Rama Setu -2

Bodhi · 05-07-2008, 10:34 AM

On Day 2 of the final hearing, it is almost clear which side do the Honorable Justices keep their anchors.

QUOTEDay 2 of the Finale: Tussle between the Bench and Setu Protection advocates

On the second day of hearing arguments in the batch of petitions filed against the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project, Senior advocate K Parasaran, appearing for Hindu Munani, argued how there was a need to adopt a balanced approach between the two facets of public interests â religious belief and developmental projects. (Express)

Earlier during the day, senior advocate and former Attorney General of India Soli Sorbajee appearing before the Bench, led by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, said the structure had acquired a special significance amongst Hindus and any such action that results in impairment or even partial destruction of structure would amount to violation of the fundamental rights of the citizens guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution (right to freedom of religion).

âReligious feelings of the people are to be respected and not offended. It is the belief of Hindus that Ramar Sethu was constructed by Lord Rama and his followers who crossed the bridge to Lanka and retrieved Sita from the clutches of the demon Ravan. That indeed is the essential theme of the Ramayana, which is an article of faith with the Hindus.â

Mr. Sorabjee, appearing for S. Kalyanaraman in the Ramar Sethu case, said: âThe issue before the court is not whether this belief can be historically or scientifically established. The court cannot sit in judgment on that belief. The courtâs role is to determine whether this belief is genuinely or conscientiously held over a period of time by Hindus and if that be so it falls within the ambit of the freedom of religion guaranteed by Article 25.â

If worship and rituals were performed over a long period, these would get constitutional protection and the court could not interfere with it, he said.

Intervening, Justice R.V. Raveendran said: âHere it is not a question of rituals or worship. This principle canât be extended to something which is under water. The length, width and size will matter. They [government] are not demolishing Ramar Sethu. They are saying only 300 metres of it would be cut. Will this change or affect the sanctity of the entire structure? Even trees are worshipped in this country. What is the philosophy and principle you are trying to say?â

Mr. Sorabjee said: âDonât take extreme positions. We are not concerned with hill, mountain or lake. For over 1,500 years Ramar Sethu is in the minds of the people. Even the committee of eminent persons had said that this belief is deeply ingrained in the minds of the people. It is the belief of the country that matters. One has to see the circumstances and threat in the minds of those who hold that belief. Any object, however, trivial it may be, if it is connected with peopleâs religious belief it has to be protected.â

âRamar Sethu has acquired a special significance amongst the Hindus. Consequently, any state action which results in impairment or even partial destruction of Ramar Sethu and leads to extinction or diminution of the right to worship at Ramar Sethu as at present is per se violative of the guarantee of freedom of religion.â

Justice Raveendran of The Bench questioned Sorbajee: âHindus worship Bhoomata (Earth goddess)... the entire Govardhan hill near Mathura is worshiped. Can you say that no structure can be constructed there?â

âAs people consider even earth as mother and worship it; does it mean there should be no construction on it? They even worship the Himalayas, does that mean no stone can be removed from there?â asked the bench.
To which, the former Attorney General replied, that in such cases, the guiding factor would be the religious belief of the community and it could not be historically or scientifically established.

After the Bench almost pushed him to a corner by citing examples of dams built on rivers like Ganga and Narmada, which too are worshiped, the senior advocate replied, âWe are not concerned with the outlandish example of mountains, rivers, trees. We are concerned with Rama Setu,â He stressed that âthe courtâs role is to determine whether aforesaid belief is genuinely or conscientiously held over a period of time by Hindus, and if that be so, it falls within the ambit of freedom of religion guaranteed by Article 25â.

âHow will it make a difference if 300 metres of the Ram Setu is cut (to make the passage for the ships)?â Justice Raveendran asked.

Major reply to the poser of the bench came from senior counsel C.S. Vaidyanathan, who said: âIt will destroy the fundamental character of the bridge. A bridge is a bridge because it joins two land masses. If a part of this is destroyed, it will no longer be a bridge.â

To make himself clear, he cited the example of judicial independence.

âThe court decides all cases on its merit. If it is provided that courts will decide 99.99 percent of cases on its merit but it will decide the remaining cases as per the government directions, will there be any judicial independence left?â Vaidyanathan asked.

Soli Sorabjee added that, unless found mitigating with public order or morality, a religious belief cannot even be subjected to any restriction for the sake of âpublic interestâ as the constitutional freedom of speech and expression is subjective.

Sorabjee pointed out to the bench that freedom of religion also implies freedom to practice various rites and rituals associated with it and state has no authority to interfere with or ban those practices.

âIt cannot be seriously questioned that it is the genuine and conscientious religious belief of the Hindus that the Ram Setu was constructed by Lord Ram and his followers, who crossed over the bridge to Sri Lanka and rescued Sita from the clutches of demon king Ravan. That indeed is the essential theme of the Ramayana, which is an article of faith for Hindus,â he added.

âThe issue before this court is not whether this belief can be historically or scientifically established. The court cannot sit in judgement over beliefs.

âThe courtâs role is to determine if the belief about the Ram Setu is conscientiously held over a period of time by Hindus and, if that be so, it falls within the ambit of the freedom of religion guaranteed by Article 25,â he added.

Pointing out that the Ram Setu is worshipped by Hindus at Rameshwaram, Sorabjee said: âAny state action, which results in impairment or even partial destruction of the Ram Setu, would lead to extinction or diminution of their right to worship the Ram Setu and it would violate their constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion,â said Sorabjee, summing up his argument.

Senior counsel C.S. Vaidyanathan, who along with K. Parasaran is appearing for Hindu Munnai leader Rama Gopalan, dwelt on an alternative alignment for carrying out the Sethusamudram project. âIt is the faith of Hindus that a bridge was constructed by Lord Rama. By destroying Ramar Sethu, the fundamental character of the bridge will be lost and it will no longer be called a bridge. In the case of a mountain or a river, even if something is done, it will not change its character. But if you demolish Sethu, it will cease to be a bridge.â

The project could be implemented by considering alignment 4 and the cost would also be cheaper than alignment 6 but this aspect was not at all considered (The Centre says there is no alternative to the existing alignment 6.)

As the court resumes its hearing Wednesday, it would be the turn of former central minister and Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy to present his argument in favour of protecting the Ram Setu. Mr. Vaidyanathan will also continue his arguments on Wednesday.

Bodhi · (This post was last modified: 05-07-2008, 11:13 PM by Bodhi.)

QUOTEDay3: Swamy Stuns The Court:Â We Don't Go To Sun To Worship It

Wednesday 07th of May 2008
The Supreme Court Wednesday had to contend with a blunt answer to its poser as to who goes to the Rama Sethu in the sea to worship it. 'We all worship the sun. But we don't go to the sun to worship it,' said former union minister Subramanian Swamy.

Speaking before the bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Swamy passionately opposed the proposed construction of a shorter navigational sea route around the Indian peninsula if it involved the destruction of the Rama Sethu or Adam's Bridge.

The bench, which also included Justice R.V. Raveendran and Justice J.M. Panchal, wanted to know last week if anyone takes to the sea to reach the Rama Sethu to worship it if it indeed had religious value.

The Janata Party president argued against the proposed breaching of the Rama Sethu due to dredging and its fallout on economy, environment and security besides of course the religious sensibilities of Hindus.

He narrated a series of five 'strange coincidences' that occurred after a Dutch dredging machine deployed to breach the Rama Sethu broke down.

When a crane was pressed into service to retrieve the broken arms of the dredging machine from the sea, that too broke down, said Swamy.

The authorities then tried to conduct the retrieving operation by pressing into service another crane with the name of Hindu god Hanuman written over it. 'But that too did not work.'

After that the authorities summoned a Russian expert for the dredging operation but he ended up breaking both his legs, said Swamy.

And much to the amusement of the bench, he added: 'Subsequently, a formal worship was organised. But a Tamil Nadu legislator who performed the worship died of heart attack the next day.'

To this, the bench asked Swamy: 'What do you expect from us?'

Swamy responded: 'My Lord, please hold that the issue of Rama Sethu involves the religious faith and belief. Scrap the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project if the government is unable or unwilling to alter the alignment of the proposed channel and ensure that the bridge is not breached.'

The former minister took pain to explain that he was not against a shorter navigational sea route per se. 'Anything that touches the Rama Sethu, I am against it.'

When Swamy pointed out that ship passengers could dump beef while passing through the Rama Sethu, Justice Raveendran censured him, saying: 'You have already put a very strong fundamental argument. You are only devaluing that by your secondary one.'

Earlier, Swamy said that section 295 of the Indian Penal Code provided for a jail term of two years on conviction to anyone defiles or damages a place of worship.

He asserted that under the same section no authority can sanction a project which involves damage or defilement of a place of worship.

And to prove that the Rama Sethu had religious value to Hindus, Swamy cited government documents that refer to the mythological bridge between India and Sri Lanka.

Among the government documents that Swamy quoted included a book tabled in parliament and released by the Prime Minister's Office.

He also cited a Tamil Nadu government advertisements on trains that say that the waters off Rameshwaram island 'still carry the blessings of Lord Rama's Lotus feet because this is where from His monkey army crossed over to Sri Lanka to rescue Sita'.

http://newspostindia.com/report-53127

Bodhi · 05-08-2008, 07:47 PM

Day 4, and at Last (for now), Baalu-Sonia-Ambika Bite Dust

20 mins back:

QUOTENew Delhi, May 8 (PTI) The Sethusamudram project controversy today took a new turn with Supreme Court asking the Centre to consider holding archaeological survey to ascertain whether "Rama Setu" can be declared 'ancient monument' and possibility explored for pushing the venture through other alignments.
"There is a specific direction of the Madras High Court that Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) should carry investigations whether Rama Setu is an ancient monument or not," a Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan said.

The Bench said that Janata Party President Subramanium Swamy and senior advocate C S Vaidyanathan, while opposing the demolition of "Rama Setu", have put "serious" arguments for conducting ASI probe and for carrying the project through other alignments.

"You also explore the possibility of carrying out the project through any other channels (alignments)," the Bench, also comprising Justices R V Raveendran and J M Panchal, said.

The Bench said in the interregnum when the matter will be taken for further hearing on July 22, the Centre can consider these two aspects as directed by the High Court on June 19 last year.

Senior advocate Fali S Nariman, who is appearing for the Centre to defend the controversial project, responded positively to the court's view.

Swamy, Vaidyanathan and others while putting arguments against the demolition of the "Rama Setu", have contended that there was a possibility of going ahead with the project through alternative alignments which will be economically more viable and cause no damage to environment besides protecting the religious faith of Hindus who considers the structure as sacred.

MORE PTI RKS BKM 05081903 DEL

http://www.ptinews.com/pti/ptisite.nsf/&#0...60?OpenDocument

dhu · 05-16-2008, 12:36 PM

Subramaniam Swamy's Janataparty website seems to have gone off line and password protected. The site had a cache of articles exposing madame (archived here)

05-16-2008, 09:43 PM

QUOTE(dhu @ May 16 2008, 03:06 AM)Subramaniam Swamy's Janataparty website seems to have gone off line and password protected.Â The site had a cache of articles exposing madame (archived here)
[right][snapback]81681[/snapback][/right]


I would rather trust a cat with a bowl of milk than Subramaniam Swamy on any issue. He pretty much gets sold to the highest bidder everytime and that he is leading the Setu issue should scare the pants of every hindu who wants the setu saved. Probably hindujagruti knows this and that is why they archived the janataparty website before it went on auction!

He opposed Jayalalitha regime (1991-1996) and was instumental in getting disproportionate assets case and the tansi case put on Jaya. He even won an election with DMK-TMC. By 1999 he was back with Jaya. Here is his justification for "turning his coat"....

My Webpage

QUOTEJayalalitha had approached me three years ago when she was in jail, saying she did not want to fight with me anymore and she would like my help in her fight against (Tamil Nadu chief minister and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam president) M Karunanidhi. I have nothing personal against anybody, but I told her that I would not withdraw the cases that I had filed against her. And I agreed to work with her if she agreed to be a different personÂ <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /> .

Anyhow... be happy till Swamy is on anti-sonia side. All he needs to switch sides is for sonia to tell him that she will be a different person here on!!!! <!--emo& Tongue

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' />

Seriously... it is pretty pathetic that we only have someone like him leading this movement.

05-16-2008, 09:52 PM

S.Swamy is just a ....... One should use him till he serves your cause. After that forget about him like a bad dream.
When he was visiting my town in US, I asked him about Seer case and anti-Hindu agenda of Sonia government, his reaction was as if I have asked him very wrong question, he was not interested at all in Hindu cause. But when he returned back, like a bunny he is on every Hindu cause.

Bodhi · 05-20-2008, 01:03 PM

Ram existed, so did temple - A Book Review by Sandhya Jain

Pioneer 18 May 2008

Rama, His historicity, mandir and setu: Evidence of Literature, Archaeology and other Sciences
B.B. Lal
Aryan Books International, 2008, pp. 99; Price: Rs. 190.

Archaeology, long given the step-sisterly treatment by Marxist historians, now finds itself at the high table of history, as it alone can deliver a credible verdict on whether the Ram Setu shows evidence of human intervention in the hoary past. The Supreme Court's direction to the Central Government in this regard is welcome to the extent that the UPA is made to depute only reputed archaeologists for this task, and not the type of academics accredited to the Babri Masjid Action Committee.

The Archaeological Survey of India has been without a proper head since the retirement of late M.C. Joshi over a decade ago. Reports delivered under the headship of an IAS officer will not have credibility; nor will a committee that does not include the iconic Prof. B.B. Lal and Dr. K.N. Dikshit, who was closely associated with the excavations of the Ramayana sites. Prof. Lal's timely book addresses hard facts relating to Ram as a historical figure; the Janmabhoomi temple; and the Rama Setu. The production values are high, and Prof. Lal generously waived his royalty to bring the work within the reach of the ordinary citizen.

B.B. Lal began exploring western Uttar Pradesh as Superintending Archaeologist, Excavations, ASI, and found the distinctive Painted Grey Ware pottery at the lowest levels, far below material known to belong to the 6th-5th century BCE. As many sites were associated with the Mahabharata, he excavated Hastinapur, Meerut district, and found that a sizeable portion of the PGW settlement was washed away by a heavy flood. This exactly matched the Mahabharata: 'after the washing away of the site of Hastinapur by the Ganga, (the then ruler) Nichaksu will abandon it and move to Kausambi.' Sure enough, the lowest levels at Kausambi begin with the same kind of material culture found at Hastinapur at the time of the flood!

Prof. Lal conceived the idea of the 'Archaeology of the Ramayana Sites,' but could actually take it up only after voluntary retirement from ASI in 1972, focusing on five major sites. At Ayodhya, human settlement began with a phase associated with the distinctive Northern Black Polished Ware (NBPW) pottery. The findings included iron and copper tools that could be used for domestic chores, agriculture, even warfare. Gradually, weights of fine-grained stones appeared, along with coinage. The NBPW-period weights were cylindrical, those in Harappa cubical. The coins were earliest in the country, silver or copper, with punch marks and no inscriptions. The structures were mud or mud bricks; and later kiln-fired bricks. Writing began in the NBPW period, and settlements continued uninterrupted through the Sunga, Kushan and Gupta periods.

In the suburb Ranopali, a stone inscription datable 1st century BCE mentions the construction of a ketana (shrine?) by Dhanadeva, king of Kosala, sixth from Pushyamitra, senapati. Pushyamitra killed the last Mauryan king, Brihadratha, and seized the throne; thus Ayodhya was the capital of the Kosala kingdom even in the early CE. Though deserted after the Gupta period, Hanumangarhi and Janmabhoomi were reoccupied in the 11th-12th centuries. In the uppermost levels of a trench just south of the Babri Masjid, a series of brick-cum-stone bases were discovered, over which there evidently once stood stone pillars. Affixed to the piers of the Masjid were stone pillars bearing Hindu motifs and sculptures. (In 2002-03, under apex court mandated digging of the Babri area itself, the existence of a Hindu temple below the structure was vindicated).

Sringaverapura is a massive mound on left bank of Ganga in Allahabad district, heavily eroded by the river, but still offering remains of occupational strata. It is earlier than Ayodhya with Ochre Colour Ware (OCP) pottery in the lowest levels; also found were harpoons, antennae swords, and anthropomorphic figures, known collectively as 'Copper Hoards.' This cultural complex is datable circa 2000 BCE to mid-2000 BCE. But OCP-occupation was short-lived, and after a break in occupation, black-slipped and black-and-red wares were followed by NBPW. This period yields the same material culture as corresponding strata at Ayodhya, and was succeeded by Sunga, Kushan and Gupta periods. After a break, the site was reoccupied in the 12th century CE, as indicated by numerous coins of the illustrious Gahadavala ruler, Govinda Chandra.

The flat land associated in public memory with Bharadvaj Ashram revealed kiln-fired bricks, pottery, terracotta figurines, and inscribed seals of Gupta era. There were no structures or regular occupational floors below, but lumps of clay with reed impressions, showing sporadic occupation with wattle-and-daub huts, consistent with an ashram. NBPW was found at Chitrakuta and Nandigram.

It is significant that Bharadvaj Ashram did not exist when Valmiki composed the epic, between 3rd century BCE and 3rd century CE, though other sites associated with the Ramayana were occupied at that time. Valmiki's inclusion of the Ashram at the site popularly associated with it suggests it did exist, and was probably recorded in a pre-existing ballad which formed the kernel of his narrative. There is evidence that the Ganga flowed past the ashram, but the river has since been diverted by a bund.

Carbon-14 dating of the NBPW strata from Ayodhya's upper levels gave a date-range from 6th to 3rd centuries BCE. But after excavations of the lower levels in Janmabhoomi area in 2002-03, the Birbal Sahni Institute of Palaeobotany, Lucknow, gave a date-range of 970-810 BCE to 1980-1320 BCE. These excavations were a fallout of the 6 December 1992 demolition, which revealed much archaeological material from the walls of the Masjid, including three inscriptions. The largest, in chaste Nagari script of the 11th-12th century, clearly states that a beautiful temple of Vishnu-Hari was constructed in the city of Ayodhya, Saketamandala, by Meghasuta, vassal of Govinda Chandra. Lal dismisses the allegation that the slab was brought from elsewhere and sneaked into the Masjid at the time of demolition as ferrying so much material to Ayodhya would require many trucks, and would have been detected by the print and electronic media and security personnel present in hordes there.

The book is such a mine of information that it is impossible to do it justice in a brief review. Lal concludes with a scientific examination of the landmass from Dhanushkodi on the Tamil Nadu shore to Talaimannar in Sri Lanka, noting the literary and other references to the Setu. He concludes that after the end of the last Glacial Period 10,000 years ago, the sea levels rose worldwide by a conservative estimate of 2 metres per 1000 years. Thus, around 1000 BCE the sea level was possibly 6 metres below current levels, which matches the period ascribable to Rama. This means the land-mass from Dhanushkodi to Talaimannar would be exposed sandbanks, whose gaps could be filled with shoals and evened to facilitate the march of an army. It does not require an engineering degree at all.

Bodhi · (This post was last modified: 05-24-2008, 11:06 PM by Bodhi.)

On Hindu Theatrics, bhavabhUti and rAma setu

From astronomy to legal system, music to statecraft, linguistics to mathematics, medicine to architecture, metaphysics to politics, from the art of war to the science of love: apparently not much escaped the ancient Hindus without being committed into the human knowledge in form of the most profound and erudite thesis upon the subject. The world of theatrics and dramatics was no exception. Ancient Hindus evolved a most intricate and detailed theory about performing arts, and centuries before the rest of the world would have any inkling to the subject, they wrote down a complete philosophy of dramatics.

A detailed handbook of drama called nATya shAstra was brought forth by bharatamuni at some ancient point in time, exact dating of which is not known with certainty, but speculated by many to be in the range of 5th century before the CE to 3rd century after.[1] And even then, it appears to have been built upon the foundation of even earlier works.[2] This elaborate thesis comprising of over six-thousand shloka-s spanning over thirty-seven (or thirty-six [3]) chapters, covers every aspect of theatrics in its finest details â from the nature of the script and costumes to the language of the dialogs, the kind of music to be played and the lyrics, the qualities of and the do-s and donât-s for the actors, guidelines for the directors, recommendations on the shape and size of the stage and the auditorium, duration of the play, recommended number of acts in a play, when should the play be performedâ¦ and a lot more.

Dramatics was obviously an important part of life in Hindu society not only for its entertainment value, but also as a major instrument of public education and means of social discourse for the entire society. bharatamuni explains in nATya shAstra, that the very purpose for which drama was invented (or descended from bramhA as he says) was public education, and especially to provide the fourth varNa and women access to learning and knowledge. [4] (this would of course fly in the face of those mlechCha Indologists and their Indian protÃ©gÃ©s, who insist that performance of drama in Hindu society was limited to the exclusive elite audiences with knowledge of saMskR^ita. [5])

Springing from the solid bedrock of this profound theory of theatrics, countless plays were produced and enacted in the public theaters of India over centuries, and demand of drama by the society was met with nourishing and plentiful supply from a galaxy of several brilliant play-writersâ¦ shUdraka, danDI, kAlidAsa, bhAsa, harSha, bhavabhUtiâ¦ to name a few.

Let us turn to bhavabhUti, who occupies a unique place in the world of the Hindu drama, even though the number of plays written by him is miniscule compared to the works of other literati of his time. Despite being small in volume, bhavabhUtiâs plays stand out for a remarkable finesse of language; and indeed as some of the best examples of the eloquence in the spoken-saMskR^ita, so much so that there is probably no writer who came up to bhavabhUti in his wonderful command of saMskR^ita, its fluency and elevation of diction. His plays also stand out for representing a careful balance of all the rasa-s, including interestingly his liking for the genre of bhayankara one - horror â which is otherwise generally ignored by the other dramatists. bhavabhUti followed the established framework and norms set forth by the nATya-shAstra of bharatamuni, even as he experimented with many a novel techniques of language and alaMkAra-s.

He was born in the 7th century vidarbha, in house of nIlakaNTha udumbara, a taittirIya kAshyapa brAhmaNa â to these details he himself attests. His given name was shrIkanTha, and he went on to became a genius play-writer as a protÃ©gÃ© of the king yashovarman who ruled from kannauj between CE 725 and 752.

Now, as we mentioned earlier, the very philosophy of Hindu nATya was to not only to provide a cheerful and jolly entertainment to public on occasions but also depict rich ethical values and learning. To achieve this, many dramatists built their themes upon the prevailing social traditions and popular tales, with which audiences were already familiar, drawing often from mahAbhArata, purANa-s, rAmAyaNa, and particularly from the latter.

bhavabhUti was no exception. bhavabhUti, like kAlidAsa before him, chose to render in drama the popular saga of rAmayaNa. Of the three known works of bhavabhUti, mAlatI-mAdhava is a fictitious romantic love story mired in royal intrigues, while the remaining two - uttara-rAma-charita (âthe story of rAmaâs later lifeâ) and mahAvIra-charita (âthe story of the highly courageous oneâ) - are the dramatic narratives of the life of rAma.

This also reflects how popular the saga of rAmAyaNa must have been, back in bhavabhUtiâs time as much as earlier during the time of vAlmIki, or as popular it is amid the Hindus of present time too. On the popularity of the saga of rAmAyaNa, swAmI vivekAnanda had aptly commented: âRama, the ancient idol of the heroic ages, the embodiment of truth, of morality, the ideal son, the ideal husband, the ideal father, and above all, the ideal kingâ¦ and what to speak of Sita? All our mythology may vanish, even our Vedas may depart, and our Sanskrit language may vanish for ever, but so long as there will be five Hindus living here, even if only speaking the most vulgar patois, there will be the story of Sita present.â [6] No surprise then, that even the most ultra-secular and hindu-phobic media channels donât hesitate to ride on the popularity of rAmAyaNa to soar their TRPs. [7]

bhavabhUtiâs dramatic narratives of rAmaâs life, while not straying too far from the main storyline of vAlmIki rAmAyaNa, still make clever innovations of format, to make the script suitable for the requirements of theatrics and an effective staging before audiences.

One good example of this is how bhavabhUti presents the episode of setu-bandhana in his play mahAvIra-charita. Unlike vAlmIki who could afford to describe that complex tale in a direct narration, bhavabhUti is obviously concerned more about the effective staging of the scene in a theater. And the original format, as in vAlmikiâs narration, would make it very challenging for the play-director to present that scene before audiences. Imagine the trouble to the director in depicting a scene involving a large number of actors in vAnaraâs role carrying large rocks throwing into a thundering oceanâ¦ and the bridge progressively coming aboutâ¦ and army then crossing over, and so on.

Therefore, to the directors rescue, bhavabhUti makes use of a clever literary work-around. He presents the story of setu construction to the audiences not directly, but through a dialog between rAvaNa and his noble wife mandodarI. In this episode which occurs in the sixth act of mahAvIra-charita, mandodarI would narrate the tale of setu-construction to her husband.

Let us now turn to how he presents the script of this scene, and may be, enjoy with our imagination how more than a millennium back this scene would have been enjoyed the then audiences.

~.~
(Picture a stage with a background depicting a palace-balcony overseeing the lush gardens, and rAvaNa standing in the center, apparently lost in thoughts of how to win over the sItAâs heart.)

Entry of mandodarI with a maid.

Maid (speaking in prAkR^ita): Here, Queen, here is the silver staircase for you to climb.

Mandodari (climbing the stairs while looking at rAvaNa, addressing audiences in prAkR^ita):
Why! Isnât that our Ten-Headed Emperor himself! (then looking more directly at him as she reaches closer - ) Alas! Why does he gaze towards ashoka vATikA!! (now with sorrow in her voice - ) Why! Even during the times of invasions by enemy, does Emperor remain indifferent like this? (finally reaching near rAvaNa, addresses him - ) Victory to the Ten-Headed Emperor! jedu jedu mahArA.a dasakandharo!!

rAvaNa (as if fixing his posture): Why! mandodarI? (and sits down to the left)

mandodari (also sits down): mahArAj, what did you decide?

rAvaNa: about what?

mandodari: About the enemy armyâs invasion.

rAvaNa (with sarcastic surprise): Why! Enemy! enemyâs army!! Invasion by enemyâs army!!! All the strange stuff you tell me today devi!

(changes tone for this ode: - )
That me â who in battlefield could hold two enraged elephants with two hands â
and then with the other four, block the dikpatI-s coming from all the four directions â
Mighty blows of indraâs vajra etc. were only good enough to leave slight bruises upon the skin of whose chest â
that me â now has got some enemy! Surely, an amusing thing I hear today!
(back to normal tone) so be it! Let us hear that too devi, say, who is that?

mandodarI: Followed by all the vAnara-s, marching ahead of sugrIva, matched in step by his younger brother, that son of dasharatha â rAma â so I hear.

RavaNa: a mendicant with a younger brother, devi!! So, what to speak of him! he would have gone away by now.

mandodari: Emperor! Better to be careful from this group. and there is more -
Encamping on the sea coast, rAma invoked sea-God. When he did not turn up â then â
(falling back to saMskR^ita, sings this ode -)
He then deployed certain prayoga-s of weapons, by which, in less than half a moment -
Entire water started revolving in a vortex, and also turned as red as blood -
The alligators began to fall unconscious, and the shells of tortoises started rupturing-
All creatures indeed of the ocean became unconscious, conch shells started exploding with thundering sounds.

rAvaNa (indignantly): So what?

mandodari (back to prAkR^ita): Emperor! After that, hounded by the arrows of rAma, Sea-God came forth from the waters, and falling to the shelter of rAmaâs feet, told Him the path of how to cross over the ocean. And I hear further, that the Courageous One has even got that path constructed.

rAvaNa (quipping sarcastically): Very well! Let us then also hear devi, how is that path constructed!!

mandodari: Emperor! They are constructing a bridge by using the mountains brought by thousands of vAnara-s.

rAvaNa: devi, you have been conned by someone! This ocean knows no limits. The mountains found in the entire continent of jambU, and even those of all other continents too, would surely not be able to fill even a part of this ocean!!

Besides, by calling him brave and courageous you make a misjudgment about our own courage! Careless about the streams of blood flowing from the veins of our severed heads - nay! - smiling with the eyes filled with the tears of joy â had we performed our offering of our heads at the feet of Lord shiva. He, who pleased with us had accepted such our offering, that Lord Shiva himself is witness to our courage!!!â

mandodari: Emperor! Please do not dismiss this without paying a serious thought. This construction of setu is a unique event! By the earlier puNya-s of a certain vAnara, it seems even the stones are floating at the surface of the water!!!

rAvaNa (shaking his head in denial): To this stupidity of women - that stones can float over water â what can be said!!! What more to say devi than this:

(sings this ode â )
about our knowledge of scriptures, knows bhamhA himself, the propagator of vedA-s,
about our command, knows indra himself, the commander of Gods,
about our strength, knows vajra, and about our glory the whole world,
about our power knows mount kailAsha; and what is more â
about our courage knows none other than shiva Himself â
whose holy feet we had lavishly washed with our own blood!

(thundering sounds from the background)

mandodari: Emperor! Protection! Protection! (acts to be terrified, looks at him in fear)

rAvaNa: devi! Fear is baseless.

===(In the background, chorus makes more clear noises this time that inform the audience that rAma-lakshamaNa with sugrIvaâs army have arrived at the gates of laMkA.)===

As the curtains would fall in a few more dialogs and the scene comes to an end, imagine now a vidUShaka probably appearing in front of the crowds to entertain them with his antics, amid the applause (or booing) from the audience. Behind the curtains the manager and his staff would get busy to hurriedly re-arrange the stage for the next scene - which happens to be a scene of a council meeting in the court of rAvaNa. That discussion should be of good interest to war-historians, since it provides many hints about how garrison was managed in event of a siege in near-abouts of 7-8th century India. The scene also provides many a details about prevailing social customs and etiquettes - sugrIva is mentioned walking behind rAma, while lakshamaNa is mentioned walking by his side; mandodarIâs extremely respectful conduct of an argument without really being argumentative with rAvaNa, and so on.

One would also easily notice that the characters of mandodarI and the maid are speaking in prAkR^ita, while rAvaNa responds in saMskR^ita. Therefore, the bilingual dialog is a significant hint that not only the characters but also audiences understand both the languages. Also notice, how mandodarI falls back to saMskR^ita at times, particularly to sing the odes, and then such transitions between the two tongues are sudden yet perfectly natural.

To understand this intriguing yet interesting usage of saMskR^ita-prAkR^ita bi-lingual dialog, we need not go any farther than nATya shAstra itself, in which bharatamuni spends one complete chapter upon the nature of language to be used in the dialogs. In the seventeenth chapter known as bhAShA-lakshaNaM, he describes in intricate details how prAkR^ita must be utilized along with saMskR^ita in the drama. Here in fact, he begins by describing the details of prAkR^ita tongue, and explains the forms of root words and etymology by examples. It is here, that he lays down the thumb-rule about choice of tongues for different characters.

By default, saMskR^ita is to be used for higher and medium types of characters, whereas minor characters should speak prAkR^ita. However, even for the higher and medium ones, if a character is illiterate, âintoxicated by prosperityâ, âdepraved in mind with povertyâ, he should be assigned dialogs in prAkR^ita. Likewise, for those in disguise, jaina ascetics, children, persons possessed by evil spirits, ladies, men of feminine qualities, low-lives, intoxicated ones â for these the language should be prAkR^ita. saMskRita on the other hand is appropriate for sannyAsI-s, bauddha monks, and brAhmaNa-s of ukSha and shrotriya varieties. [8]

Therefore, bhavabhUti is following this edict of nATya shAstra, when he makes mandodarI speak in prAkR^ita. But then why does he make her switch occasionally to saMskR^ita as well?

The answer is, he does so to follow another finer edict of nATya shAstra. That is explained explicitly by bharata muni, that the queens, courtesans and female artistes should speak in devavANI depending upon the situation, particularly when describing something of a technical subject matter such as war, politics, diplomacy, or astrology etc. So, we know why mandodarI switched occasionally to saMskR^ita, when talking to rAvaNa about enemyâs invasion.

To conclude our note, let us finally turn again to rAma setu which is mentioned at one more place by bhavabhUti in mahAvIra-charita. In the seventh act, this scene is about rAma, sItAdevI and lakshamaNa returning back to ayodhyA from laMkA in the puShpaka vimAna. sItAdevI gets the aerial view of rAma setu and in her amazement, she inquires her brother-in-law about it as follows:

à¤¸à¥à¤¤à¤¾ : à¤à¥ à¤à¤®à¥à¤¹à¤¾à¤£à¤ à¤à¥à¤à¥à¤ à¤¸à¤¸à¥à¤°à¥à¤¹à¤¿à¤ à¤à¤¿à¤¦à¤¨à¤¿à¤®à¥à¤®à¤¾à¤£à¥ à¤¤à¥à¤¤à¤¿ à¤µà¥à¤¡à¥à¤¢à¤ªà¤°à¤à¤ªà¤°à¤¾à¤ à¤¸à¥à¤£à¥à¤à¤¦à¥à¥¤ à¤à¤¦à¤¸à¥à¤¯ à¤®à¤à¥à¤à¥à¤µà¤¿ à¤à¤¿à¤ à¤à¤¦à¤ à¤¦à¥à¤°à¤ªà¥à¤ªà¤¸à¤¾à¤°à¤¿à¤¦à¤ à¤§à¤µà¤²à¤à¤¸à¥à¤à¤ à¤µà¤¿à¤ à¤à¤¹à¤¿à¤£à¤µà¤¤à¤¿à¤£à¤à¥à¤à¤£à¥à¤£à¤¾à¤¸à¥ à¤à¥à¤®à¤¿à¤¸à¥ à¤¦à¥à¤¸à¤à¥¤
sItA (in prAkR^ita): I have been hearing that ancient tradition, that this massive flood in ocean came into existence by efforts of our Great-Grand Fathers-in-law. [9] Now, even in the heart of that ocean, what is that thing, which is shining as if a bright strip of cloth spread over greenery?

à¤²à¤à¥à¤·à¤®à¤£à¤ : à¤¦à¥à¤µà¤¿!
à¤¸à¥à¤¤à¥à¤¸à¤¾à¤¹à¤ à¤§à¥à¤¤à¤¶à¤¾à¤¸à¤¨à¥à¤ à¤¸à¤à¥à¤¤à¥à¤à¥à¤µà¥à¤à¥à¤·à¥à¤à¤¸à¤¾à¤ à¤¨à¤¾à¤¯à¤à¥à¤
à¤¦à¤¿à¤à¥à¤ªà¤°à¥à¤¯à¤à¤¤à¤§à¤°à¤¾à¤§à¤°à¥à¤¨à¥à¤¦à¥à¤°à¤¶à¤¿à¤à¤°à¤¾à¤£à¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤¨à¤¾à¤¯à¥à¤¯ à¤¨à¤¿à¤°à¥à¤®à¤¾à¤ªà¤¿à¤¤à¤à¥¤
à¤à¤²à¥à¤ªà¤¾à¤à¤¤à¤¾à¤µà¤§à¤¿à¤µà¤¨à¥à¤¦à¤¨à¥à¤¯à¤®à¤¹à¤¿à¤®à¤¾ à¤²à¥à¤à¤¸à¥à¤¯ à¤¸à¥à¤¤à¥à¤°à¥à¤¨à¤µà¤
à¤à¥à¤°à¥à¤¤à¤¿à¤¸à¥à¤¤à¤®à¥à¤ à¤à¤µà¤¾à¤¯à¤®à¤¾à¤°à¥à¤¯à¤à¤°à¤¿à¤¤à¤¸à¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤®à¥à¤à¥à¤¨à¤¿à¤§à¥ à¤²à¤à¥à¤·à¥à¤¯à¤¤à¥ à¥¥

lakshamaNa: devi!
That, which was constructed by those great vAnara heroes cheerfully â
By bringing the rocks from the great mountains in all the directions â
That new Bridge whose fame is to remain till the last day of this universe â
Behold this! that Pillar of Glory of the character of our Arya!

The approving applauses from the audience.
~.~

Notes

[1] Manmohan Ghosh dates him to 5th century BCE. AB Keith dates him to 200s of the CE.

[2] pANini, the great grammarian of the sixth century BCE, records in aShTAdhyAyI that shilAli and kR^ishashva compiled naT-sUtra-s : à¤ªà¤¾à¤°à¤¾à¤¶à¤°à¥à¤¯à¤¶à¤¿à¤²à¤¾à¤²à¤¿à¤à¥à¤¯à¤¾ à¤à¤¿à¤à¥à¤·à¥à¤¨à¤à¤¸à¥à¤¤à¥à¤°à¤¯à¥à¤(aShT.4.3.110). Unfortunately this compendium is not found so far. bharatamuni himself acknowledges the earlier AchArya-s of dramatics, mentioning them by name: shilAli, kR^ishashva, dhUrtila, shANDilya, vAtsya, kohala and sadAshiva. Further, abhinavagupta mentions padmabhU as another earlier AchArya, and dhana~njaya mentions drohiNI and vyAsa too to have been pre-bharat masters of theatrics. â quoted from âBhavbhuti ki kratiyo ka Natyasastriya vivechanâ by Ashok kumar Dubey, 1999, Allahabad University Press.

[3] âWhether there are thirty-six chapters in the nATya shAstra or thirty-seven - This debate has been going on since long time. Even in the twelfth century, the great savant AchArya abhinavagupta too was burdened with this dilemma. In his commentary on nATyashAstra, known as abhinavabhAratI, he writes in the preface that, âI begin now commentary upon the thirty-six chaptered nATya shAstra.â However in the end of his commentary he says, âThus completes the thirty-seventh chapterâ. Today there are two versions of manuscripts of nATya shAstra: one containing the thirty-six and the other thirty-seven chaptersâ. â quoted from Hindi book âbharat aur unakA nATyashAstraâ, Braj Ballabh Mishra, 1988, Publisher: Uttar Madhya Kshetra Samskritik Kendra, CSPSingh Marg Allahabad.

[4] à¤¨à¥à¤®à¥ à¤µà¥à¤¦à¤¾ à¤¯à¤¤à¤ à¤¶à¥à¤°à¤¾à¤µà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤ à¤¸à¥à¤¤à¥à¤°à¥à¤¶à¥à¤¦à¥à¤°à¤¾à¤¦à¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤¸à¥ à¤à¤¾à¤¤à¤¿à¤·à¥à¥¤ à¤µà¥à¤¦à¤®à¤¨à¥à¤¯à¤¤à¥à¤¤à¤¤à¤ à¤¸à¥à¤°à¤à¥à¤·à¥à¤¯à¥ à¤¸à¤°à¥à¤µà¤¶à¥à¤°à¤µà¥à¤¯à¤à¤¤à¥ à¤ªà¤à¤à¤®à¤à¥¥
à¤§à¤°à¥à¤®à¥à¤¯à¤®à¤°à¥à¤¥à¥à¤¯à¤ à¤¯à¤¶à¤¸à¥à¤¯à¤à¤ à¤¸à¥à¤ªà¤¦à¥à¤¶à¥à¤¯à¤ à¤¸à¤¸à¤à¤à¥à¤°à¤¹à¤à¥¤ à¤à¤µà¤¿à¤¶à¥à¤¯à¤¤à¤¶à¥à¤ à¤²à¥à¤à¤¸à¥à¤¯ à¤¸à¤°à¥à¤µà¤à¤°à¥à¤®à¤¾à¤¨à¥à¤¦à¤°à¥à¤¶à¤à¤à¥¥ (nATyashAstra 1.14)
bharatamuni narrates that the drama descended from bramhA as a fifth veda, just like the earlier four veda-s descended from Him. However unlike the rest of the four veda-s, study of which was denied to the women and shUdra-s, the very purpose of the fifth one â nATya - was for being of utility to everyone, including especially these sections, for education and instruction into the right ways of dharma, besides spreading happiness, enjoyment and merriment in the society.

[5] Professor Horace Wilson, âThe Dramatic System of the Hinduâ, 1830s: âThe Hindu Theatre is distinguished from every other by a most remarkable peculiarity ; it is not in the vernacular tongue ! â¦ The explanation of this peculiarity is to be found in the constitution of Hindu society â not only the highest offices of the state, but the highest branches of literature, being reserved for the privileged tribes, or Brahmans. â¦ The Brahmans in the boxes had it all to themselves; and some even of them may have had no great share of Sanscrit. Even among them, as Prof Wilson says, but a small portion could have followed the expressions of the actors so as to have felt their full force, and the plays of the Hindus must therefore have been exceedingly deficient in theatrical effect.â

[6] Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda

[7] NDTV Imagine, a new TV channel from the âsecular paratroopersâ, made its very debut riding on its advertisement for airing Ramayana TV serial with a huge budget. What is more, SUN TV the DMK supporting Tamil channel, has licensed the dubbing and telecasting rights of this serial.

[8] Dr. S. Kalyanaraman has done path-breaking research towards cracking the historical mysteries of bhAratIya bhAShA-s, and has considered nATya shAstra an important source of historic information on Indic linguistic studies. Commenting upon this subject of bharata-recommended choices for language, he writes: âWhile discussing the choice of Samskr.ta and Prakr.ta, Bharata notes that Sanskrit should not be employed to those (characters) who are intoxicated by prosperity, depravd in mind with poverty and those who are illiterate even though they belong to the uttama type. (Abhinavagupta gives the example of Arjuna in the disguise of Br.hannala_ for the last type). For those who enter in disguise, Jaina monks, mendicants and wandering ascetics, the Prakr.t language may be employed. So also for children, persons affected by evil spirits, ladies, those possessing feminine qualities, persons of low characters, intoxicated ones and mendicants who professed religious marks, the language should be Prakr.t. (18.38-39). Wandering ascetics, sages, Buddhist monks, uks.as (consecrated Brahmins), sârotriyas (learned Brahmins) and those who wear religious marks should be assigned the Sanskrit language. For the queen (consecrated as Maha_devi_), courtesans, female artistes, Sanskrit should be employed depending upon the situation. The queen is expected to know the connotation of words relating to matters of alliance, martial preparation, the auspicious or inauspicious movements of planets and stars and the notes of birds foreboding good or bad omens. Hence she should be assigned the language of Sanskrit on the appropriate occasions. (18.40-43). Bharata then goes on to enumerate others such as courtesans who should use Sanskrit, cestial nymphs who come down to earth who should use Prakr.tâ

(Dr. Kalyanaraman refers to the chapter 17 of NS as lakshaAAlankArAdivivekaH and chapter 18 as bhAShAvidhAnaM. However, in the version of NS that I have access to, chapter 17 is titled bhAShAlakShaNaM and chapter 18 as dasharUpanirUpaNaM. shloka # mentioned by him also differ in my version.)

[9] sItA here refers to the ancient paurAnika tradition of king sagara and his many descendants having undertaken the enterprise of bringing mighty river ga^ngA to the plains of jambUdvIpa. BhAgIratha, his worthy descendant, at last succeeded in this endeavor. ga^ngA eventually merged with the ocean at the place known as ga^ngA-sAgara (in bay of bengal). The traditions says that this way king sagara and his descendants caused âanother seaâ. (affected a water level rise in sea?) As rAma descends from the lineage of that king sagara, sItA is referring to those ancient kings as jeTTha-sasure (jyeShTha shvashuraiH) â senior fathers-in law.

06-01-2008, 05:57 PM

Nine-part talk on Ram Sethu issue by Dr. S Swamy. In addition to the detailed discussion on the Ram Sethu case, the talk also highlights a number of facts and incidences, not previously known, on minority appeasement strategies of the central and state governments, and the arm-twisting tactics used by the muslims and christians to bring hindus down on their knees. Interesting talk.

QUOTEhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tZOUw5-P0U&feature=PlayList&p=13C6CC433448906C&index=0

Bodhi · 06-01-2008, 06:32 PM

Use these links:

http://www.bridgeofram.com/2008/06/dr-subr...re-on-rama.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tZOUw5-P0U

Bodhi · 06-06-2008, 09:06 PM

X-posting, originally posted by Ashok Ji:

British governor wanted Ram Sethu declared national monument in 1914
QUOTELord Pentlen, who was the governor of the Madras presidency between 1912 and 1919, had written to the then Indian Viceroy Lord Hardinge in December 1914 to have an archaeological study conducted on the Ram Sethu - between Rameshwaram, in India, and Sri Lanka - to ascertain if it could be declared a national monument.

'I would earnestly request you to direct the Archaeological Survey of India to undertake an extensive and intensive survey of Rameshwaram and its beautiful environs, particularly with reference to historic and primordial Adam's Bridge, for declaring it as a national monument,' Lord Pentlen wrote to Lord Hardinge after touring Rameshwaram in 1914.

Bodhi · (This post was last modified: 06-09-2008, 09:08 AM by Bodhi.)

Dr. S Kalyanaraman awarded 19th Dr. Hedgewar Praj~na Samman 

Sunday June 08 2008 Kolkata:

Dr. S. Kalyanaraman, President of Rama Setu Raksha Manch and Director of Saraswati Shodh Sansthan, received the 19th annual Dr. Hedgewar Praj~na Samman award. Former Union Minister Dr. Murali Manohar Joshi presided over the function held at the Kalamandira Prekshagriha. The award is given every year to an eminent scholar for lifelong contribution to Indic research by Shri Burrabazar Kumar Sabha Pustakalaya Kolkata and consists of a citation, a memento and Rs 51,000. Dr. Kalyanaraman, was given the award for his path breaking work towards researches in Saraswati Civilization and for his efforts in Rama Setu Protection Movement.

Born on October 20, 1939 at a village under Tanjor district of Tamil Nadu Dr Kalyanraman completed BA from Annamalai University in 1958. He joined the Accountant General Office of Bangalore after his fatherâs demise. He also worked as the Chief Controller of Accountants and a financial advisor in Railway Board till 1978. He then took up an assignment in the Asian Development Bank as a senior officer till 1995. During this period he toured 29 countries of the world and monitored 650 developmental projects. He did his Ph.d in Public Administration in 1982. He also played a key role in computerisation of the Indian Railways.

With the inspiration of the late Shri Moropant Pingle, Dr Kalyanraman joined him in the Saraswati river research project. He took voluntary retirement from the Asian Development Bank five years before the actual retirement. While working with the project he not only discovered the flow route of Saraswati river but also materialised it practically at some places. Dr Kalyanraman wishes to irrigate additional nine crore acre land of the country while connecting Brahmputra and other rivers. He has authored a five-volume book on Sindhu script and Saraswati river civilisation. Earlier he was also honoured with Vakankar Award in the year 2000.

Speaking at the function, Dr. Kalyanaraman narrated how after being inspired by Shri Moropant Pingale, both of them took up the Saraswati Research and extensively traveled in the interiors of Rajasthan, Gujarat, Haryana and Himachal, to trace the path of Saraswati River that dried up five thousand years ago. Speaking in Hindi, he narrated many mesmerizing details about his research. He also shared with audience the status of Ram Setu Protection Movement, and described in detail how the legal battle is progressing. He also added that the real battle will be won not in court rooms, but on roads.

Dr. Murali Manohar Joshi who handed the award, also spoke recounting how when he was the Union Minister for HRD, the government had initiated projects to discover the new facets of Indic History and Culture and how these were branded by the left-secular media as saffronization of Indian history.

Shri Suresh Soni, the saha-sara-kaaryavaah of RSS, was the chief guest of the function which was also attended by Shri S Vedantam, the Working President of VHP, Shri Tarun Vijay, director of Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee Research Foundation, the office bearers of the library and general public.

images and videos tomorrow.

http://www.bridgeofram.com/2008/06/dr-s-ka...ed-19th-dr.html

Bodhi · (This post was last modified: 06-13-2008, 11:38 AM by Bodhi.)

06-18-2008, 11:11 PM

QUOTEMosque in Kolkata blocks airport .... did someone say Ram Setu ??

http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Ko...-mosque/317195/

http://stepstosecondpartition.blogspot.com...irport-did.html

Kolkata airport: Map redrawn, land to be acquired, high-rises trimmed to save mosque

Mouparna Bandyopadhyay

Posted online: Sunday, June 01, 2008

Kolkata, May 31 Big Grin

evelopment runs deepâbut devotion runs deeper. So an ancient mosque on a tiny patch of 1,200 square feet of land right next to a runway has forced a redrawing of the entire Rs 2,000-crore map to upgrade Kolkata airport.

An extra 25,000 square metres has to be acquired, crores have to be spent on building a detour and several high-rise buildings have to be compensated because they have to knock off their top floors in line with the new plan.

The project, cleared yesterday by the Public Investment Board under the ministry of Finance is all set to go to the Cabinetâafter a very public spat between Civil Aviation Minister Praful Patel and the Planning Commission over delaysâand envisages extension of the second runway at the Kolkata airport.

The Kolkata airport has two runways: the main runway, 3,627m, that carries bulk of the air traffic, and a shorter one, 2,399 m, which is inadequate to service large aircraft, and so needs to be extended by another 440 m to the north.

But this is exactly where the 117-year old Bankra mosque â where on an average 30 people offer prayers each day under tight security â lies, less than 100 feet from the north end of the shorter runway, Also, the walls of the mosque cannot withstand vibrations caused by aircraft landing or taking off.

"We have tried to negotiate with the masjid committee numerous times. We have also tried to give them land outside the port and offered to create a replica of the masjid elsewhere but to no avail," says SPS Bakshi, Director (Projects), Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose International Airport. Result: the Airports Authority of India has decided to extend the runway towards the southern side.

"This means we have to lease out more than 25,000 square metres of land to the state government for the diversion," says another official of he AAI. The AAI will spend Rs 2 crore and the state government will provide Rs 3 crore. Also, an existing road, running from Kaikhali to Narayanpur (Rajarhat) will need to be diverted.

Then there is the issue of a new taxiway that needs to be constructed joining the northern end of both the runways. The taxiway needs to be at least 30 m wide to allow for wingspan of aircraft like A-380. As per the blueprint, the taxiway will intersect with the barb-wired path leading to the mosque. This poses a security threat and to circumvent it, a new path leading to the mosque has to be constructed. This, in all probability, will be a subway and will mean an extra Rs 20 crore, say officials.

"The authorities are in constant dialogue with the members of the masjid committee to bring out a viable solution to the problem. The extension of the runway towards the south will mean diverting the Kaikhali road and paying compensation to the building owners whose buildings will now come under height restriction. AAI is already conducting a survey to mark the buildings," said Deepankar Ghosh, leader of the AAI employees union.

Says Abid Ali, a senior influential member of the committee that runs the mosque, "Thirty years ago the civil aviation department of India had evicted us from our land and relocated us at Bankra on the understanding that the mosque will never be demolished. We cannot let the mosque be destroyed."

Amitava Nandi, CPM Member of Parliament, Dum Dum, passes the buck to the Centre. "The mosque is on AAI's land and the Centre should speak to the Imam in New Delhi to shift the structure to a different area. As of now the Centre is not taking any initiative about this. What can the state do?" he asks.

That's not all. Aviation regulations have height restrictions for buildings within 10 km of the runway. The extension of the runway to the south to keep the mosque intact means that multi-storeyed buildings that were permitted in the adjacent Rajarhat area, will now need to lose some of their top floors. "This will require us to pay compensation amounting to crores, we are working this out," said a senior AAI official. A mapping of the area is being done to identify which structures have to be trimmed accordingly.

In fact, this week, the DCL Housing Development Company is the first one to receive a notice to construct Ground plus 17 and not Ground plus 19 floors it had got clearance for. A detailed survey is under way to identify such houses that would have to conform to the height restrictions.

"We will be extending one runway to 12,000 feet and the other one to 10,500 feet without touching the mosque. It is wrong to say that top floors of some buildings will have to go for the 10,500 feet runway expansion, no such thing will happen
.
However, we are still negotiating to have the mosque relocated elsewhere and we will bear the cost of relocation as we usually do in case of shifting of religious structures. We had also taken up the issue with the West Bengal CM a couple of months back but then he had said that his hands were full so the issue could be addressed at a later stage. So we have not really lost hope on the issue", said a senior official from AAI.

Bodhi · (This post was last modified: 06-20-2008, 11:13 PM by Bodhi.)

Posted by Hauma Hamiddha:
QUOTEThe story of the nAstIka attack on rAmeshvaraM

An exchange with my acquaintance SRA on apotropaic rites related to temples prompted me to record this brief note. The light of the theravAda bauddha-s, the mighty king parAkrama-bAhu the Great (i.e. parAkrama-bAhu-I), came to power in Shri Lanka around 1153 CE. Few years after he came to the throne, he sent emissaries to other theravAda bauddha kings in Asia to announce his devote support for the sangha. narAthu, the king of Myanmar scorned the Lankan messengers and tortured them. He also imposed economic sanctions on Lanka. In the meanwhile parAkrama-bAhu was busy in local wars in course of which he conquered the whole of shrI-lankA and unified it under a single bauddha banner. In 1164 CE parAkrama-bAhu decided avenge the insult of the Lankans and launched a massive attack on Myanmar with a formidable fleet equipped with an yearâs supply of grain for his large navy, an amphibious landing force of war-elephants and uniquely crafted long-range poisoned arrows. Despite cyclones and loss of multiple ships parAkrama-bahuâs fleet under admiral nagara-girI and chera mercenaries established a bridgehead at Kusumiya and captured the city with the amphibious landing force. Then the Lankan sea-borne army invaded Myanmar and penetrated as far as the capital Arimardhanapura. The Burmans resisted with much fury but parAkrama-bAhu ordered his navy and army to keep pressing on till they destroyed the killed the king of Myanmar. The ports were blockaded by the Lankans and their army finally stormed Arimardhanapura and killed narAthu.

This successful adventure tempted parAkrama-bAhu to invade and conquer south India. He found a great excuse for this program in the form of the internal struggle between two pANDya contenders for the throne and the choLa allies of one them (kulashekhara). He claimed to act in support of the other party (vIrapANDya) against choLa-s and kulashekhara. parAkrama-bahu dispatched his powerful admiral lankApura to deal with the Tamil kingdoms. lankApura conquered Ramanathapuram near the setu and built a heavily fortified camp named parAkramapura after his king. From here lankApura brought in a large lankan land army and sent it towards Madhurai, where he besieged and defeated kulashekhara. Then the Lankan army placed vIrapANDya as puppet in Madhurai and controlled it from a fortified camp they built named paNDuvijaya. They used this fort in tandem with parAkramapura and continued the war on the choLa-s inflict many blows on them and even sent Tamils captured in India to build monuments in Lanka. Around 1171 parakarama-bAhu probably filled with bauddha zeal ordered the conquest of rAmeshvaraM. The lankan navy blockaded the temple city and an amphibious landing force with elephants launched a direct attack on the temple. They first uprooted the huge temple doors and carried it away. Then finding their way to the temple treasury they seized all its treasures and took control of the shrine and prevented worship of shiva.

The choLa king rAjadhirAja-II was shaken by the desecration of the temple and called upon a learned tAntrIka of the Urdhva-srotras, j~nAnashiva to perform abhichAra rites to destroy the lankans who had desecrated the jyotir-li~Nga. j~nAnashiva began an elaborate abhichAra prayoga invoking the terrifying 5-headed, 18 handed form of shiva, who wears a garland of 108 skulls. An image of shiva in this form is also found in the chandella fort near Kajuraho where they routinely invoked him before doing battle with the turuShka-s. j~nAnashiva performed the rite unfazed for 28 days. The choLa army had been hammered by the lankans in multiple battles till that point, but is said that the fury of mahAdeva entered them. rAjAdhirAja-IIâs army fell upon the desecrating bauddha-s in rAmeshvaraM and smashed them in a quick assault. The lankan admiral lankApura himself was leading the desecration and was struck by an arrow. The choLa-s beheaded him and nailed his severed head on the gates of the pANDuvijaya camp as a befitting offering to mahAdeva.

The details of this event are recorded in the ArpAkkaM inscription 18 Km from Kanchi. 

wow. Thanks Hauma Hamiddha.

That answers the long standing question I had about why the outer constructions around rAmeshwaram go back to the 12th century and why the major renovations from that duration.

which books/texts should be referred to for more details on the lankan excursions?

**Hauma Hamiddha** · 06-27-2008, 05:35 AM

<<which books/texts should be referred to for more details on the lankan excursions? >>
Bodhi:
Please see the chulavamsha. I have examined both the original text and William Geiger's translation of the chulavamsha. This gives the Shri Lanka view. They suddenly go silent on the point of the Chola fightback.
Indian side of the story is summarized in KAN Sastri's book The Colas 1955

Bodhi · (This post was last modified: 07-23-2008, 09:45 AM by Bodhi.)

Sethusamudram hearing in Supreme Court resumes, and Fali Nariman expected to spell out what government has decided about the court's suggestions in the last hearing. Court had asked last time (in May) that the Govt come back with details of whether they can reconsider the channel alignment, and why Setu can not be declared a national heritage monument. With the trust vote of yesterday in their favour, adamance and flamboyance expected from the UPA government. Hearing in court today.

07-23-2008, 08:15 PM

Buddha in a spot over Setu remark
QUOTEThe complaint cited reports of newspapers in which the Bengal CM was quoted to have said in December last year that Lord Ram was simply a flight of imagination of poets.

The complainant said the statement has hurt his religious sentiment

Bodhi · 07-23-2008, 10:06 PM

QUOTEIn comments that triggered a fresh controversy over the Sethusamudram project, the Centre on Wednesday invoked in the Supreme Court a Tamil version of Ramayana to make a point that Lord Rama himself had destroyed the mythical Rama Sethu.

Asserting that the government wants to go ahead with the project, senior advocate Fali S Nariman attacked the opponents of the project for raising matters of religion and faith to oppose it.

Appearing for the Centre, he said those who have relied on scriptures of faith in their attempt to block the venture should also consider other aspects of faith.

He referred to Kamba Ramayana and Padma Purana to make a point that Lord Rama himself had destroyed the Rama Sethu so that nobody should come from Lanka.

"Lord Rama destroyed the bridge and details are there in the scriptures. You cannot worship something which has been destroyed," Nariman asserted before a Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan.

The senior advocate, who was countering the arguments of anti-project petitioners that destruction of Rama Sethu would affect the faith of people, said, "We are not destroying any bridge. Everything on the project is being done with great circumspection."

"If we have gone wrong we will correct it. The idea is to go ahead with the project. We have to see there is no violation of law," the noted jurist said.

Though the bench clarified that at the moment it was averse to entering into any debate whether Rama Sethu or Adams Bridge was man-made or not, Nariman said, "If you are going to rely on faith, go into other aspects of the faith also."

http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/jul/23sethu1.htm


QUOTEA Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices R V Raveendran and J M Panchal suggested to senior counsel F S Nariman appearing for the Union of India (UoI) that the government should do some balancing act between faith and biosphere and must not hurt the former even if a little damage is caused to the latter.

Justice Raveendran also suggested that the government should not try to create an issue where there is none.

He also told Mr Nariman that the situation would have been different had there been no alternative alignment but when number of alignments/alternatives are available why to insist on demolishing Ram Setu.

Mr Nariman agreed to the suggestion of the apex court and assured the latter that he will advise the government to look into the same seriously, while contending that when no one goes to worship the place, it ceases to be a place of worship.

The court, however, said if faith of the people is involved little diversion in the route of the Setusamudram Canal, which will link Rameshwaram coast to Sri Lanka and is likely to reduce the navigation time considerably, is desirable.

The Supreme Court also suggested to the UoI to consider whether little diversion will be appropriate for the government ''scientifically, technically, economically and most important, politically.'' Earlier, counsel for the petitioners, who include former Union Minister Dr Subramanian Swamy and former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalitha, concluded their arguments while seeking declaration from the Court that Ram Setu is a national heritage and therefore should not be demolished or destroyed.

According to the petitioner, eight alignments are available and the government is insisting on taking the route which will involve demolition of the Ram Setu without any justification and the Archaeological Survey of India has not caried out any scientific study till date to ascertain whether it is manmade or a natural formation.

http://www.newkerala.com/one.php?action=...s&id=89855

07-23-2008, 10:35 PM

QUOTECentre on Wednesday invoked in the Supreme Court a Tamil version of Ramayana to make a point that Lord Rama himself had destroyed the mythical Rama Sethu.

"Center" which believes Rama is a myth destoryed a bridge - which again they have stated never existed? If the joke was not on us, it would be for the funny thread.

QUOTE"You cannot worship something which has been destroyed," Nariman asserted ..
By that logic, Shri Nariman would ban trips to Wailing wall. Remove cross from churches? Stop namaz at Babri or prayers at Somnath?

QUOTEwhen no one goes to worship the place, it ceases to be a place of worship.
Too bad we can't dreg Sun for profit. Else Fali the ambulance chaser would have stopped all those sun worshipers too.

Login




Remember me Lost Password?