and suffice it to consider whether it is credible or not, but we find it difficult to resist ourselves in this particular case considering the sensitivity and nature of dispute and also the reckless and irresponsible kind of statements…[25] the judge noted. He said opinions had been offered without making a proper investigation, research or study in the subject. The judge said he was startled and puzzled by contradictory statements.When expert witness Suraj Bhan deposed on the Babri mosque, the weight of his evidence was contradicted by anotherexpert for Muslim parties, Shirin Musavi, who told the court that Bhan is an archaeologist and not an expert on medieval history[26]. Justice Agarwal noted that instead of helping in making a cordial atmosphere it tends to create more complications, conflict and controversy. He pointed out that experts carry weight with public opinion.

When the matter is subjudice, one has to obey law: It is a simple matter that whenever, any issue / case is pending with the Court, as the matter is subjudice, it should not be discussed or the decisions cannot be drawn in favour of anybody. However, these left historians etc., have been always speaking and writing supporting for Muslim cause or against Hindus, as is evident from their own recorded / printed statements / articles always published in the selected in few journals / ndewspapers. Unfortunately, they have even agreed to be witnesses for the Wakf Board in the Allahabad Court as their names are figuring. Ironivcally, they are called as Sunni Wakf Board experts![27]

When religions rely upon belief system, so also secularism historians too belive so ignoring objectivity: Like believers and dis-believers historians too believe and compel others to believe their perspective without any objectivity. As their objectivity differes, their perspective also differ, but try to argue with ideology, as could be understood by others. With belief system, no two ideologists could come together; with objectivity no two historians could accept the same historical event in the same view or pwerspective; here, the media has been projecting only one view. So what about the other view and why the media does not provide opportunity to accommodate their view? Should “audi alteram partem – hear the other side and decide” be applicable only to the Courts according to the principle of natural justice or the historians do not want to follow?

The same pattern as noted in the case of DK, DMK and other rapid atheists and radical experts is noted in the case of these eminent historians or Sunni Wakf Board experts: As it is pointed out in the case of DK[28]-DMK[29] radicals and rabid atheist groups that they do not come to Courts or face courts, though, they used to cry and roar that they are not afraid of Courts and so on. Here, also, suppressing the facts, these historians talk and write one thing in the dailies and cover up their mumbling and bungling in the court. The court recordings of the witnesses have been actually exposing their hollowness of expertise, deceptiveness of historical knowledge and their dubious role as witnesses. That they accuse even without seeing, even without reading or just discussing with others etc, prove their capacity of manoeuvring and manipulation of academics. How they get PhDs etc., only prove such academic degradation and professional pampering without any shame or remorse. It is open secret that the JNU, AMU, DU, IHC, ICHR and others at one side and BMAC, Sunni Wakf Board, AIMPLB at the other side have been playing communalism under the guise of secularism. Just by accusing others they cannot live, survive and continue their careers in this competitive world.

Why the eminent historians and Sunni Wakf Board experts did not respond to the remarks of the Judge? Definitely, the remarks of the Judge have been questioning the integrity of the eminent historians and Sunni Wakf Board experts, who deposed before the court as witnesses! They cannot simply brush aside such exposure, as it casts aspersion on their position. The English reading Indians and Indian students may doubt their veracity, reliability and uprightness, as they read their writings or listen to them. Therefore, they should go to court to clear the mess instead of shooting out letters to the Chief Justice just like politicians.

Indians and Indian youth should note as to whether these Sunni Board experts should teach history. Very often, it is said, claimed and propagated that India is / has been secular. Yes, how then the eminent historians professional archaeologists acted as Sunni Wakf Board experts and deposed as witnesses to the Muslims? Why these retired historians, senile professors and their working agents always make clamor about history, historicity and historiography in India, as if they are the sole selling agents of such stuff? Nowadays, the fact is that a few have been takers for history and most of the universities have dispensed with history subject. Definitely, the so-called historians have lost their importance and thus they tried to struggle for survival with the political and communal support. Now, the documents are available to all and the facts are known to everybody who access them through internet or otherwise. Common people may not know or understand the deceptive talkings and writings of the eminent historians or Sunni Wakf Board experts, but slowly they come to know. They easily understand that who want to settle the dispute and who want to continue the dispute for their stakes. Definitely, Muslims and Hindus want to settle the issue once for all, but these history gamblers and politicians want to continue. Therefore, the will of people prevail.

Vedaprakash

16-10-2010


 

[2] Romila Thapar, “Where fusion cannot work – faith and history” (the Hindu, dated September 28, 2007).

…………………., Historical Memory without History, in Economic and Political weekly, VOL 42 No. 39 September 29 – October 05, 2007, pp.3903-3905.

K. N. Panikkar, Myth, history and politics, Frontline, October 5, 2007, pp.21-24.

Suraj Bhan, “Government should have stood by ASI”, Ibid, pp.19-20.

[4] During the 2007-IHC session, Suvira Jaiswal was making such satatements. Then, in Delhi also they tried take up the matter. Now, in February 2011 at Malda, they may raise the issue. However, the Indians have to weait and see.

[5] In “the Hindu”, as usual, the news appeared with her photo and all, but after that everbody would have forgot about it! However, their warrior-like talk, veiled threatening and tactics of suppression of facts cannot be acquired by others.

[6] The Hindu, ASI report should be made public, says appeal to Chief Justice, Published: October 14, 2010 01:54 IST | Updated: October 14, 2010 02:03 IST; http://www.hindu.com/2010/10/14/stories/2010101464751800.htm

[7] How this has been a blatant lie has been exposed by the judge and that is why these guys have now tried to save their image by writing such letters. Of course, the media gives due publicity to such hypes and gimmicks.

[8] However, their mumbling, jumbling and bungling deposes before the Court have been kept as closed secret!

[9] Thus the eminent historians look for a non-vegetarian kitchen of Muslims there instrad of a temple. The same experts declared that the 16” inscription was planted by the Karsevaks in 1992.

[10] When Bharatiya Itihasa Sankalana Samiti works on the same lines, the same eminent historians make fun of having such diversified experts, but now they themselves have such signatories, just to project their strength.

[11] The Hindu, Published: October 2, 2010 00:41 IST | Updated: October 2, 2010.

[12] There is nothing new in Romila’s argument, as she repeats the same matter again and again. The unfortunate thing is that she like her friends always want others should accept their views!

[13] How they contradict in their views legally can be noted in such statements. When convenience comes, they forget law, when law is against them, they start talking generalization or raise the bogey of “Hindutva”!

[14] Law precedence is created in the Court. Yes, definitely, the judges are the persons to create and others have to accept. Of course, the appealable legal remedy is there.

[15] But whatever happened also cannot be forgotten. When the same historians want to whitewash the temple destruction of the Muslims and accept only the Muslim contribution, such type of exclusivist logic is not explained. Why the students should not know the facts? In law it is said audi alteram partem – hear the other side and decide. How then historians want to decide without knowing the other side?

[16] Why then the interpretation of the past is always different for different historians? Nowadays, historians do not want objectivity also. How then they woerry about accuracy, when they themselves are not worried about it?

[17] Acts and Rules are within the time frame work. All know that Places of Worship Act is there and it e3xempts only this place and not others. Why then they talk about pre-1947 and after 1947, when law its4elf  cannot do so?

[18]The Hindu, Historical evidence ignored, say historians, dated October 1, 2010, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article805087.ece

[23] It is interesting to note that the ASI report talks about a shrine followed by a temple with different structural phases, it also talks of “animal bones recovered from various levels of different periods”. If any shrine and a temple existed how can anyone account for the animal bones, Supriya Verma asks? She also maintains that stones and decorated bricks could have been used in any building, not necessarily only in a temple. Also, the carved architectural members have come from the debris and not from the stratified context.

[24] She got appointment in the AMU after she started supporting the cause of mosque and appeared as Sunni Wakf Board expert!

[25] The historians who deposed as witnesses and as well as others should carefully read this and understand their postion. They cannot pretend as if nothing happened or pose as great authorities and roam here and there in historical forums and conferences. Now Indians have also understood their double-games, double-speak and double-standards.

[26] Nowadays, just like medical experts or specialized doctors, these historians ad archaeologists trading charges like this – so-and-so is an expert in that field and he alone can know the truth and others cannot know the truth. Such type of exclusive mind-set exposes their arrogance and weakness and not the real expertise.

[27]Asghar ali Engineer, Archaeological Excavations and Temple, September 1-15, 2003,  http://www.csss-isla.com/arch%20150.htm

[28] Vedaprakash, Old Judgments and  New thoughts in the present context: S. Veerabadran Chettiar vs E. V. Ramaswami Naicker  others., http://vedaprakash.indiainteracts.in/2008/08/09/old-judgments-and-new-thoughts-in-the-present-context-s-veerabadran-chettiar-vs-e-v-ramaswami-naicker-others/

Atheist’s sermon on Ramayana!

May 17, 2007

Atheist’s sermon on Ramayana!

Three years back, I started blogging here, but, I switched over to http://www.indiainteracts.com.

However, as they stopped such facility suddenly, many of my writings, bloggig, comments etc., disappeared.

Therefore, I just want to revive, recollect and repost them, wherever possible.

This response was actually for one Nandivarman of Pondicherry, as he used to attack Hindus with his self-claimed atheism and so on.

My attention is drawn to your posting in WordPress.com.

I offer my comments to your post:

India was an island nation surrounded by seas hence it had the name நாவலந் தீவு.

Is to so? Kindly tell me, where the expression நாவலந் தீவு is found in the ancient Tamil literature or “Sangam” literature?

In such a scenario to claim that a Land Bridge built 1,750.000 years ago when no human being had inhabited the Earth

In haste, you are mentioning as 1,750 years (1,750.000 = 1750).

Paula Richman wrote a book titled “Many Ramayanas” Yes the question before us is to accept which Ramayana as true story?.

You claimed youself as a rationalist / atheist etc. Then, you have to be careful in quoting from secondary sources, because, non-Hindus or anti-Hindus can write anything and quoting such biased ideas make you unbecoming of a “rationalist / atheist”. You should have read H. D. Sankalia also before jumping into the so-called “debate”.

Your mention about Jain / Buddha Ramayanas: As Ramayana has become so popular, even Jains and Buddhists had to imitate Ramayana by changing the story, just like Kulandai. Therefore, there is nothing new in it. As a researcher or scholar or historian, you have to demythologize and find out the truth, instead of relying upon “such myth on myth”, straightaway.

[The biblical Adam and Eve’s story and its resemblance could also be taken note of] Sita becoming a monket after eating a fruit: This shows that either you have not read the story properly or misquoting or rather drawing wrong parallel with the biblical Adam and Eve (don’t try to escape by telling that I am a rationalist and all). I do not know as to whether Eve became monkey to have such forceful comparison!

You furthering the above story: Here, you are perhaps nearing the biblical fables, as Jesus also reportedly married to May Magdelene. Perhaps, you decided to not stretch it.

According to Thais, Hanuman had many affairs and children: Naturally, if the wishes are horses, even blind can fly. Why Thais, even Annba did it. As you are a rationalist and atheist, you quote all these things, so enjoy.Anna’s inconclusive debate on Kamba Ramayanam: “Navalar Somasundara Bharathiar and சொல்லின் செல்வர் R.P.Sethu Pillai debated with Anna and openly admitted they have lost the debate. This debate in Tamil Book “Let Fire Spread” தீ பரவட்டும் wants to illuminate Tamil hearts by symbolically burning Kamba ramayanam. Pulavar Kuzhanthai wrote இராவண காவியம் . Ravana Kavyam  can be considered as Dravidian version of Ramayanam”.No, they were ashamed of the perversity and vulgarity erupted in the name of literary flow and hanged their heads. Any Tamil knowing or reading person would hang his head after reading as it is just like “yellow journalism” circulated under the “Dravidian” banner, that too, coming from Anna, wjo became Chief Minister of Tamilnadu taking oath under the Indian Constitution, that has been written by Ambedkar. Anyway, the facts are as follows:

  • The so called debate was held in the auditorium of Law College, Madras on 09-02-1943 under Ramachandra Chettiyar.
  • Anna started speaking and took more than one and half hours leaving no time to others.
  • Pointing out the falsehood in his speech, R. P. Sethu Pillai openly spoke about his weakness in the argument. In fact, re ridiculed Anna for quoting from “Northern Nehru”, being a “Nakkiran” (one who always finds fault with others). Regretting that he could not speak for long time, he wound up his speech within ten minutes. He dared him that he would even come to Kanchipuram for another debate on the subject matter, if he would invite him.
  • Ezattu Adigal, who followed him, was asked to cut short his speech within five minutes.
  • Then Srinivasan started speaking, but he was prevented from speaking, as the DK activists created a riot-like condition. He had to stop his speech, because of the pandemonium created by them.
  • But, Anna was given a chance to speak again!
  • So that was the debate conducted with “freedom of speech” and respect for speakers!
  • However, winding up, C. M. Ramachandra Chetti concluded that he could not give his opinion, as the debate had been inconclusive.

The main point discussed was as to whether Ravana was an Aryan or Dravidian. Thus, the first debate had been the most undemocratic conducted under controlled conditions with rioters.

The second debate was conducted on 14-03-1943 at Devanga Padasalai, Sevvaipettai,  Salem. Salem College A. Ramasamy presided over Anna and Somasundara Bharathi spoke.

  • Anna spoke as usual taking full time
  • Somasundara Bharathi pointed out that Anna spoke as an orator with brimming emotion not as a debater. He then, however brought out his points refuting Anna;s talk.
  • He left, as his speech was over and moreover, he had to catch his train, as plannede by the organizers.
  • But, after his departure, Anna was given a chance and he stressed upon Ravana’s race and concluded with the demand of burning “scriptures of Aryans”.
  • A. Ramasamy, though did not gave any result about the debate, he pointed out that there was “vulgarity” in Kamba Ramayanam.

In any case, such diverted reference has nothing to do with the “Ramar’s Palam”.

The question before us which of these versions is based on true historical facts. These are not days where everyone will accept anything with blind faith. If you place new facts to reopen a settled issue in history, you should place facts and prove it”.

Yes, yes. Nowadays, everybody can get information easily and they decide about truth behind it.  Even in those days (when Anna debated), the other scholars were not allowed to speak or threatened with dire consequences. In other words, they used their own type of terrorism in those days. Now, let us see, how truth is faced.

Let us examine the falsehoods one by one. We from the Dravidian Movement are atheists but not Ravana; all know that Ravana as per epics is a devotee of Lord Siva. The doubt which arises to me is why should a reincarnation of God perform superhuman deeds to impress demigods? Does it mean that Demigods are more powerful than the Original God on reincarnation?

Interestingly, the answer is there in the so-called above debate, as they debated only about the race of Ravana as to whether he was an Aryan or Dravidian! Rationalist or atheist has to deny such myth. Having believed it as a myth, why one should worry about it as to whether it works or not? Without Ramayana myth, there is no Ravana. If Ramayana is myth, Ravana is also a myth. Then, why debate about his “racist credentials”?

There are many books on Indian Ocean. All these books give us evidences on the continental drift, the submerged lands of the Lemuria, which Tamils prefer to call as the Kumari Kandam”.

Yes, but note again, the western scholars do not believe in such hypotheses. Why them, even Indian eminent historians not only do not accept, but also dub them as myth.

Mr. Nandi Varman, go to Endo-eurasian group and other forums, where Tamil literature is misinterpreted and disrespected. Steve Farmer openly accuses that your friend R. Mathivanan is a foregerer. They go on debate even without knowing the fundamentals of Tamil and Tamil literature. I feel it is better spend your energy there instead of politicizing the issue.

VEDAPRAKASH,

Researcher,

Chennai.

vedamvedaprakash@yahoo.com

Indology

May 9, 2007

Indology

Indians have been studying about them and recording their activities since their advent on the earth. However, with the advent of the Europeans during 18th-19th centuries, their studies carried on with their purpose came to be known as “Indology”.

“Indology”, study of India in all aspects,  has not been new to Indians, but of later, the westerners have dominated and tried to interpret the “historical process” of India in their own way. And many times, what they have understood about India, Indians, Indian religion, culture, heritage, tradition, civilization etc., whether such understanding is correct or incorrect, biased or unbiased, motivated with vested interest or otherwise, are printed in newspapers, journals and books and widely circulated. The

inbuilt mistakes, errors and wrong interpretations are also thus carried with authority. Unfortunately, the other tendency developed among the former group has been, if any Indian scholar points out such mistakes and blunders, immediately, he is dubbed as “nationalist”, “revisionist”, “communal” etc.

It has to be noted that certain words and expressions “communal”, “secular”, “progressive”, “sectarian”, “pseudo-secular”, etc., are used in India in peculiar connotation, but now, the westerners have borrowed such terminology and use against Indians. Moreover, as Indians of different categories have spread in many countries, because of material and non-material benefits, they side with such biased westerners and help in anti-India propaganda carried out under the guise of research and so on.