BABER MASJID-REAL STORY
1949 On December 23rd, Muslims finished their night prayer and left to their home. A shock was waiting for them, who came for fajr prayer. Inside the Mosque a mob kept Rama, Laxamana, Sita statues and claimed that their God took avatar (appeared) inside the mosque and they started agitating against innocent Muslims.
An FIR was filed at faizabad police station. Afterwards central and state government banned Muslims to conduct prayer inside the mosque and this became one of the important issue in Indian history.
Then Innocent Hindu's mind were brain-washed with hatred feeling against Muslims by spreading a false propaganda that "Babri Majid was built by demolishing Ram Temple"
If the propaganda of Saffron Group " Babri majid was built after demolishing Ram Temple" is true then no Muslims will fight for this issue. Because in Islam, demolishing other religious Temple is strictly prohibited. Due to their false claim about Ram Temple, Muslims are fighting to get back their mosque.
We don't want to divert the subject by exposing the comment of Chatterji, AK majumdhar, Nehru that RAM is an imaginary character.
Because the subject is to discuss by doing research whether any Ram temple exists in the disputed location ? Whether Majid was built in that location by demolishing Ram temple? Not about the existence of Ram or whether it is imaginary character or not!!!
Even Ram is an imaginary character; no Muslims will accept the demolition of Ram temple and build a mosque in that location.
Was Ram born at Ayodhya ?
We'll see how the claim of Ram born in that disputed location will be true.
Whatever the decision Hindus want to take, it should not be fundamentally taken from the comment of RSS or any other saffron organization. It should be taken from Hindus Vedas and Purunas. In fact, it would be opposite to Hindu ideology, if some decision taken apart from this jurisdiction of Vedas.
Valmiki wrote first about Ram and his words explained everything about Ram in crystal clear format. Valmiki explained in his Ramayana that he born at DHIREDHA Yuga.
A basic measurement unit of time, to denote the Hindu's belief of time is Yuga. There are four Yugas.
Kirudha yuga 17,28,000 ( 17 lakhs, 28 thousands ) years
Dhiredha Yuga 12,96,000 ( 12 lakhs, 96 thousand) years
Duvaba Yuga 8,64,000 ( 8 lakhs, 64 thousand ) years
Kali Yuga 4,32,000 ( 4 lakhs, 32 thousand ) years
Now we are living in the time of Kali Yuga. Kali Yuga starts before 3102 years of Christ. Now 2009 finished after Christ. So 5110 years finished after kali yuga starts.
Duvaba yuga was before Kali Yuga and Ram didn't born during this time. Before this was Dhiredha Yuga and even Ram born during last stage of this Yuga and according to Valmiki Ramayana's Judgment " Ram should have born before 8,69,110 years ( 8,64,000 + 5110 )
Like Valmiki Ramayana told about Ram's Yuga, he specified the birth place too that is "He born at Ayodhya city "
That means " Ayodhya" should exists before 8 Lakhs, 64 thousand years. A report was submitted on 1976, 77 by central government archeological department regarding " when Ayodhya appeared?". This report in its 52, 53 page explained that "A place name called Ayodhya in which people started dwelling was before 700 BC.
That means, before 2708 years, there would be no Ayodhya according to their archeological research.
Afterwards this was re-researched by C.P.Lal and K.N Theetjit , a notable historian. They also found that it was true whatever the archeological department found.
Valmiki told that Ram born before 8 lakhs 69 thousand years at Ayodhya, but it is crystal clear that there was nothing called Ayodhya at that time.
How Hindus can conclude by neglecting Ramayana and archeological finding?
The age of this Ayodhya is 2708 years. But this is not the one explained by Ramayana. May be it is in different place. It is general to find many places in the same name. By considering these facts, they have to come for conclusion, which will not contradict with Ramayana and research facts.
There is lot of testimonials in Ramayana that Ram born at Ayodhya which is different from the existing one.
While speaking about Ayodhya, Ramayana spoke about Sarayu River. Sarayu River exists 1.5 yojan distances from Ayodhya. (1.5 yojan means 23 kilometers )
Even though there's one river called Sarayu at Ayodhya, it's running inside the city, not 23 kilometers away from the city.
That means, Ayodhya and Sarayu River told by Ramayana is not the existing one. Ramayana teachings will be correct when you believe Sarayu River flows 23 kilometers away from Ayodhya.
People are simply neglecting Hinduism, if they consider existing Ayodhya is same like Ayodhya explained in Ramayana.
Also Valmiki Ramayana explains that " Sarayu River join with Ganga". But this Sarayu River mingles with Raabthi River. What we learnt from this? Ramayana doesn't denote this Ayodhya and Sarayu river. Also Valmiki Ramaya explains Sarayu river flows from east to west. But Sarayu river in UP flow from west to east.
A researcher, Saer Singh Identified a truth. There is one Ayodhya at Nepal. 20 kilometers away from that city one river is flowing from east to west. Also it mingles with Ganga.
So, those who believe Ram born at Ayodhya, which is at Uttarpradesh, are neglecting Ramayana and its ideology.
Real Ayodhya should be one, which was explained by the Ramayana with all testimonials.
was Ram temple existed at Ayodhya ?
Babar Majid was build at 1528. We'll see whether any truth present with the opinion of " Mir Baahi" a minister of Baber, who was accused for demolishing Ram Temple in the disputed location"
RSS claimed that Ram temple was built by king Vikramathithya. Vikramathidya is general name like Chola,Pandya kings. Chandra Gupta, samutra Gupta kings are called in the name of Vikramathidya.
They contradict in specifying the actual king who really built the Ram temple. There is not fact in their claim.
Gupta kings ruled some part of U.P during the period 300 AD to 1100 AD. These kings who ruled for 800 years are called as Vikramathidya.
During the period 300 AD to 1100 AD, there was not even a smell of human at Ayodhya, according to the chief of Indian Archeological department.
P.P Lal who submitted research report and was published at famous magazines" The Week" (25.02.1990) and "Sunday Times" (20.11.1987 ). In that report, after showing several evidences, he was confidently explained that, at Ayodhya during that period of 300 – 1100 AD, there was no human, building, temple or anything.
In some place, which is untouched by human, how can they build a temple? How Baber can demolish a temple which was not existed? I request Hindu Brothers and sisters to think about this.
When Ram was worshipped as God?
If temple to be built for Ram, it should be built after Ram was worshipped as God. Now Hindus are worshiping Ram as God, but they didn't do it before. Ram was not considered as God, Especially during the period of 300-1100 AD, which was claimed by RSS, the time when Ram temple was built.
Amar Simha of AD 600, released many Sanskrit Poetry resources in the name of " Amara Kosa". In that, those who are worshipped as God in India were specified. Ram name was not in the list. So Hindus during that period were not considering Ram as GOD's Avatar and its considered as big testimonial.
A Sadhu called Lakhsmidhar, collected the information of all sacred place up to 11th century (until last time of Gupta Dynasty). Ayodhya Ram temple is not existed in that.
If Ram temple was build during Gupta period, why it was not included in the list of sacred place?
Same like that, S.S.Iyer , a notable research scholar, published book called " Indian Temples, Historic notes". He didn't specify anything about Ram temple. He noted five temples which was built by Vikramathidya. Ayodhya Ram temple is not there.
At 1989 November 12, IAS officer Ramachandra Kadri wrote one article at "Radiance". He referred so many evidences with Encyclopedia like Britannica and comment that only after 1100 AD, Ram was worshipped as God.
That means, until the last period of Gupta kings, Ram was not worshipped as God. Can any Hindu who has real conscience, believe that Ram temple was build during the Gupta period?
If we want to tell more clearly, Valmiki wrote Ramayana in Sanskrit. Sanskrit was not popularly spoken by all people and only Brahmins knew about that. Because of this Ram was not considered as God.
Valmiki Ramayana was translated and released in Hindi by Tulsi Das. After that, Ramayana was very famous among people. After Tulsi Das translated Ramayana in Hindi, people start considering Ram as God's Avatar.
What's the time of Tulsi Das ? Tulsi Das Lived during the period of Baber (in Ayodhya ), which was claimed for demolition of Ram temple. Baber ruled during 1500 AD and Tulsi was living under that rule.
Ramayana was translated in Hindi during the rule of Baber and that time Ram was not considered as God. So it becomes true that Hindu people didn't have any knowledge about him.
How Ram was worshiped as GOD when Ramayana was not spread across people? How temple was build for him? Dear Hindu Brothers and sisters, think about this.
India's first president was Dr. Radha Krishnan. His son Gopal who was good Hindu devotee and very good research scholar too. In his research article, he proclaimed that "There was no temple for Ram before 1750 AD, in any part of India. He confidently declared that "All Ram temple belongs to 18th century".
if Ram temple was not existed before 200 years, how Baber demolish Ram temple at Disputed location of Ayodhya. I request every citizen, to think about this.
The truth is, the foundation of Babri Majid was laid by Ibrahim Lodi, on 1524. He was unable to continue the service for long time and he was killed in war by Baber. Then, Baber build a Majid, with the foundation laid by Ibrahim Lodi. So it is untrue to tell that Baber demolished the temple.
Will Baber Demolish temple ?
So far, the evidences provided here is enough for everyone, who can really able to distinguish between good and bad. For debate purpose, even though if any temple was there in the disputed location, Baber would not demolish that.
Because, in same Ayothya, for five temples like Hunumangiri ,Jenmasthan, Baber provided incentives by writing in brass . This been safeguarded still now by temple management and was reiterated with evidences by Ramrasha Thiribathi.
How a person will demolish a temple, who provided incentives to many temples?
Also the population of Muslims during Baber reign would be meager when compared with present population. Sovereignty of the kingdom will be maintained only by the support of majority Hindus. Baber would be thrown-out from his throne, by agitators of Hindu Majority, if their temple was demolished. No king will be involved in such activities, if he really wants to retain his power.
Hindus during that time were not involved in any riots or agitation, but only welcomed all Mughal heirs like Babar, his son Humayun, his son Akbar. This shows the courtesy and kindness were showered by Mughal emperors towards Hindu majority.
During the last time of Baber, he wrote one WILL to his son Humayun written in Persian language and it is been preserved still today at Central government's National museum at Delhi.
Guru Nanak who founded Sikh religion was considered as big enemy during Baber's reign. He rigorously opposed Baber, especially for the issues related with women. If Baber demolished the temple, he would have indicated that with his strong resentment. But history commenting that he went to Ayodhya and enjoyed the beauty of Babri Majid's Structure.
Person like him who lived in those years only knew that whether Baber constructed Majid by demolishing temple. In such case, he would never enjoy its building structure.
Some falsely imagine and claim that people didn't oppose the rule because of Babar's tyrant nature.
Baber was neither hated by Hindu people nor was he was a tyrant king. This is the truth. For debate purpose, if we consider Baber was a tyrant king, it would not be true.
After Baber, his kingdom was ruled by his son Humayun. After 25 years of Baber's death, his grandson Akbar ruled the kingdom. He gave up Islam and was following New Religion Din-ilahi, for which he was the founder. Akbar was like a Hindu king and even he got appreciation from many saffron organizations.
If Baber demolished the temple, it should have been noticed by many people who lived during the period of Akbar too. They don't need to worry about Akbar and they would have asked to rebuild the temple which was demolished by his grandfather. Surely, Akbar would have satisfied such people, if his grandfather would have demolished such structure. People could have requested, only if temple was demolished!!! But there happened no such incidents.
We'll leave that. Even after the Mughals era was ended by Britishers, this issue was not raised by anyone until 1948. There was no case registered too.
In 200 years rule of British:
No case was registered during British rule against the demolition of mosque and nobody requested British government to get back their temple.
Problem suddenly rose to its full vigor only after December 23, 1949, when a mob placed Ram idol inside the mosque.
In Ayodhya there are more than 30 Temples which manifest about Ram's birth place. Hindu scholars identified many places as Ram's birth place and they didn't include Babri Majid among them.
This was the reality, until saffron group diverted the attention of Hindus by such false claims.
Saffron Group discovered that by evoking extreme hatred among Hindus and Muslims, they can capture the opportunity to rule India from Congress. Finally they captured the rule by cheating innocent Hindu citizens who believe that" All the glitters are Gold ".
Dear Hindu Brothers and Sisters!!!
We'll strive to preserve the UNITY.
We'll neglect communal forces, which have vested interest in creating extreme friction to the development of our country.
We'll work hard for the economic development of our country and for its prosperous future.
SOURCE: www.tntj.net
-English Translation Barakath Ali
Regards,
.jpg)
0 comments:
Post a Comment