Is disputed Ayodhya site the exact birthplace of Ram?




By Pramod Kumar, IANS,

New Delhi : Does the 1,500 square yard piece of land where the disputed Babri Masjid once stood support the mansion of Queen Kaushalya, the mother of Hindu god Ram, and is it the exact place of his birth?

According to Justice S.U. Khan, one of the three judges in the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court who gave the Sep 30 Ayodhya verdict, there is a difference between Janamsthan, Janambhoomi and Janamsthal.

Translating the words in English, Justice Khan says 'janam' means 'birth', 'sthan' means 'place', 'bhoomi' means 'land' and 'sthal' means site. "No one has used the word Janamsthal (birth site in English)," points out Justice Khan.

Queen Kaushalya was one of the three favourite queens of Raja Dasharath of Ayodhya, the father of Lord Ram, according to the Ramayana.

The question on the 1,500 sq yard piece of land arose in the course of the hearing of the title suit and was dealt with by Justice Khan in his separate but concurrent judgment with Justice Sudhir Agarwal in the title suit case.

Justice Khan says that each of the counsel who appeared for different Hindu contenders replied in the affirmative when they were asked if they were sure that the 1,500 sq yards, which was in dispute, was the birthplace of Lord Rama.

However, the same counsel were not sure if by Janmasthan or Janmabhoomi they meant that it was the exact site where Kaushalya - the mother of Lord Rama gave birth to him, which by its very nature could be a very, very small area of 5 to 10 square yard only, or it meant the room in which the birth took place or it meant the mansion where the mother of Lord Rama resided, he pointed out.

Justice Khan said that in common parlance, birthplace denotes the village, town or city where one is born. None of the learned counsel could give any specific reply to this query.

Justice Khan further pointed out: "At this juncture it may be noticed again that in the plaint of suit no.5 by the deities no effort has been made to identify, specify and pinpoint 'the birth place'."

The court was told that the position was too well known to need any description. It is also mentioned in the plaint that both the annexed maps clarify the position.

However, the first map is of premises in dispute and the second of the premises in dispute as well as the adjoining land, most of which was barren (parti) and unused.

Raja Dasharath was a king. In olden times there was not much demand on the land.

It is given in several books and gazettes that the fort of Raja Dasharath was quite big. The mother of Lord Ram was one of his favourite queens. Accordingly, it cannot be assumed that she used to live in a 'mansion' constructed only on an area of 1,500 sq yards.

In those times even the houses of medium level people must have been of quite larger area.

It has been mentioned in several books as well as gazettes that for a long time till the first century BC, Ayodhya was completely deserted and was almost a jungle, he pointed out.

It was Raja Vikramaditya in the first century BC, who after great research located several places connected with activities of Lord Ram in Ayodhya and constructed/got constructed 360 temples there, he said.

However, it has also been mentioned that most of those temples collapsed over the centuries and were in ruined condition.

It has also been noticed in various books and gazettes that even before the construction of the mosque in question thousands of pilgrims visited Ayodhya and treated and believed it to be the birthplace of Lord Ram and revered it as such.

These and many other arguments have been used by Justice Khan to conclude that firstly no temple was demolished for constructing the mosque, and secondly, until the mosque was constructed during the period of Babar in the 16th century the premises in dispute was neither treated nor believed to be the birthplace of Lord Ram.

News: 

Comments

Is disputed site exact birth place?

From the above, it can be concluded that the traditional belief that Shri Ram was born here continues from centuries and has not been something thought about overnight.

Second, now now no other Hindu groups will come forward to claim any other place as birthplace of Lord Ram.

Third, when there was a certain tradition and belief since centuries then only this has been made into a case and the same piece of land has been insisted upon. Otherwise what is the need of that particular piece of land if it is my birthplace of any Tom, Dick or Harry's birthplace?

The Muslims need to understand this point.

No one is claiming that Mecca is the birthplace of Lord Ram or for that matter Ahmedabad or Delhi.
It is Ayodhya and only one particular piece of land is which is insisted upon as the birthplace of Lord Ram.

This is common sense logic.

Is disputed Ayodhya site the exact birthplace of Ram?

Does the 1,500 square yard piece of land where the disputed Babri Masjid once stood support the mansion of Queen Kaushalya, the mother of Hindu deity Ram, and is it the exact place of his birth?

According to Justice S.U. Khan, one of the three judges in the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court who gave the Sept. 30 Ayodhya verdict, there is a difference between Janamsthan, Janambhoomi and Janamsthal. Translating the words in English, Justice Khan says 'janam' means 'birth', 'sthan' means 'place', 'bhoomi' means 'land' and 'sthal' means site. "No one has used the word Janamsthal (birth site in English)," points out Justice Khan.

Queen Kaushalya was one of the three favorite queens of Raja Dasharath of Ayodhya, the father of Ram, according to the Ramayana. The question on the 1,500 sq yard piece of land arose in the course of the hearing of the title suit and was dealt with by Justice Khan in his separate but concurrent judgment with Justice Sudhir Agarwal in the title suit case.

Justice Khan says that each of the counsel who appeared for different Hindu contenders replied in the affirmative when they were asked if they were sure that the 1,500 sq yards, which was in dispute, was the birthplace of Rama. However, the same counsel were not sure if by Janmasthan or Janmabhoomi they meant that it was the exact site where Kaushalya -- the mother of Rama gave birth to him, which by its very nature could be a very, very small area of 5 to 10 square yard only, or it meant the room in which the birth took place or it meant the mansion where the mother of Rama resided, he pointed out.

Justice Khan said that in common parlance, birthplace denotes the village, town or city where one is born. None of the learned counsel could give any specific reply to this query. Justice Khan further pointed out: "At this juncture it may be noticed again that in the plaint of suit No. 5 by the deities no effort has been made to identify, specify and pinpoint 'the birth place'."

The court was told that the position was too well known to need any description. It is also mentioned in the plaint that both the annexed maps clarify the position. However, the first map is of premises in dispute and the second of the premises in dispute as well as the adjoining land, most of which was barren (parti) and unused.

Dasharath was a king. In olden times there was not much demand on the land. It is given in several books and gazettes that the fort of Dasharath was quite big. The mother of Ram was one of his favorite queens. Accordingly, it cannot be assumed that she used to live in a 'mansion' constructed only on an area of 1,500 sq yards. In those times even the houses of medium level people must have been of quite larger area.

It has been mentioned in several books as well as gazettes that for a long time till the first century BC, Ayodhya was completely deserted and was almost a jungle, he pointed out. It was Raja Vikramaditya in the first century BC, who after great research located several places connected with activities of Rama in Ayodhya and constructed/got constructed 360 temples there, he said.

However, it has also been mentioned that most of those temples collapsed over the centuries and were in ruined condition.

It has also been noticed in various books and gazettes that even before the construction of the mosque in question thousands of pilgrims visited Ayodhya and treated and believed it to be the birthplace of Ram and revered it as such. These and many other arguments have been used by Justice Khan to conclude that firstly no temple was demolished for constructing the mosque, and secondly, until the mosque was constructed during the period of Babar in the 16th century the premises in dispute was neither treated nor believed to be the birthplace of Rama.

Place is settled can you settle time too?

Ms. Umabharti said it was the happiest day in her life as Babar came only a few years ago while Rama was there more than 9lakh years ago?
Ms. Uma, The modern science puts the current Human Species, to which us all belong, at 1.3 lakh years only, by those calculations Rama was a Homo Erectus.But we do know that Hoo Erectus was not as advanced species that could have given rise to the Maryada Purushottam?
http://www.andaman.org/BOOK/originals/Weber-Toba/ch5_bottleneck/fig5-4.gif
http://www.andaman.org/BOOK/originals/Weber-Toba/ch5_bottleneck/textr5.htm
Should we now get a complete picture from the court in terms of timings too?

Intellectual slavery

@anonymous

I would like to take the wrods of west with a pinch of salt, as they have always provided half truth. That is with regard to invention or fact. Invention is like cfc, asbestos and fact is the WMD in iraq.

If you want to have an intellectual salvery to believe whatever west says, it is your choice but not that of us.

Not "Intellectual" but RELIGIOUS BIGOTED Slavery

"Satwa Gunam" @ 4 October 2010 - 10:45 am. under title: Intellectual slavery.

I believe "satwa" lives in a BUBBLE-WONDERLAND, created by Hindutva - a "RELIGIOUS BIGOTED" Slavery - where a "few" Hindus BLINDLY FALL PREY. This reminds me of a saying:

WE CAN TAKE A HORSE TO A POND - BUT WE CANNOT MAKE IT DRINK.

Whether OR not to drink-water from the pond, is solely dependent on the horse.

Humans fail to understand OR "learn" from animal behaviour (a wisdom) heavenly ordained to every living creature. It has been historically noted THAT FEW ANIMALS, die from NATURAL DISASTERS compared to HUMANS - especially from Earthquakes and Tsunamis; as ANIMALS know before-hand OF AN IMPENDING DISASTER and run for protection, than humans.

An Indian

dear indian

Hi,

I think u must become a lawyer for mplb and they can really try their luck. If is say the law is against you, you talk about facts and if i go further and logically place that facts are also against you, you start blabbering.

For your kind information, hinduism does not have dos and donot, reason being that the human has been given the intellect to decide of his own. Even after gita, krishna gave the option for arjuan to fight or not fight.

Even the upanishads are basically question and answer various subject, probabkly it is too much to expect from very intelligent race like you.

Was Ram born at Ayodhya ?

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.

Is disputed site exact birth place?

The disputed site may or may not be the exact spot.

But it has something to do about faith.

Just like the faith that there was a person called Abraham.

From whom the Abrahamic religions have come up.

What is the proof Abraham had existed? Had the Saudi or Pakistani government given a birth certificate of Abraham to his parents?

Certain things come from tradition and belief.

Honour them.

Is disputed site exact birth place?

There is a certain Faith which has come down from centuries immemorial by word of mouth from father to son. Such Faith which has come through centuries of belief; it is better not to question them for truth or false; if such belief has not harmed anyone.

Take for instance, if the Islamic religion had not come to India.

Then there would have been no problem regarding Shri Ram Janmabhumi. All would have accepted that place as Ram Janmabhumi or Janmasthal. The life of Shri Ram is a life which has influenced even Mahatma Gandhiji. Shri Ramchandraji had made all sorts of sacrifice in his life.

Likewise, it has been claimed that Shri Mohammed had been visited by a God's Angel. Has anyone seen it. No. It is all through word of mouth and accepted. By word of mouth from father to son this has been handed down.

No one questions the Muslim's faith in such miracles and revelations. In Shri Mohammed's case it has been recent history of 1500 years or less. Some historical evidence can or cannot be obtained.

But in the belief that Shri Ram existed not 9lakhs before. But even assuming it to be some 10000/15000 years ago; historical evidence would not have been available to support Shri Ram's existence. Only faith and belief are there.

And what sort of beliefs?

Belief right from North Indian Ayodhya to Shri Ram Setu and Sri Lanka, Chitrakoot, Sabari Hills, etc.
Beliefs that Shri Ram had been to all these places.

Dont question good beliefs which have not harmed anyone over the centuries.

Honour faith and belief which has not been touched by history.

Is disputed site exact birth place?

Hey Friend,

Don't worry time will come.You will see what you have not saw.Just wait.Time is near by which reply all your question regarding belief and faith.

Thanks

Is BIRTHPLACE important - or DEATHPLACE ?

Reading all comments, articles, claims, and counter-claims i.r.o. this MAD TAMASHA created by Hindutva, Politicians, Mad-men, God-men, and "overall" hyped by media - one fails to question:

Is BIRTH-PLACE important, auspicious, sentimental ((OR)) the "DEATH-PLACE" ???

As I know, every famous personality's DEATH PLACE is important. I don't need to mention the names, tombs, resting-place(s) of famous personalities in history.

Birth-place is insignificant - as the person born at that place DID NOT DO any SIGNIFICANT / WORTHWHILE thing, which needs to be remembered from his / her birth-place

Hindutva has always played, peddling SUCCESSFUL "inverted logic" - as "blind-followers" succumb ((OR easily fall prey)) to INVERTED LOGIC !!! Although we have produced Engineers, Scientists, Doctors, Mathematicians, Nobel-Prize winners - and even launched OUR OWN indigeneous SPACE SATELLITE, we FAIL to question INVERTED LOGIC.

An Indian

Logica vs. belief

@indian

It is a sad comedy for me to see a muslim talking about logic. See your back yard and you will see the influence of blind belief to the teaching of 700 ad to show light for 20th century. Probably u might have some logic for the following :

http://secular-hindu.sulekha.com/blog/post/2010/06/saudi-clerics-advocat...

Is RAM really Born in the world ?????

So many Hindus said on TV channles and in there books also that RAMAYAN is a Story and RAM is the Cherector of that story. after the years passed he become a LORD as just like we have so many gods and goddesses whoes name are not heard before 20 years but after releising films in the name of any God or Goddeses it becames the spritual persons for some. and from starting one now we heard there is 33 crores Devta or Bhagwans and counting is still on. So please stop it. and think whetere RAM was ever born or not.???

nope

Ayodhya is not the exact birthplace 9of lord rama maryada purushottam. he was born in makkah al mukarramah in mamlaka al arabia as saudia. Now, what next? please give me piece of land to build temple there.