Shri Ramcharitmanas Ramayan recitation by Pujya Bhaishri Ramesh Bhai Oza ji during Navratri Anushthan

Shri Ramcharitmanas Ramayan paath (recitation) by Pujya Bhaishri Ramesh Oza ji during Navratri Anushthan at Sandipani Vidyaniketan, Porbandar, Bharat

1st day of Navratri Anushthan 2011 (28 September, 2011)



2nd day of Navratri Anushthan 2011 (29 September, 2011)



3rd day of Navratri Anushthan 2011 (30 September, 2011)



4th day of Navratri Anushthan 2011 (1 October, 2011)



5th day of Navratri Anushthan 2011 (2 October, 2011)

Prayagraj High Court's verdict - Shri Ram Mandir existed in Holy city Ayodhya

Delhi's Jama Masjid Imam Syed Bukhari who is known Islamic terrorist supporter & Anti-Hindu bigot, like Muslim apologist Digvijay Singh, attacked a Muslim journalist who merely asked a question about Hindus legitimate claim on Ayodhya & Shri Ram Janambhoomi. Very unbecoming of a so-called mass leader of section of Indians. And fake secularists wants Hindus to make peace with such Anti-Hindu bigots who can't even stand a mere query. Shame! Religion of Peace indeed.



Official website of Prayagraj High Court's verdict on Holy city Ayodhya





HAS THE COUNTRY MOVED ON? By Voxindica

Division will escalate dispute. By S Gurumurthy

A perverse discourse: Steeped in ignorance, pseudo-secularists are busy doing what they do best, Deliberately misinterpreting the Ayodhya judgement. By A Surya Prakash

Eminent historian displeased with the Ayodhya verdict. By Koenraad Elst

How Allahabad HC exposed 'experts' espousing Masjid cause By Abhinav Garg, Times of India

The role played by "independent experts" — historians and archaeologists who appeared on behalf of the Waqf Board to support its claim — has come in for criticism by one of the Allahabad High Court judges in the Ayodhya verdict.

While the special bench of three judges unanimously dismissed objections raised by the experts to the presence of a temple, it was Justice Sudhir Agarwal who put their claims to extended judicial scrutiny.

Most of these experts deposed twice. Before the ASI excavations, they said there was no temple beneath the mosque and, after the site had been dug up, they claimed what was unearthed was a mosque or a stupa. During lengthy cross-examination spread over several pages and recorded by Justice Agarwal, the historians and experts were subjected to pointed queries about their expertise, background and basis for their opinions.

To the court's astonishment, some who had written signed articles and issued pamphlets, found themselves withering under scrutiny and the judge said they were displaying an "ostrich-like attitude" to facts.

He also pointed out how the independent witnesses were all connected — one had done a PhD under the other, another had contributed an article to a book penned by a witness.

Some instances underlined by the judge are: Suvira Jaiswal deposed "whatever knowledge I gained with respect
to disputed site is based on newspaper reports or what others told" (other experts). She said she prepared a report on the Babri dispute "after reading newspaper reports and on basis of discussions with medieval history expert in my department." Supriya Verma, another expert who challenged the ASI excavations, had not
read the ground penetration radar survey report that led the court to order an excavation. She did her PhD under another expert Shireen F Ratnagar.

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

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

"Normally, courts do not make adverse comments on the deposition of a witness and suffice it to consider whether it is credible or not, but we find it difficult to resist ourselves in this particular case considering the sensitivity and nature of dispute and also the reckless and irresponsible kind of statements..." the judge has noted.

He said opinions had been offered without making a proper investigation, research or study in the subject. The judge said he was "startled and puzzled" by contradictory statements. When expert witness Suraj Bhan deposed on the Babri mosque, the weight of his evidence was contradicted by anotherexpert for Muslim parties, Shirin Musavi, who told the court that Bhan "is an archaeologist and not an expert on medieval history".

Justice Agarwal referred to signed statements issued by experts and noted that "instead of helping in making a cordial atmosphere it tends to create more complications, conflict and controversy." He pointed out that experts carry weight with public opinion. "One cannot say that though I had made a statement but I am not responsible for its authenticity since it is not based on my study or research but what I have learnt from what others have uttered," Justice Aggarwal has said, emphasising the need for thorough original research before concurring with what someone else has claimed.

Fundamentals of Sri Ram temple

True and devout Hindus believe Lord Sri Rama was born in Ayodhya, the then capital of a flourishing kingdom of the Suryavamsa dynasty. Rama is venerated as Maryada Purushottam, and worshipped by Hindus of the north. As an avatar of Vishnu, he was first propagated by Tamil saints Nayanmars and Alwars; the north later came to accept Rama, especially thanks to the saint Tulsidas. In that sense, Sri Rama was the first truly national king of India, supra region, supra varna or jati.

The exact spot where Rama was born has been and remains firmly identified in the Hindu mind and is held as sacred. This is the very area where stood from 1528 till December 6, 1992, a structure that came to be known as Babri Masjid, put up in 1528 by Babar’s commander Mir Baqi.

Baqi was a Shia Muslim, and hence he intended it to be a place for Shias to perform namaz. Today, interestingly, the Shia clerics have made it clear to Hindu organisations that they would agree to have the site restored as a Ramjanmabhoomi. It is the Sunni Waqf Board, which entered the legal dispute as late as 1961, that has been claiming the title to the land on which the structure once stood. I call it a ‘structure’ since it cannot be strictly called a mosque by Sunni edicts — because it did not have the mandatory minarets and wazu (water pool).

In Skanda Purana (Chapter X, Vaishnav Khand) the site is vividly described. Valmiki Ramayana also describes it beautifully. Less than two decades before Mir Baqi carried out the horrible demolition of the Ram temple, Guru Nanak had visited the Ramjanmabhoomi and had darshan of Ramlala in the mandir at the spot. Guru Nanak himself records in 1521 the barbarity of Babar’s invasions (in Guru Granth Sahib at p.418). In Akbar’s time, Abul Fazal wrote the Ain-i-Akbari in which he describes Ayodhya as the place of “Ram Chandra’s residence who in Treta Yuga combined spiritual supremacy and kingship” (Translated by Colonel H S Jarrett and published in Kolkata in 1891).

In Chapter X of the Report of the Archeological Survey of India, NW, and Oudh (1889) it is mentioned (p.67) that Babri Mosque ‘was built in AD 1528 by Mir Khan on the very spot where the old temple of Janmasthan of Ram Chandra was standing’.

It is recorded in many official and judicial proceedings. In 1885, for example, Mahant Raghubar Das in a Suit No 61/280 of 1885 filed in the court of the Faizabad sub-judge against the secretary of state for India (who was based in London), prayed for permission to build a temple on the chabutra outside the mosque. His suit was dismissed on March 18, 1886.

However, in his order, the sub-judge, an Englishman, stated: “It is most unfortunate that a Masjid should have been built on land specially held sacred by the Hindus. But as the event occurred 358 years ago, it is too late now to remedy the grievance.”

It is well-established by GPRS-directed excavations done under the Allahabad High Court monitoring and verification in 2002-03, that a large temple did exist below where Babri Masjid structure once stood. Inscriptions found during excavations describe it as a temple of Vishnu Hari who had killed the demon king Dasanan (Ravana).

The Sunni Waqf Board does not accept these findings. It does not however matter if all this was indeed so or not, since under Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code(IPC) it is prescribed that ‘Whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons, with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement as an insult to their religion, shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both’.

That is, an offence under criminal law is committed if a body of persons hold something as sacred. It does not matter if the majority does or does not hold so. Nor can a court decide what is sacred and what is not. The offence under Section 295 IPC is cognisable and non-bailable, as well as non-compoundable. The fundamental question before us is: Can a temple and a masjid be considered on par as far as sacredness is concerned? Relying on two important court judgments that hold the field today, the answer is ‘no’. A masjid is not an essential part of Islam, according to a majority judgment of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court.

In the famous Ismail Farooqui vs Union of India case (reported in (1994) 6 SCC 376), the Supreme Court had observed: ‘It has been contended that a mosque enjoys a particular position in Muslim law and once a mosque is established and prayers are offered in such a mosque, the same remains for all time to come a property of Allah…and any person professing Islamic faith can offer prayer in such a mosque, and even if the structure is demolished, the place remains the same where namaz can be offered’. (para 80).

The Constitution Bench rebutted this contention. The Bench stated: ‘The correct position may be summarised thus. Under Mohammed law applicable in India, title to a mosque can be lost by adverse possession…A mosque is not an essential part of the practice of the religion of Islam and namaz (prayer) can be offered anywhere, even in the open. Accordingly, its acquisition is not prohibited by the provisions in the Constitution of India’. (para 82).

Thus what was wrong in the demolition of the Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992 was that it was unauthorised by law and hence a criminal offence. Otherwise any government depriving the Muslims of the Babri Masjid is within law, if the government decides to do so in the interest of public order, public health and morality (Article 25 of the Constitution). This is the position in Islamic law as well since in Saudi Arabia the authorities demolish mosque to lay roads. Even the mosque where Islam’s Prophet Mohammed used to pray was demolished for a road to pass through!

When I was Union law and justice minister, the question of the status of a temple — even if in ruins or without worship — had come up before me in November 1990 in a case of a smuggled out bronze Nataraja statue which was up for sale in London.

The Government of India, when Rajiv Gandhi was PM, decided to file a case in the London trial court in 1986 for recovery. The Nataraja statue had by then been traced to a temple in ruins in Pathur, Thanjavur district. A farmer named Ramamoorthi had unearthed it in 1976 while digging mud with a spade near his hut.

When the news spread, touts of an antique dealer paid a small sum and smuggled it out to London, where in 1982 they sold it to Bumper Development Corporation Private Limited. The corporation sent it to the British Museum for possible purchase. By then the Government of India asked the UK government to take action.

The Nataraja idol was seized by London Metropolitan Police, and thus the corporation sued the police in court for recovery but lost the case. An appeal was filed in the Queens Bench which was dismissed on April 17, 1989. The Bumper Corporation went to the House of Lords. On February 13, 1991 when I was law minister, the judgment came dismissing Bumper’s final appeal (see (1991) 4 All ER 638).

The UK apex court upheld the Indian government’s position that because of the prana prathista puja a temple is owned by the deity, in this case Lord Shiva, and any Hindu can litigate on behalf of the deity as a de facto trustee. The Bench consisting of Justices Purchas, Nourse and Leggatt concluded: “We therefore hold that the temple is acceptable as party to these proceedings and that it is as such entitled to sue for the recovery of the Nataraja.” (page 648 para g).

Even if a temple is in ruins as the ASI had found, or destroyed as Ram temple was, any Hindu can sue on behalf of Lord Rama in court for recovery! No such ruling exists for a mosque. That is, the Ram temple on Ramjanmabhoomi has a superior claim to the site than any mosque. This the fundamental truth in the Ayodhya dispute. This truth will apply to Kashi Vishvanath and Brindavan temple sites as well.

His Holiness Kanchi Shankaracharya Shri Jayendra Saraswati ji on Holy city Ayodhya and Muslims

Following are interviews of the zenith of sainthood, our incomparable Revered His Holiness Shri Shankaracharya ji of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham, Shri Jayendra Saraswati ji and his views on Holy land Ayodhya, Shri Ram Mandir, Mutt's inclusive contribution to Jobs creation, Social uplifting and Communal harmony in Ayodhya, Muslim's communal arrogance and radical intolerance on the issue, etc. His Holiness Shri Shankaracharya ji was arrested, humiliated, and tortured on false charges on a holy Deepavali day of November 11, 2004 by the communal government almost a year after these interviews (July 16-18, 2003) as soon as the government changed in center.

Below are some excerpts from the interviews:

'Has Allah told them to fight all the time?'

What is the extent of your, your Mutt's involvement in Ayodhya? Is it only the temple?

In Ayodhya the Kanchi Mutt has set up a trust, the Kanchi Ayodhya Nagara Development Trust. On it we have our Mutt officials, and locals, including a Muslim. The people of that area, whether Hindu or Muslim, are very poor; the mahants and such people are also there, living in big bungalows, they are happy. So we thought of doing something for the people, to do some social service, for the poor to prosper. We teach them tailoring, and buy readymade clothes from them which is sold in Hyderabad, so they have a steady livelihood. We have also started embroidery classes recently, and both Hindus and Muslims are part of this project. That is one endeavour of ours that is on in Ayodhya.

Apart from that we have also set up a small information technology project in Ayodhya, in which both Hindus and Muslims, men and women, participate. We have taken on rent a small place there, hired two teachers to teach them IT, and help them set up on their own by giving them whatever help they may need. One batch is over and the second batch commenced on the 6th of this month.

We want to see the people of Ayodhya happy. There is no point in fighting over Ram, Krishna, this god or that, in Ayodhya. Feed the stomach, Swamigal, they say. They are now able to look after themselves, their family, with dignity. Both communities are living with dignity, which is important.

But what about the main problem in Ayodhya?

As far as Ayodhya is concerned there is no problem at all. Not through the Mutts there, or through the poor people. If any problem is there it is coming through outside forces. If these forces were to keep away the problem you are referring to will automatically solve itself.

I am talking about the specific problem over the Ram temple. You and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board had this exchange of letters, which raised a lot of hope all around, and then came your letter dated July 1, in which you raised Kashi and Mathura over which the Board expressed its dismay.

Why? Leave their feelings alone. OK, I agree, maybe I need not have mentioned Kashi and Mathura, I don't want them either, but what about the other points in my letter? They have used this as a pretext to ignore the other points mentioned by me.

What else did you say?

We had said, in the first letter, to give us the undisputed area, and to build a wall in the middle if they feel that we will extend the temple, if they don't trust us. We will in the meantime talk, look to the court judgment etc. No one else should interfere in this matter, it should be sorted out by the two sides. Then they asked for some clarifications. You had mentioned the court judgment, they said, so can you tell us where the Ramalayam's garba griha will be located? Show the same on the map, they said.

We wrote to them that the undisputed and disputed areas, which were separate earlier, have become one, is not in existence anymore. They were separate, which is why we had asked for it, but now there is no separation of disputed and undisputed areas. In the last developments of the last few months the two parts have become one.

What are these developments you referred to?

The matter went to the Supreme Court for vacating the stay on the undisputed land given during the Bhoomi Pujan, which ruled that the stay will be vacated only when the status of the disputed land is sorted out. After that there is no point talking about disputed and undisputed areas, they have become one. There is no sense in them saying they won't give the undisputed area, both are now disputed. Given that, if we want the talks to go anywhere, we have to start discussing the disputed area since the court has made even the undisputed area into a disputed one.

On what basis did you ask for the disputed land?

We gave them reasons for saying so. One, for the sake of communal harmony. This issue has led to a lot of violence, and will lead to more violence in which poor people will get killed. You must develop a spirit of give-and-take. It is the vishwas-bhoomi [land of faith] for Hindus. For you, it is of a man who you call great today [Babar], we don't know what he was then. We don't also know if there was a temple there. Hindus have the faith that he was born there, so keeping in mind this faith if you give up the area it will lead to communal harmony, we told them.

Two, today, Lord Ram is already seated there, although in a small jhopdi, it is the reality. As of today if you think anyone can move him from there, it is impossible. Just as the undisputed and disputed areas have become one, it is also evident that Lord Ram has occupied the site. If he is moved, there will be mass protests, so he cannot be moved. Even a human being, over twelve years, acquires property, family etc. Also, whether occupied land or unoccupied, if someone has resided in a place for twelve years the law recognizes him as the owner. But we told them, we are not here to claim ownership. It may be yours but we are asking you to give it up in our favour. We can also go the law's way but we are asking you.

Next, there are already many mosques in that town, some 20. But only eight have prayers offered there still, the others are in a state of disrepair. No one's come forward to repair them, nor has the government given permission for it. In this situation if you erect another mosque who do you expect to come and pray there? You build a temple or mosque when there are people around. Like, when you build a colony you build a Vinayak temple. But you don't erect a temple just because the land is yours, you build where there is scope for public worship. Similarly there is no need for public worship in a mosque there, where will the people come from? For this reason also you must give in to us, we said.

More, we all accept Allah as great, the supreme power. We pray to such a god, in a mosque worthy of him, or in a holy place, or even when you find the time and place. But here is a mosque named after Babar, who came here, fought and won, so you decide, is he of importance, or is Allah of importance? Allah is supreme, but do we rate Babar who came here and fought as equally important? This fact of his war, whenever it was fought in history, will be remembered forever. If you want the ill will to go, remove Babar. Otherwise, his memory will keep coming up, and the problem will keep recurring.

Lastly, we all agree that communal harmony is needed. The Wakf Board has given up so much land in so many places, for schools, colleges, etc. It is nothing new. Given that, if you give up this site for the sake of communal harmony, you will come to occupy an exalted position. Because, although only a handful of Muslims may be terrorists they have given the entire community a bad name. Because of them the general perception is that a Muslim is someone who will only fight. But, if you were to think in a spirit of accommodation, you will enhance the reputation of Indian Muslims across the world, as a people who are willing to give in for communal harmony.

I had written all this to them, in my last letter

Which led to the Board digging its heels in. But why Kashi and Mathura?

That was extra, yes. I don't need it, it is not needed now, but I said one day Hindus may ask for them so be prepared mentally for it, that's all. But it was unnecessary, yes, though we had said it.

Yes, there seems to be a hint of a threat in your second letter.

What threat? Isn't there a difference between saying 'prepare yourself mentally' and 'get ready to fight'? If your office says your performance is not good, is that a threat? It means to change your behaviour, to perform better, and cannot be considered a threat, but sound advice. If someone mistakes advice for a threat, what can I do! The two are different.

When you say, 'if you don't do this I will kill you, harm you' that is a threat, but we are not doing it. To consider well-meaning advice as a threat is the wrong approach. Anyway, let it be, we have no such desire in our minds.

In all fairness, their reply should have been to question why I am asking for the disputed area instead of the undisputed area. But they never wanted to know! If they had asked me I would have told them that the two have become one now, both are a problem today. Since the whole land has now become disputed, where do we start from if not the disputed area so that the non-disputed area also comes out? This has to be faced, but no one wants to face it.

So what is the next stage in the negotiations?

Unless they are willing to face all this we will not talk about the next phase.

But what do you expect to see from them?

The news must come out, that they realize we changed our view was that since the disputed and non-disputed have become one, we broached the disputed land. This has to happen.

Second, they have announced that no one has the right to give away Allah's land. Even during the various Muslim empires they have given grants to various temples and Mutts, including land. Grants were given to the Sringeri Mutt, our [Kanchi] Mutt, to the Srirangam temple and many others. One of them even built a temple! That proves there's nothing that says Allah's property cannot be given away.

Apart from what the Wakf Board owns everything else belongs to Allah. If the world is Allah's property how can they be different with just one piece of land? They have not answered that properly. They had clarifications of my first letter, but no doubts over the second letter. Why? So how did they decide Allah's property cannot be given, how did they decide that we are threatening them? Did I ask anything for myself?

Since I mentioned Kashi and Mathura they should have wanted to know what will happen later, who will ask, when, how, shall we talk about it now. Instead of that they decide that Allah's property cannot be given away, so how do they want to solve the problem? The way we say everything is Bhagwan's they believe Allah's property is all over, fine, but how can they say they cannot give only that portion? What, they don't buy and sell shops and houses? Whose property is that, Allah's or theirs?

According to the Quran, the world belongs to Allah, not one bit of land here or there. In countries like Pakistan mosques have been razed, only recently one was pulled down, but did you see any protest over it? In Afghanistan and Iraq many were ruined in the war. Such questions should be debated upon and done with. Instead, they say it is Allah's property and get stuck on one point: you raised Kashi and Mathura which we don't like.

Finally they say looking at their image, honour, respect, dignity, their consensus, the consensus of all Indians they will consider [my proposal]. They have taken a minority status, and now talk about Indian consensus? Let them then give up the minority status.

The counterpoint to what you say is, why can't Hindus show their large heart, the oft-repeated line that all faiths are equal, by giving away the site to Muslims? Why are you stuck on it?

Yes, Hindus have a large heart, all faiths are equal. If it were not, such a senior religious leader like the Shankaracharya will not be talking to them. I have gone to Lucknow to talk to them, no saint has done that, no Hindu has gone there. Why did I go to Lucknow when they called me? For peace and communal harmony. Did they show me similar respect? I did not go there to see their architecture and such stuff.

We were discussing this problem, so I went to an Arabic school there to talk to them, putting my prestige aside so that something positive may come about. Communal harmony can come about if both are in agreement. Has Allah told them to fight all the time, don't they have a spirit of give and take? Where can they go apart from India? We all have to live together right here.

Don't you agree Muslims harbour a sense of grievance over December 6, 1992, when the Babri Masjid was pulled down by Hindus?

What has happened has happened. They may feel that way but how long will they grieve over December 6? Our temples have also been demolished, people killed. In Kashmir many temples were destroyed, our people are still being killed there. Shouldn't we also harbour similar feelings? Both sides should forget. In day to day life there will be many grievances, they should not be nursed.

December 6 cannot last forever. How many people must be upset over Babar's mosque in that sacred site? You have been grieving for 10 years, many people have grouses going back hundreds of years. After all he defeated us and built that structure, didn't he? Both sides have grievances, and both sides should get over them, one can't live that way.

'Show me another janambhoomi and we will go there'

Archaeological excavations have been going on at the Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya, but indications so far are that a temple was not pulled down to build the mosque. Doesn't it puncture Hindu claims that Ram's temple was razed to erect the mosque?

Listen, Lord Ram was born hundreds, thousands of years ago. In matters of faith you cannot consider such stuff as proof. To give you an example, if your father died after you were born who is to say you were born to your mother and no one else? Because people around say she is your mother you believe she is. Or your dad has gone away, and returns after 10 years. Your mother knows him but you don't. Yet you believe her when she tells you he is your father, don't you? Isn't that faith?

To give you another example, you believe that you will get paid after working for 30 days -- isn't that also faith? Setting out to prove faith is an impossible task.

Faith is faith, proof is proof. Can you prove there's god? That is faith. Can we prove Allah exists? That is faith? Can we prove Ram exists? That is faith. Because we believe in the Quran we believe in Allah; we believe in the Ramayan, so we believe in Ram. Faith is not to be tested and proved.

My question remains. For long the case was built up that a Ram temple was demolished to build the mosque. Now it may so happen that it wasn't the case.

The question is not whether a temple existed there or not. The question is of the site's sacredness. We have faith that he was born there. What gives us that faith? We could claim many other sites in Ayodhya, but why are we saying this is the site?

Exactly. There are other such sites too in Ayodhya.

Where? Nowhere The sites you are talking about are like 'the place where Ram played, Ram's kitchen, the place where he slept' etc. No other place claims to be the janambhoomi, our faith is this particular site is where he was born.

Second, it was the custom to build a mosque on our holy sites. In that sense they seem to be the cause behind our faith (laughs). We know that they had built their mosques on sites important to us. They thus indirectly contributed to our faith growing.

You had said there are enough mosques in Ayodhya, so there is no need for another. Conversely, isn't it true that there are enough temples in India and there is no need for another one?

Of course, there are many temples, including in Ayodhya itself. But is there a temple on the spot where Ram was born? We say there are many mosques so we don't need another one. You say there are enough temples so we don't need another one. But we are not building a temple for the sake of building it. This is janambhoomi! Show me another one and we will go there (laughs heartily).

My earlier question remains. Are further talks possible?

If one can abandon ego, not think of a prestige issue, and think instead of communal harmony, talks are possible. Otherwise, no chance.

What is your impression of AIMPLB President Maulana Rabey Hasan Nadvi, with who you have been interacting?

You won't find another good human being like him. He is very spiritual (satvik) in nature. He is the nephew of Ali Miyan [Maulana Abul Hasan Ali Hasani Nadvi, a respected Muslim leader and rector of the Nadwatul Ulama], who had come here twice and thrice when Periyavar [the late Kanchi Parmacharya Chandrasekharendra Saraswati] was around. Nadvi is just like his uncle, and possesses all the qualities essential for a tapaswi. The others around him are different, poor fellow, what can he do by himself!

There are many people like him among Muslims, they must come together and overcome the negative forces. Such people are not there among Muslims alone. They need to be overcome. The good people must stand up and do it, for the sake of communal harmony, nation, unity, for the good of everyone.

There is no point being adamant on a point and calibrating your replies on that basis. If you want to, then better to do it face to face. Let's talk about it, and not through the media.

But why have you been communicating through letters, why not face to face?

They asked for a letter, we gave it. They said we need to place it before their committee, so we gave them the first letter. They had clarifications, we gave explanations. If they didn't ask why would we give? We had been talking all along.

They could have formed a subcommittee, decided on a face to face, done that, and then asked for a letter. They could have done that also, but did not. Or, they could have said on receiving the second letter that some points have been raised, let us seek clarifications, talk face to face. If their intention was above board they would have done that.

'We erect memorials for Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Kamaraj, and we can't have one for Ram?'

Out of the five Sankara Matts (the other four being in Badrinath, Dwarka, Puri and Sringeri), you have taken the lead in trying to solve the problem. Are the other four Shankaracharyas with you in your initiative?

No one has opposed it. No one has any objection. No one is concerned so long as something good comes out, doesn't matter whether it is a Shankaracharya or anyone else doing it. I am not doing it to hog the credit; if I did, the other Mutts could get upset. National integration, communal harmony, the country's well-being, and a Ram temple comes up, where is my name in it? If I had the ego to take credit for it, others could get angry and oppose me but that's not my intention at all. If everything goes well Ayodhya will benefit, the nation will benefit! How will I benefit personally? I will still be sitting here in Kanchipuram. I am merely doing my duty, so there is no way for anyone to become angry at me.

Except, of course, the politician (laughs).

There is also doubt over the status of the Kanchi Mutt itself. Adi Sankara, goes one belief, founded only four Mutts, and the Kanchi Mutt is self-proclaimed.

Those who say so will say so. It is like the dog barking at the sun, does the sun care? If a cloud blocks the sun, has the sun disappeared? Similarly, such statements won't rob the Kanchi Mutt of anything. I know who is spreading such talk, he had in fact been a friend of mine once, he had then given in writing that Kanchi was also a Sankara Mutt (laughs). We still have that letter. Today there is not a squeak out of him, there is no publicity for him, the world today knows only one Shankaracharya, he is unable to handle this obscurity and gives vent to his feelings to the press. That's all.

One thing has always puzzled people. What is your interest in Ayodhya? Why are you involved in the negotiations?

Shouldn't I do at least one good thing in my lifetime? There is so much strife over Ayodhya. Do you know what the name means? A-yodham, meaning a place without war. Can there be another adarsh-purush [ideal] like him! If not a memorial for him then who else! We erect memorials for our fathers, grandfathers, Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Kamaraj, and we can't have one for Ram? It has been facing problems for so many years. We are willing to do that for politicians, but not for god?

Kalyan Singh: Babri Qila, a symbol of disgrace

Before he sold his soul to flip-flop on the issue of Shri Ram Mandir recently like a dhimmi wimp possibly sonburnt by dynastic Congress, following were the original views of Kalyan Singh on encroachment known as Babri Qila which he called "a symbol of disgrace... no regret, no grief (over demolition)" in an affidavit.

Here is the history of Shri Ram Janambhoomi Sangharsh aur Aandolan (Struggle and Movement for the Birthplace of God Shri Ram) which didn't just start a few 10-15 years ago but has been going on for past 2200 years since 150 BC. Over 175,000 Hindus sacrificed their lives in protecting Shri Ram Mandir (God Shri Ram's Temple) in Ayodhya from just Babar alone. There are many hard incontrovertible evidence of Shri Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, one of which you can read here on "THE Evidence: Shri Ram Mandir in Ayodhya by N.S. Rajaram". You can also watch video on history of Ayodhya, brutality of Muslim/Mughal rulers like Babur and evidence of Shri Ram Mandir destroyed by Babur below:







Following are Kalyan Singh's past depositions:

1. Babri was a symbol of disgrace... no regret, no grief (over demolition): Kalyan said in affidavit

   For all the adjectives and verbs Kalyan Singh may be using now to describe the demolition of the Babri Masjid — with an eye on the Samajwadi Party and the elections — in his 27-page affidavit dated December 2, 2004, which he submitted to the Liberhan Commission of Inquiry probing the demolition, Singh was forthright.
   
   He claimed that the demolition of the mosque on December 6, 1992, “was an act of God” and “whatever happened on that day, the deponent has no regret, no repentance, no sorrow, and no grief for that.”
   
   Singh, incidentally, was the last witness to be examined by the Liberhan Commission and his deposition, which runs into 400-plus pages, is the longest in the Commission’s record. Spread over 20 sittings, the deposition began on December 3, 2004 and finished on June 3, 2005.
   
   Singh’s views on the Babri Masjid, too, find mention in the affidavit. “The deponent firmly believes that the place at the disputed structure in fact was a Ram Temple, it continues to be Ram Temple and will be a Ram Temple and nothing else but a Ram Temple,” he asserted in their affidavit. Incidentally, sources in the Liberhan Commission say there was no need for Singh to file any affidavit and it was entirely voluntary.
   
   Referring to the demolition, Singh said in his affidavit, “...Historians will write that devotees of Ram and devotees of the nation had demolished this symbol of slavery and disgrace and though this demolition was not expected, it was purely sudden and totally unplanned.”
   
   On March 17, 2005, Kalyan filed another short affidavit, in which he cited portions of the report submitted by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in the Allahabad High Court. This report talked of the presence of the Ram Mandir on the site of the Babri Masjid.



2. Kalyan has no regrets over Babri Qila demolition

   "I neither regret nor feel sad nor repent for the demolition of the structure. I even uttered these words before the court," the senior BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) leader told a press conference in Ranchi referring to the pulling down of the structure over a decade ago.
   
   "Yes, I had promised to save it, but I could not. So I resigned from the Chief Minister's post then," Singh said in reply to a question.
   
   Asserting that a temple would be constructed on the disputed site, Singh claimed the temple issue was not a way of garnering votes. "It is the identity and self-respect of the nation, and one should not oppose it," he asserted.



3. Kalyan asks Muslims to forgo claim on disputed site on April 5, 2005

   "The excavations at the disputed site by the Archaeological Survey of India has proved beyond doubt that Babur had constructed the mosque over a temple in 1528," Singh, during whose rule the disputed structure was brought down by kar sevaks on December 6, 1992, told reporters in New Delhi.
   
   He asked the Muslim community that they should "let go off" their claim for construction of Ram temple at the site.
   
   Voicing strong demand, Singh said, "(Ram) temple should be made and will be made at Ayodhya."



4. Babri Qila built on demolished temple: Kalyan

   Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Kalyan Singh today (Mar 18, 2005) claimed before the Liberhan Commission that an Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report has clearly shown that the disputed Babri Masjid was built on the demolished temple, which existed prior to 1528.
   
   In an additional affidavit filed before the Commission, Singh, during whose tenure the disputed structure was demolished, said that the report was prepared after the excavation carried out by the ASI on the direction of Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court.
   
   To support his claim, he filed the official summary report of the ASI report before the Commission, which is probing the sequence of events leading to the demolition of disputed structure at Ayodhya on December 6, 1992.
   
   In the affidavit filed on December 2, 2004, Singh had contended that the temple was demolished from the disputed site in Ayodhya on the instruction of Mughal emperor Babar and the mosque was erected in its place.
   
   It is a historical fact that earlier a grand temple existed at this very place (disputed site) in Ayodhya. It was in the year 1528 that foreign invader Babar ordered his commander Mir Baqi to demolish the temple and erect a mosque in its place at Ayodhya," the former Chief Minister said.
   
   Meanwhile, the summary report placed before the Commission stated that the disputed structure was constructed on the existing building of public usage between 12th and16th centuries AD.
   
   "It was over the top of this construction during the early 16th century that the disputed structure was constructed directly resting over it," the report said.
   
   It said the area below the disputed site remained a place for public use for a long time till the Mughal period when the disputed structure was built, which was confined to limited area and population settled around it, as evidenced by the increase in contemporary archaeological material including pottery.
   
   The ASI claimed that the Ground Penetrating Radar Survey (GPRS) of the disputed site was indicative of remains, which had distinctive features found associated with the temples of north India.



5. Temple was demolished to build Masjid: Kalyan

   After explaining that the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 was a "public outrage" for which he has no remorse, former UP CM Kalyan Singh turned academic in the Liberhan Ayodhya Commission on Friday.
   
   Singh filed the Archaeological Survey of India's report of excavation in Ayodhya in 2003 as an additional affidavit to prove that a temple existed before it was demolished by Babar in 1528. He said the report is recent since excavation was done on the direction of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court.



6. It was out of anger: Kalyan apologises on Ayodhya

   Former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Kalyan Singh today (Dec 3, 2004) filed an affidavit before the Liberhan Commission saying his charge against senior BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) leaders Atal Bihari Vajpayee, L K Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi of being part of a "conspiracy" to demolish the disputed structure at Ayodhya was made "out of anger".
   
   Giving details of the elaborate security arrangements made by him as the then Chief Minister to protect the disputed structure, Singh said he was angered by the news reports which said the NDA (National Democratic Alliance) Government had told the Commission on June 20, 2003 that the State Government failed in its duty to make arrangements for the protection of the structure.
   
   "In that reaction and anger, the deponent might have said before the media that there was a conspiracy between Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee, L K Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi etc. to demolish the disputed structure," the affidavit said.
   
   "The deponent (Singh) has no knowledge, information or evidence to support the above allegations. Actually the above statement was made in furious reaction and was not correct," it said in a rather apologetic tone.



7. We have not given up stand on Ayodhya: Kalyan

   "In the document, all issues will be taken up, perhaps none should have any objection (on Ram temple) because we all want that the Ram temple should be constructed," he said.

8. He Still Stands the Tallest

Kalyan Singh sorry for demolishing Babri encroachment

Looks like BJP's past liability Kalyan Singh joined the league of those who believe in Appease-The-Muslims Divide-The-Bharat vote bank politics by unnecessarily apologizing for demolishing an encroachment by rearranging a pile of bricks in Ayodhya. What a dhimmi wimp!

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Kalyan_Singh_apologizes_for_Babri_demolition/articleshow/4073933.cms

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Muslim_leaders_reject_Kalyans_Babri_apology/articleshow/4077611.cms

"Who are Muslims to forgive those who demolished the mosque..? Let him apologise to Allah for his crime," Maulana Hameed Noamani of Jamiatul Ulema-e-Hind said.

What crime? Is demolishing an encroachment a crime? What about Hindu Genocide by Muslims which is largest ever in the World History? Wasn't that crime? These communal bigots are worried about a useless building which is not even a requirement to pray as per their own mythological religion. Jerks!

Please read "What the Islamic Invaders did to India" to know the truth.

Here is the history of Shri Ram Janambhoomi Sangharsh aur Aandolan (Struggle and Movement for the Birthplace of God Shri Ram) which didn't just start a few 10-15 years ago but has been going on for past 2200 years since 150 BC. Over 175,000 Hindus sacrificed their lives in protecting Shri Ram Mandir (God Shri Ram's Temple) in Ayodhya from just Babar alone. There are many hard incontrovertible evidence of Shri Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, one of which you can read here on "THE Evidence: Shri Ram Mandir in Ayodhya by N.S. Rajaram". You can also watch video on history of Ayodhya, brutality of Muslim/Mughal rulers like Babur and evidence of Shri Ram Mandir destroyed by Babur below:







Also, read "Best wishes to all on Shaurya Diwas (December 6)" for more.

What the Islamic Invaders did to India

------Forwarded Message------

What the Islamic Invaders Did to India
By Rizwan Salim

On the anniversary of the Babri Masjid demolition (December 6, 1992), it is important for Hindus (and Muslims) to understand the importance of the event in the context of Hindustan's history, past and recent, present and the future.

Savages at a very low level of civilisation and no culture worth the name, from Arabia and west Asia, began entering India from the early century onwards. Islamic invaders demolished countless Hindu temples, shattered uncountable sculpture and idols, plundered innumerable palaces and forts of Hindu kings, killed vast numbers of Hindu men and carried off Hindu women. This story, the educated-and a lot of even the illiterate Indians-know very well. History books tell it in remarkable detail. But many Indians do not seem to recognise that the alien Muslim marauders destroyed the historical evolution of the earth's most mentally advanced civilisation, the most richly imaginative culture, and the most vigorously creative society.

It is clear that India at the time when Muslim invaders turned towards it (8 to 11th century) was the earth's richest region for its wealth in precious and semi-precious stones, gold and silver, religion and culture, and its fine arts and letters. Tenth century Hindustan was also too far advanced than its contemporaries in the East and the West for its achievements in the realms of speculative philosophy and scientific theorising, mathematics and knowledge of nature's workings. Hindus of the early medieval period were unquestionably superior in more things than the Chinese, the Persians (including the Sassanians), the Romans and the Byzantines of the immediate proceeding centuries. The followers of Siva and Vishnu on this subcontinent had created for themselves a society more mentally evolved-joyous and prosperous too-than had been realised by the Jews, Christians, and Muslim monotheists of the time. Medieval India, until the Islamic invaders destroyed it, was history's most richly imaginative culture and one of the five most advanced civilisations of all times.

Look at the Hindu art that Muslim iconoclasts severely damaged or destroyed. Ancient Hindu sculpture is vigorous and sensual in the highest degree-more fascinating than human figural art created anywhere else on earth. (Only statues created by classical Greek artists are in the same class as Hindu temple sculpture). Ancient Hindu temple architecture is the most awe-inspiring, ornate and spell-binding architectural style found anywhere in the world. (The Gothic art of cathedrals in France is the only other religious architecture that is comparable with the intricate architecture of Hindu temples). No artist of any historical civilisation have ever revealed the same genius as ancient Hindustan's artists and artisans.

Their minds filled with venom against the idol-worshippers of Hindustan, the Muslims destroyed a large number of ancient Hindu temples. This is a historical fact, mentioned by Muslim chroniclers and others of the time. A number of temples were merely damaged and remained standing. But a large number-not hundreds but many thousands-of the ancient temples were broken into shreds of cracked stone. In the ancient cities of Varanasi and Mathura, Ujjain and Maheshwar, Jwalamukhi and Dwarka, not one temple survives whole and intact from the ancient times.

The wrecking of Hindu temples went on from the early years of the 8th century to well past 1700 AD a period of almost 1000 years. Every Muslim ruler in Delhi (or Governor of Provinces) spent most of his time warring against Hindu kings in the north and the south, the east and the west, and almost every Muslim Sultan and his army commanders indulged in largescale destructions of Hindu temples and idols. They also slaughtered a lot of Hindus. It is easy to conclude that virtually every Hindu temple built in the ancient times is a perfect work of art. The evidence of the ferocity with which the Muslim invaders must have struck at the sculptures of gods and goddesses, demons and apsaras, kings and queens, dancers and musicians is frightful. At so many ancient temples of Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, for example, shattered portions of stone images still lie scattered in the temple courtyards. Considering the fury used on the idols and sculptures, the stone-breaking axe must have been applied to thousands upon thousands of images of hypnotic beauty.

Giving proof of the resentment that men belonging to an inferior civilisation feel upon encountering a superior civilisation of individuals with a more refined culture, Islamic invaders from Arabia and western Asia broke and burned everything beautiful they came across in Hindustan. So morally degenerate were the Muslim Sultans that, rather than attract Hindu "infidels" to Islam through force of personal example and exhortation, they just built a number of mosques at the sites of torn down temples-and foolishly pretended they had triumphed over the minds and culture of the Hindus. I have seen stones and columns of Hindu temples incorportated into the architecture of several mosques, including the Jama Masjid and Ahmed Shah Masjid in Ahmedabad; the mosque in the Uparkot fort of Junagadh (Gujarat) and in Vidisha (near Bhopal); the Adhai Din Ka Jhonpra right next to the famous dargah in Ajmer-and the currently controversial Bhojshala "mosque" in Dhar (near Indore). Hindu culture was at its imaginative best and vigorously creative when the severely-allergic-to-images Muslims entered Hindustan. Islamic invaders did not just destroy countless temples and constructions but also suppressed cultural and religious practices; damaged the pristine vigour of Hindu religion, prevented the intensification of Hindu culture, debilitating it permanently, stopped the development of Hindu arts ended the creative impulse in all realms of thought and action, damaged the people's cultural pride, disrupted the transmission of values and wisdom, cultural practices and tradition from one generation to the next; destroyed the proper historical evolution of Hindu kingdoms and society, affected severely the acquisition of knowledge, research and reflection and violated the moral basis of Hindu society. The Hindus suffered immense psychic damage. The Muslims also plundered the wealth of the Hindu kingdoms, impoverished the Hindu populace, and destroyed the prosperity of Hindustan.

Gaze in wonder at the Kailas Mandir in the Ellora caves and remember that it is carved out of a solid stone hill, an effort that (inscriptions say) took nearly 200 years. This is art as devotion. The temple built by the Rashtrakuta kings (who also built the colossal sculpture in the Elenhanta caves off Mumbai harbour) gives proof of the ancient Hindus' religious fervor.

But the Kailas temple also indicated a will power, a creative imagination, and an intellect eager to take on the greatest of artistic challenges.

The descendants of those who built the magnificent temples of Bhojpur and Thanjavur, Konark and Kailas, invented mathematics and brain surgery, created mindbody disciplines (yoga) of astonishing power, and built mighty empires would almost certainly have attained technological superiority over Europe.

It is not just for "political reasons" that Hindus want to build grand temples at the sites of the (wrecked) Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi, and the Mathura idgah. The efforts of religion-intoxicated and politically active Hindus to rebuild the Ram Mandir, the Kashi Vishwanath Mandir, and the Krishna Mandir are just three episodes m a one-thousand year long Hindu struggle to reclaim their culture and religion from alien invaders.

The demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya on 6 December 1992 was just one episode in the millennial struggle of the Hindus to repossess their religion-centered culture and nation. Meanwhile, hundreds of ancient Hindu temples forsaken all over Hindustan await the reawakening of Hindu cultural pride to be repaired or rebuilt and restored to their original, ancient glory.

http://www.islam-watch.org/Rizwan_Salim/What-Islamic-Invaders-Did-to-India.htm

This article was published in Hindustan Times in December 1997

Slumdog Millionaire makes Millionaires at the cost of Slumdogs

There is poverty in Bharat (misnomer: India), no doubt about that, thanks to those who have (mis)ruled the nation especially after so-called Independence. But then which country doesn't have poverty? Still the way in which Danny Boyle has exploited it in his commercial movie Slumdog Millionaire and also turned it up side down by filling it with lots of Anti-Hindu prejudice is disgusting. And those who are shamelessly lauding the exploitative movie at Hollywood Foreign Press Association’s Golden Globes located in West Hollywood or nominating it at The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences's Oscars located in Beverly Hills should know that as per World Socialist Website and The Institute for the Study of Homelessness and Poverty, the largest population of Homeless in the US live in the city they are all identified with: Los Angeles. (Source: Los Angeles: city of the stars becomes US homeless capital, Homelessness in Los Angeles County, Cartifact: Downtown Los Angeles Homeless Map)

This movie is full of Anti-Hindu prejudices that "evil" Hindus are out to get "innocent" Muslims which is a completely horrendous, mythical, nonsecular and absolutely politically incorrect point of view. A clear violation of "Revised guidelines for shooting feature films in India by foreign nationals/co-productions" and Cinematograph Act 1952 laid down by Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Govt. of India. Like Mr. Kanchan Gupta said in his article "Slumdog is about defaming Hindus" in The Daily Pioneer,

"Nor is it surprising that Boyle should have cunningly changed the name of the film's — as also the book's — protagonist from Vikas Swarup's Ram Mohammad Thomas (a sort of tribute to the Amar Akbar Antony brand of 'secularism' which was fashionable in the 1970s) to Jamal Malik."

The film also makes fun of respectable Hindu God Shri Ram to show him as "evil" who is out to kill people especially Muslims. This hurts my religious sentiments and believably so of Millions of devout Hindus in US and around the world. He shows that Hindu mobs murder Muslims and not vice versa, completely suppressing that these riots were during 1993 terrorist bomb blasts by Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar (a Muslim follower of Radical Islam now living in Pakistan, India's most wanted, 4th on the World's 10 Most Wanted Fugitives list by Forbes) and that allot of Indians irrespective of their religion suffered in such heinous Muslim-Hindu riots. I say it again that any life lost because of such crimes was a life lost of an Indian irrespective of his/her religion. It should be condemned equally. Why show a bias?

It just proves that to fit the movie in west likeable square, one should fill it, as Boyle did, with Make-fun-of-India masala to make it western acceptable along with Anti-Hindu prejudice tadka to make it secularly acceptable (or politically correct) then fry it to exploit the poverty of the nation to make it socially acceptable and voilà we have an Indian poverty porn curry which will make every nationalist patriotic Hindu and Indian embarrassed and make the producers, cast and crew of the movie Millionaires at the cost of the exploited Slumdogs (which is no less than a derogatory and condescending term).

--

One Bharatiya (misnomer: Indian) channel called Star TV calls this piece of sh*t an awesome film while advertising it. In the Ad they said "एक आश्चर्यजनक फ़िल्म जिसने भारत को दिलाई एक नई पहचान" which by the way is not correct Hindi as "फ़िल्म"/"Film" is not a Hindi word and they have a audacity to call themselves a Hindi entertainment channel. What they said was that Slumdog Millionaire is "one monumental film which gave Bharat (misnomer: India) a new identity". Well in one way they are not wrong. These suckers have permanently damaged the identity of Hindus, Bharat and Bharatvaasi (misnomer: Indians) by coining a new racist term "Slumdog", which is now used every where to hate and spread bigotry against Hindus, Bharat and Bharatvaasi. Here is one such Anti-Hindu Anti-India bigot who calls himself an IT Grunt who blames all the unemployment woes in US on "Slumdog Indians". Caution: the guy is a complete looser, hater, bigot, and a good for nothing Racist.



--

Online Protest movie 'Slumdog Millionaire' by Hindu Jangruti Samiti

O Hindus, Register your protest to Censor Board against 'Slumdog Millinaire' :-

Address: Central Board of Film Certification, Bharatbhuvan, 91E, Walkeshwar Road, Mumbai 6.

Phone: (022) 2369 9255, 2362 5770

Fax: (022) 2369 0083
Email: aocbfcmum@rediffmail.com
A Thought by HJS reader

I feel every bit as strongly as you all do. But let us not underestimate the power of letters written to Oscar committee head Mr. Sid Ganis (president@oscars.org), head of Writers Guild Patric Verrone (pverrone@wga.org) and head of Directors' Guild Michael Apted (laraine@dga.org). If a steady stream of letters from proud and dignified Hindus reaches the desks of these people, it will make them stop and think.
Anil Kappor's e-mail ID & website for protest:

e mail- anil@anilkapoor.net

website- http://www.anilkapoor.net/html/index.html#

--

Slumdog is about defaming Hindus by Kanchan Gupta

In keeping with American politics of the times, Slumdog Millionaire has been nominated for as many as 10 Oscars and our deracinated media, which constantly looks for inspirational ‘good news’ stories that invariably revolve around Western appreciation of ‘truthful’ portrayal of the Indian ‘reality’, has gone into a tizzy. Saturday’s edition of a newspaper published from New Delhi had a blurb on the front page that read, “The Slumdog story: How ‘Danny uncle’ and his ‘moral compass’ created the biggest ‘Indian’ blockbuster — and why you should watch it.” Predictably, the chattering classes, who had been blissfully ignorant of Vikas Swarup’s Q and A (as they had been of Aravind Adiga’s The White Tiger till its perverse denigration of India and all things Indian wowed the judges of last year’s Man Booker prize) are now making a beeline for the nearest bookshop for a copy of the novel, whose title has been suitably changed to Slumdog Millionaire so that the book and the film are eponymous and both publisher and producer can encash the extraordinary hype that has been generated. Late last year, there was similar hoopla over AR Rahman getting the Golden Globe award for the music he has scored for Slumdog Millionaire. An approving pat on the back by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, it would seem, is the most important marker in an artiste’s career. Those Indian musicians who haven’t got the Golden Globe are not worthy of honour at home just as Sahitya Akademi award winners are not worthy of finding space on our bookshelves, leave alone feature on news pages or news bulletins.

.....deleted.....

Therefore, it is not surprising that Boyle’s film is about a slum where extreme social exclusion, political suppression and economic deprivation define the lives of its inhabitants. He has made every effort to shock and awe the film’s audience by taking recourse to graphic and gory portrayal of bloodthirsty Hindu mobs on the rampage — the idiom that defines India as it is imagined by the lib-left Western mind — laying to waste Muslim lives (a Hindu is shown slitting a Muslim woman’s throat in an almost frame-by-frame remake of the videotape that was released by the killers of Daniel Pearl) and property. There’s more that makes you want to throw up the last meal you had: Hindu policemen torturing Muslims by giving them ‘electric shock therapy’, street children being physically disfigured and then forced to beg, and such other scenes of a medieval society where rule of law does not exist and every Hindu is a rapacious monster eager to make a feast of helpless Muslims.

Nor is it surprising that Boyle should have cunningly changed the name of the film’s — as also the book’s — protagonist from Vikas Swarup’s Ram Mohammad Thomas (a sort of tribute to the Amar Akbar Antony brand of ‘secularism’ which was fashionable in the 1970s) to Jamal Malik. The name implies a Kashmiri connection, and we can’t put it beyond Boyle suggesting a link between Jamal’s travails — it is his mother whose throat is shown as being slit by a Hindu — and the imagined victimhood of Kashmir’s Muslims who, the lib-left intelligentsia in the West insists, are ‘persecuted by Hindu India’. Asked about the protagonist’s name being changed, Swarup is believed to have said that it was done to “make it sound more politically correct”. There is a second hidden message: The Hindu quizmaster on the ‘Who Wants to be a Millionaire?’ show has doubts about Jamal, who gets all the questions right, not because he is a ‘slumdog’ but because he is a Muslim; so he sets India’s Hindu police on the hapless boy. Swarup did not quite put it that way in his book, but the film does so, and understandably the critics in Hollywood who sport Obama buttons are impressed.

.....deleted......

--

Shocked by Slumdog's poverty porn by Alice Miles

Danny Boyle's film is sweeping up awards, but it's wrong to revel in the misery of India's children.

......deleted.......

Like the bestselling novel by the Americanised Afghan Khaled Hosseini, A Thousand Splendid Suns, Slumdog Millionaire is not a million miles away from a form of pornographic voyeurism. A Thousand Splendid Suns is obsessed with rape and violence against women, the reader asked to pore over every last horrible detail. Slumdog Millionaire is poverty porn.

......deleted.......

Boyle describes the film as “very subversive”. He has forestalled potential criticism about plundering another country's horror as entertainment by employing many Indian actors, including Bollywood stars and an Indian composer. Much of the dialogue is in Hindi.

That very seductiveness is the problem. But if Boyle may be absolved from criticism, I am not sure the same can be said of the audience. “Slumderful!” declared the New York Post. When we are suckered into enjoying scenes of absolute horror among children in slums on the other side of the world, even dubbing them comedy, we ought to question where our moral compass is pointing. Boyle's most subversive achievement may lie not in revealing the dark underbelly of India - but in revealing ours.

--

Day 265 by Amitabh Bachchan

On blog, comments for the film ‘SlumDog Millionaire’ and the anger by some on its contents, prompt me to say the above. If SM projects India as Third World dirty under belly developing nation and causes pain and disgust among nationalists and patriots, let it be known that a murky under belly exists and thrives even in the most developed nations. Its just that the SM idea authored by an Indian and conceived and cinematically put together by a Westerner, gets creative Globe recognition. The other would perhaps not.

The commercial escapist world of Indian Cinema had vociferously battled for years , on the attention paid and the adulation given to the legendary Satyajit Ray at all the prestigious Film Festivals of the West, and not a word of appreciation for the entertaining mass oriented box office block busters that were being churned out from Mumbai. The argument. Ray portrayed reality. The other escapism, fantasy and incredulous posturing. Unimpressive for Cannes and Berlin and Venice.

--

'Slumdog' sacrifices Indian pride by Priya Rajsekar

But, for the average Indian, and the average Indian emigrant, the liberal use of stereotypes rankles. It is difficult not to squirm when, seated with a western audience, one witnesses the graphic portrayals of abuse and poverty, as though India has little else to offer. Given that India now makes more movies than Hollywood and that every year it has religiously sent in its Oscar hopefuls, many brilliant, and I dare say far better than Slumdog Millionaire, it is rather ironic that a non-Indian’s depiction of life in India is more palatable to the world than an all-Indian creation.

However, if one has read the original novel, Q & A , by Indian diplomat Vikas Swarup, it is hard to ignore certain deliberate and strategic changes.

Why has the name of the protagonist, a secular Ram Mohammed Thomas, been changed into an easily identifiable Muslim name, Jamal Malik?

Why not a Hindu name to go with the Hindu-dominated country?

Were the repercussions of Hindu-Muslim tensions so relevant to the central theme of the movie?

Then again, the novel itself is not so rooted in the slums and there is far less of an effort to draw attention to the sword-wielding Hindu fundamentalist.

As an unsolicited exercise in defamation, even as it warms the heart and lifts the human spirit in true fairytale style, it wilfully discourages the average tourist to India, for whom the graphic, stark images of misery will easily overwhelm any painstakingly made holiday brochure.

--

Reflections on Slumdog Millionaire by Rajeev Srinivasan

--

why slumdog millionaire is a piece of crap

--

christist Evangelist director Using Islam to Batter Hinduism

Shri Ram Sethu, sacred ecology of the Sethusamudram

Source: Rama Sethu, sacred ecology of the Sethusamudram
By: Dr. S Kalyanaraman
letters@newstodaynet.com

In a heartening development catalysed by the Rameshwaram Rama Sethu Protection Movement, a group of scientists gathered in London in November 2008 to declare the imperative of saving and protecting Sethusamudram as the world’s sacred ecological treasure.

Location map of Rama SethuLocation map of Rama Sethu: bathymetry map of Sethusamudram (reproduced from Murty et al., 1994)

http://www.Setusamudram.in/htmdocs

/Articles/cp_rajendran_2.htm

Sethusamudram

The Gulf of Mannar and Palk Straits of the Indian Ocean separated by the causeway Rama Setu called Setusamudram. Setusamudram is a compound term: Sethu + Samudram (Causeway + Ocean). Unlike the Great Barrier Reef of Australia, the Sethu has for millennia served as a causeway linking India and Sri Lanka. This sacred monument is venerated in the cultures of millions of people of many nations along the Indian Ocean Rim – nations that can be called the Indian Ocean Community, analogous to the recently constituted European Community. The Sethusamudram is so sacred that every year hundreds of thousands pilgrims assemble in the oceanfront near Rameshwaram (a jyotirlinga pilgrimage place) to perform samudrasnanam (sacred bath in the ocean) at a place where the Indian Ocean remains placid like a lake. This samudrasnanam is a celebration of and homage to the ancestors of many civilizations, Hindu civilization, in particular. This homage is called pitr-tarpanam reinforcing the identity of a billion people on the globe who revere the story of Rama and the history of Sethubandha (the bund to cross the ocean built by the architect Nala, under the direction of the Avatarapurusha, Sri Rama and by vanara army led by Sri Hanuman. Both Sri Rama and Sri Hanuman are worshipped in many temples across the globe. [vanara is erroneously translated as ‘monkeys’; va-nara literally means people-like speakers, evoking the evolution of man on earth.] The causeway is a physical structure superimposed over a ridge formed by collapsed canyons in geological past in an ocean zone exemplified by Mannar volcanic rocks, heat-flows of geothermal energy potential and plate tectonics (earthquakes caused by plate-movements).

HeatflowS in Rama Sethu 100 to 180 milliwatt per sq. m. comparable to Himalayan hotsprings. Will dredging in the area activate these heat zones?

Corals of Sethusamudram

Sethusamudram is home to corals. The coral conglomerates [* File contains invalid data | In-line.JPG *], which are referred to as floating stones in many versions of the story of Sri Rama, were used to construct the causeway, Sethu (which is explained in Tamil encyclopaedia Abhidana Chintamani as ‘ceyarkarai’ that is, artificial, man-made bund). Sethubandha is celebrated in ancient texts, in the song, dance and sculptural traditions of the Indian Ocean Rim states.

Sethubandha construction shown on a 9th century sculptural panel in Parambanan (Brahmavana) temple in Indonesia.

The devastation warned, affecting over 60 million people should make every public official and scientist pause and consider the sacred ecology that Sethusamudram constitutes. Over the millennia, people have venerated the Indian Ocean as a life-source. Many young, married couples go for the samudrasnanam praying for the birth of children in their families. Millions of marine folk along the long 7,500 km coastline of India live off the marine wealth of the coastline including the wealth of corals. Corals have a particular sacred significance in Hindu civilizational traditions. The shankha or turbinella pyrum is also called the sacred conch. This sacred conch, shankha, adorns the hands of Vishnu and Bhairava, two divinities worshipped in thousands of temples all over the world. The shankha is also venerated as the conch-trumpet called Panchajanya used by Avatara purusha Sri Krishna to call the troops to battle in the Kurukshetra war described in the epic Mahabharata. Sri Rama is also shown blowing the shankha trumpet in an exquisite terracotta sculpture of the 3rd century in a village near Ayodhya.

Terracotta panel of Bhitargaon showing Vishnu blowing the conch, an event depicting Rama as Vishnu Avatara, defeats the Rakshasas led by Malyavan, Mali and Sumali and as narrated in the Uttarkanda of the Ramayana (Cantoes VI-VIII). http://ignca.nic.in/pb0020.htm

Quake-induced uplift of coral families in Sumatra Mentawai islands.Sethusamudram is an Indian Ocean region famous for the coral turbinella pyrum, shankha. At Kizhakkarai, 15 kms from Rameshwaram, West Bengal Development Corporation has an office for acquiring the shankha; the annual turnover is over Rs. 50 million ($1 million). The shankha is used to make bangles. Without shankha bangles, no Bengali or Oriya marriage is complete. So sacred are the shankha bangles.Studies of the type carried out in Mentawai Islands near Sumatra have to be carried out in Sethusamudram to record the upliftment, if any, of the coral reefs, in the region which is earth-quake prone, apart from being the only coastal region with evidence of Mannar volcanic rocks and heat-flows comparable to the heat-flows recorded in the sub-Himalayan hot-springs.

Sethu as tsunami-protection wall

The Sethu has served as a natural tsunami-protection wall in an ocean zone subject to many earthquakes and consequent tsunamis. The nearby region of Sumatra is also home to the world’s most devastating volcano, the Mount Toba that had a super-eruption about 74,000 years ago spewing volcanic ash to a depth of 6 to 12 inches all over South India south of the Vindhya Mountains.

The Bay of Bengal part of the Indian Ocean is a trough subject to recurring, severe cyclonic storms from the area of depression near Taiwan. The storm surges get sucked into the trough of Bangladesh causing enormous damage to lives and properties. The tsunami which occurred on December 26, 2004 was an event triggered by the subduction of the Indian plate under the Burmese plate resulting in the displacement of water which surreptitiously traveled as tsunami resulting in the loss of over 200,000 lives and the virtual disappearance of Aceh island. A tsunami expert, Prof. Tad S. Murthy notes that if any channel is laid across Sethusamudram, the channel will act like a funnel absorbing the energies of the next tsunami and devastate the coastline of South India because of what is known as the ‘quarter-wave resonance amplification’. This is proved by the Alaska tsunami of 1964 which resulted in maximum devastation along the Alberni Canal in Canada and the destruction of the Alberni Port.

The sentiments expressed in the London seminar echoe the judgment of the Supreme Court of India which asked the Union of India to reconsider the Sethusamudram Channel project and noted that a Pachauri Committee will go study the issue. Prof. Rajendra Pachauri heads the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an institution that received the Nobel Prize for Peace. Pachauri Committee should not only recommend the scrapping of the Sethusamudram Channel project, which will be a world calamity if carried through, but also recommend a serious, multi-disciplinary agency to study the impact of another tsunami in the Indian Ocean. Another tsunami in the Indian Ocean is not a theoretical model but a reality. Scientific advances have not been able to predict the exact date of the next tsunami but all scientists are agreed that another tsunami more devastating than the December 26, 2004 tsunami is a possibility.

This nightmare warning, this possibility has been studied by seismologists (researchers of earthquakes) and earth scientists studying corals. In a recent study published in the Science Magazine (December 16, 2008) scientists have observed that many coral colonies in the Mentawai Islands near Sumatra were killed in September 2007 when large earthquakes lifted the reefs 1 meter or more out of the water. Seismology studies show that an earthquake of magnitude greater than 8.8 on Richter scale, could rock the coastal areas of Bengkulu and Padang in the next 30 years (along the Sumatra earthquake belt), triggering a major tsunami which could put over 60 million people of the Indian Ocean, east coast of India, west coast of Burma and south coast of Bangladesh at risk.

Pachauri Committee will also be well advised to review the creation of Marine Economic Zones all along the long 7500 km. coastline of India to create new economic opportunities for the coastal and marine people.

Tsunami-protection wall in Japan

A multi-disciplinary team of experts should be constituted IMMEDIATELY, by the Union of India to study the warnings of another tsunami which will devastate the nation’s coastline and lives and property of coastal people and establish Disaster Management Zones all along the vulnerable coastline with structures like tsunami-protection walls constructed in Japan.

Next tsunami

Sacred traditions help us remember the sacredness of the earth in which we are only trustees of the present and future generations.

We do NOT have the right to destroy this sacred ecology and deny future generations, the privilege of worshipping sacred sites and remembering the ancestors who have given the humanity its very identity.

Indian Ocean Rim states impacted by the tsunami of December 26, 2004

http://nctr.pmel.noaa.gov/propagation-database.html

The next tsunami is likely to impact the same Indian Ocean region – a lesson learnt from history.List and locations of catastrophic tsunamis of Indian Ocean.catastrophic tsunamis of Indian Ocean

What the scientists tell us about earthquakes and tsunamis should make us pause and ponder.The 9.0 Earthquake of December 26, 2004 at 6.58 hours at the epicenter (and in Sri Lanka) led to a sequence of 15 quakes across the Andaman region. While earthquakes could not be predicted in advance, once the earthquake was detected it was possible to give about 3 hours of notice of a potential Tsunami. Such a system of warnings is in place across the Pacific Ocean but is only being put in place in the Indian Ocean; this needs further cooperation among the nations of the Indian Ocean Community.

Nature magazine reports: “Tens of millions of people along the heavily populated coasts of Myanmar, Bangladesh and West Bengal could be living under threat of a tsunami as massive as the one that devastated the Sumatran coast in 2004, according to a report to be released by Nature on Thursday this week. The report claims that while the 2004 disaster took the scientific community by surprise many of the same warning signs currently exist in the Bay of Bengal.”

When the plate boundaries abruptly deform and vertically displace the overlying water, a tsunami occurs. A tsunami travels very fast as ocean waves, about 800 km/h, or 0.2 km/sec for a water depth of 5000 m. Seismic waves are faster and cause enormous upheavals on the earth’s crust and ocean-beds. Oceans are the treasure of humanity and it is our responsibility to harness the treasure in a sustainable manner through well-regulated Marine Economic Zones which have the potential to make the Indian Ocean Community a veritable powerhouse to create wealth of nations, while providing new livelihoos opportunities to over 2 billion people on the globe.

Tsunami impact on land cover of Indian Ocean Community

http://www.unosat.web.cern.ch/unosat/freeproducts

/Tsunami/JRC/Asia_Tsunami_07January_landcover.pdf

http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/

fullMaps_Sa.nsf/luFullMap1724ADB850F3F30B85256F8E0055AB65/$FileEUJRC_tsu_cov_sasia070105.pdf?OpenElement Land cover

/ potential land affected by tsunami (26 December, 2004)

Details of scientific papers on “Sacred ecology, sacred ocean, sacred Setusamudram” are provided at http://sites.google.com

/site/kalyan97/setu

(The author is the National President,

Rameshwaram Rama Sethu Protection Movement

and he can be contacted at kalyan97@gmail.com)

http://newstodaynet.com/col.php?section=20&catid=29