Sethusamudram Controversy - My Ram

http://funhike.blogspot.com/2007/09/sethusamudram-controversy-my-ram.html

It is a situation for which most Indians – regardless of religion and community – are not prepared. Imagine someone stating on oath that Ramayana and Ram are fictional characters and there is no ‘scientific basis’ for their existence hundreds of thousands years ago.
And what rubs salt in the wound is the fact that this statement comes from an agency of the Government of India.

In an affidavit filed in the Supreme Court, the Director-general of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has said on Wednesday (11 September) that there was no archaeological evidence to establish the existence of Lord Ram or other characters of the Ramayan.

Denying that Ram Sethu or Adam’s Bridge is a man-made structure, the ASI argued that ’Ramcharitmanas’ by Tulsidas cannot be taken as a historical record.

The ASI filed the affidavit in response to three petitions, transferred from the Madras High Court to the apex court, challenging the government’s decision to construct the Sethusamudram Canal Project on the Tamil Nadu coast.

Although the UPA government and specifically Sonia Gandhi were quick to react to the widespread angry reaction by saying that the affidavit shall be amended, the damage, it appears, has been done. Union Law Minister H.R. Bharadwaj has been quick to admit that he himself was a ‘devotee of Ram’ and there was no question of commenting on the veracity of Ramayana and its characters. Railways Minister Lalu Prasad also spoke out saying that the existence of Ram was beyond any scientific inquiry.

Hindus – and in fact most Indians -- believe that Ram Setu was built by Lord Rama with the help of Hanuman’s ’Vanar Sena’ to cross over to Sri Lanka to free his wife Sita from the captivity of ’demon king’ Ravana.

“It is amazing how the people of your community can take this news lying down and without getting agitated to the core,” said Mohd. Anwar, officer in a Central Government undertaking based in Gorakhpur, who was in Lucknow on tour. “It is unimaginable that a similar statement could have been made about any community,” he said matter-of-factly.

Predictably, it has led to angry protests among sections of the majority community in the form of street protests in cities across India. H.N. Singh, a Bharatiya Janata Party activist, said that the party was not going to sit idle on this ‘onslaught’ on sentiments of the majority community.
Hriday Narain Dikshit, spokesman of the BJP in Uttar Pradesh, in a scathing reaction said that the move was a ‘self-destructive misadventure’ as it had no right to attack the symbols of faith of the Hindu community.

Even historians are aghast at the ASI observations. Says Prof Tapas K Roy Choudhury, an eminent historian, “It is not proper to look for scientific evidence in matters of faith because then it degenerates into a confrontation between believers and non-believers. Even scientists and researchers can believe in God, despite knowing that scientific evidence about the existence of God may never be found.”

People generally are not ready to believe that the language of the affidavit was ‘a mistake’ on the part of the ASI officials. The debate on the environmental and other impact of the proposed Sethusamudram project is a different matter, but when and how did the government get a right to attack the faith of the Hindus, ask the people. It is believed that although the ‘anti-Hindu’ acts and decisions of the UPA government had been continuing for a long, this time it had become too much to tolerate.

The protests spread across cities in Uttar Pradesh in no time. The impact on Ayodhya was one of stunned disbelief. Ayodhya is a place that owes its existence, culture, life-style and much of its economy to Ram. The dispute over Ram Janmabhumi has altered the pace of life in Ayodhya forever. The ubiquitous presence of security forces, the unending stream of Ram devotees, other pilgrims and tourists and hundreds of shops selling Ram icons all over Ayodhya are inextricably linked to the presence of Ram. If there is no evidence of the existence of Ram and all literature pertaining to Ram is fiction, then what is the reason for the Ram Janmabhumi dispute?

In the narrow lanes of Ayodhya, in ashrams, temples, ponds and structures like Seeta Rasoi, Hanauman Garhi, the throngs of pilgrims and devotees are not there because they have studied some scientific evidence about the existence of Ram. And they cannot be termed ignorant simply because they pay obeisance at places associated with the life of Ram.
Crores of rupees have been spent – and are being spent – on maintaining a security cover for ‘Rama Lala virajman’ – the small idols of Ram Lala at the Ram Janmabhumi site, with every inch of the premises being guarded round-the-clock by heavily-armed paramilitary personnel. Isn’t everything irrelevant – and even ridiculous -- if Ramayana is fiction and Ram never existed?

“Doesn’t the complicated legal battle that is being fought in various courtrooms in Lucknow, Ayodhya and elsewhere over the issue of Ram Janmabhumi lose all its relevance with the Government of India affidavit,” asks R.K. Singh, a High Court lawyer?

Ram Vilas Vedanti, a trustee of Ram Janmabhumi Trust and former MP, has been reported saying that it was time to launch a ‘decisive struggle’ to protect the sanctity of Indian culture. The BJP, right from L.K. Advani to the street-level worker, has recognized that the UPA has given it a live issue on a platter. It will be self-destructive for the BJP if it does not take it up aggressively.