THE IMMORTAL LEGENDS OF HOLY AYODHYA

https://youtu.be/nRJD6kldukQ

रघुपति राघव राजा राम......

जद्यपि सब बैकुण्ठ बढाना।

बेद पुरान बिदित जग जाना।।

अवधपुरी सम प्रिय नहिं सोऊ।

यह रहस्य जानइ कोउ कोउ।। रा०च०मानस

Holy Ayodhya is the most honored of the seven sacred cities of India, founded by Manu, mentioned in Vedas. Lord Rama is the ideal ruler and avatar of Dharma.

Mathura

Kashi

Kanchi

Avantika

Puri

Dwaraka 

Are others of 7 which are most sacred and devine regions for Hindus. 

अयोध्या मथुरा माया काशी कांची अवंतिका। 

प्यूरी द्वारकवती चैवा, सप्तायते मोक्ष  दायकः ।।

The Place and its History Ayodhya is the foremost of the seven sacred cities of ancient India, first mentioned in the Atharva Veda as the city of the Gods. In the Ramayana, it is said to have been built by Manu himself and served as the main capital of the solar dynasty of the Ishvakus, who along with the lunar dynasty formed the main kingdoms that ruled India for thousands of years.

प्रजापति मनुविनिर्मित अयोध्याके प्रथम

अधिपति आदिराज मनुपुत्र इक्ष्वाकु मान्य हैं।

अत एव मर्त्यलोककी प्रथम राजधानी अयोध्या

सिद्ध है —

मनु: प्रजापति: पूर्वमिक्ष्वाकुश्च मनो: सुत:।

तमिक्ष्वाकुमयोध्यायां राजानं वद्धि पूर्वकम्।।

(वाल्मीकीय रामायण - बालकाण्ड सर्ग 70. 21)

अयोध्या नाम नगरी तत्रासील्लोकविश्रुता।

मनुना मानवेन्द्रsण या पुरी निर्मिता स्वयम्।।

( वाल्मीकीय रामायण - बालकाण्ड सर्ग 5.6 )

मनु: इक्ष्वाकवे स्वपुत्राय आदिराजाय अब्रवीत्

( गीता 4.1 शाङ्करभाष्य )

अयोध्या ऐतिहासिक; अत: उसके संस्थापक मनु

और अयोध्याधिपति मनुपुत्र आदि राजा इक्ष्वाकु भी

ऐतिहासिक।

वाल्मीकीय रामायण - बालकाण्ड सर्ग 70 में

सूर्यवंशका वर्णन है। उसके अनुसार सागरकी

ऐतिहासिकता के सदृश इक्ष्वाकुवंशी सगरकी

ऐतिहासिकता सिद्ध है। तद्वत् भागीरथीकी

ऐतिहासिकताके सदृश इक्ष्वाकुवंशी भगीरथ की

ऐतिहासिकता भी सिद्ध है।

तद्वत् रामेश्वरम्, रामसेतुकी

ऐतिहासिकताके सदृश इक्ष्वाकुवंशी प्रभु रामकी

ऐतिहासिकता भी सिद्ध है।

Ayodhya was located on the Sarayu River, which in the Rigveda is listed among the three great rivers of Sindhu and Sarasvati and said to be full of waters. The solar dynasty and Ikshvakus are mentioned in Rigveda and great solar dynasty rulers like Mandhata, Purukutsa and Trasadasyu who existed long before Sri Ram. Ayodhya has since endured throughout history as one of the most important historical sites of India, particularly for the Hindus. Queen Suriratna of Korea nearly two thousand years ago was said to have been a princess of Ayodhya and is honoured today by the Koreans as such.

Sri Ram – The Avatara Purusha

Sri Ram is placed in this venerable solar dynasty of Ayodhya at a date long before Sri Krishna in all the lineages of the Puranas, the vast encyclopedic texts of Hindu knowledge and sacred lore. 

Sri Ram is the seventh of the ten avatars or divine incarnations of Lord Vishnu, coming before Sri Krishna and often combined with Krishna as the two most important Hindu avatars. Sri Rama is said to personify Dharma, including right conduct at personal, government and spiritual levels. Not only the Hindus but also the Buddhists honour Sri Ram, and Lord Buddha-like Sri Ram was originally a prince in a branch of the same solar dynasty of kings.

Some people have doubt whether Rama was an actual historical person as if that might discredit Hindu claims. The historicity of any comparable ancient figure is difficult to prove. There are those who doubt the historical reality of Jesus or the Biblical prophets, but that is not used to deny connections with their traditional places of worship.

(Prabhu Shri Ram blessing Shri Tyagaraja, one of his greatest bhaktas. One composition by Tyagaraja is enough to rival entire generations of music and poetry. After all, who else would dare to tell Bhagwan: "Even if you blame me for loving you, I've never known a better fortune." )

India is a civilisational nation. That’s why a Ram Temple in Ayodhya should be the demand from all Indians. It’s beyond religious call, it’s a national priority. All Indians with self esteem must support the cause...Rama belongs to all Indians...from Kashmir to Kanyakumari, from Baluchistan to Arunachal...!

Rama is our national hero. Our civilisational icon.

Till we restore his glory, India would remain chaotic.

The Hindu claim to Ayodhya and Ram Janmabhoomi, Rama’s place of birth, is a claim to India’s sacred history, and to its cultural identity that has permeated the land and the way of life. The fact is that Sri Ram is an enduring cultural icon of India and Ayodhya is his sacred domain. As to the yogic and mystical aspects of Sri Rama’s life that go far beyond ordinary views of physical reality, we find such spiritual portrayals in the lives of religious leaders, including Lord Buddha. These indicate the spiritual greatness of the figure, not a reason to deny their importance.

The Ramayana

The massive Ramayana of sage Valmiki, which first depicts the great story of Sri Ram, is regarded as the oldest and most important of the Sanskrit Kavya work or poetic literature of India, which all other Kavya works look back to. It is mentioned by Ashvaghosha who wrote the Buddha Carita or Life of the Buddha. Aspects of the Ramayana are referred to in Mahabharata, India’s great national epic, where Arjuna has Hanuman on the flag of his chariot.

The Ramayana became the most popular story in India and throughout Asia, where it remains embedded as far as in Indonesia that honours the story today. This popularity has resulted in many different versions of the Ramayana. The Ramayana became depicted in numerous stories and dances, from village levels to that of emperors. Rama and the Ramayana live in the minds and hearts of the people of India and Asia, with the kings of Thailand called Ram and their capital city Ayutthaya name after Ayodhya. The Tulsidas Ramayana composed in the sixteenth century became the most popular story of North India and is regularly chanted to the present day by many millions of people.

The Ramayana has entered as far as Europe, North America and Australia with the Hindu diaspora and western Yoga students who commonly chant the name of Ram, Sita and Hanuman in various kirtans. A temple at Ram’s birthplace in India has long been denied on political or legal grounds that have never been properly defined or justified, and ignore or belittle both Hindu and international sentiments based upon the Ramayana.

The battle for Ayodhya and Shri Rama Janmabhoomi is not a political movement as being painted. Did you know it started in 1528 when Babur’s commander destroyed the temple. 76 –the number of battles that have been fought from 1528 till 1934.

Last one should have been "Supreme Court"

But Sadly, people outside of India, know little of India’s devotional traditions and find it hard to understand why Ayodhya remains such a vital issue in India for a figure said to have lived thousands of years ago. While they know something of Jesus or Mohammed, they know little of Rama or Krishna and are not inclined to invest them with much sanctity. They view the Ayodhya issue like Jewish and Muslim disputes in Jerusalem; they don’t know that Ayodhya was never a major sacred site for the Muslims but only for the Hindus.

A RamJanamBhumi temple at Ayodhya is not an issue of mere bricks and mortar. It is an issue of our cultural resurgence, where Lord Ram has a prime place of importance. The movement is an expression of the collective consciousness of the Hindu ethos, our honor & dignity. 

Unfortunately most of are damaged / invaded by Desert cult invaders.

India itself was founded on the idea of Ram Rajya through the independence movement. Yet India's intellectuals and leftist politicians try to deny it and refuse to let any Ram Mandir to be built in Ayodhya to affirm it. 

1950 :: Image of Lord Rama , Goddess Sita and Laxmana In Original Copy of Indian Constitution

Strong opposition to the Ram Temple remains in India, not just from other religious groups and the Marxist left, but from other political parties up to the Congress, which are at best ambivalent about the issue and are afraid it will give more power to the BJP for it to build a Ram temple.

Most problematically, the radical left in India has denigrated the Ram Temple movement as merely modern politics, reactionary Hindu biases, ignoring the ancient history involved and the depth of devotion behind the issue. The left in India has made the Ram movement its main enemy and used its connections with foreign media to portray the Hindu cause as oppressive when it is Hindus who have been oppressed and deprived of their sacred sites for centuries. The result is that a Hindu point of view on the topic remains hard to find outside of India and difficult to find available inside of India, particularly by the English dominated elite, many of whom have greater admiration for Nehru or Marx than Sri Rama.

The Marxist Distortion 

How they erase many centuries struggle and countless sacrifices of millions of rambhakts .

We can’t miss out the communist historians’ acts of bigotry. They appeared on behalf of the Babri Masjid Action Committee as experts, though none of their testimony speaks of same. Few even went on to contradict own statements. Right from beginning their argument was ideology driven. The attacks and commentaries by them in publications, which went on to create the popular anti-Ram Janmabhumi Mandir narrative were not based on facts or historicity, but on creating an emotional appeal for Babri Masjid. Four Babri Action Committee historians: R. S. Sharma, D.N. Jha, Suraj Bhan & Athar Ali insisted that they be treated as independent historians, but the VHP team refused to agree to this demand. There were evidence exchanges but it helped little in shaking the determination of the proponents of Babri. The coterie kept behaving like broken record. The gang had power & the establishment supported it.The main arguments were: 

1. Sri Ram is a mythic figure, 
2. Identification of present day Ayodhya with Valmiki’s Ayodhya is incorrect 
3. Variants of Rama story are proof that Valmiki version is not accurate 
4. 4Buddhists texts state Kosala and not Ayodhya as Ram Janmabhumi
5. Ayodhya is a sacred place of Buddhists and Jains and not Hindus to that extent 
6. Ayodhya has not been a place of pilgrimage for Hindus for a very long time 
7. There was no Rama cult before thirteenth century 
8. Babri masjid was built on virgin land
9. The remnants discovered from beneath the structure are of non-religious nature 
10. The architectural remnants are brought from elsewhere and planted 
11. Possibly an idgah or qanati mosque lays below Babri masjid 
12. Babri masjid does not stand on birth place of Rama 
13. There is no reference to demolition of Ram Janmabhumi temple at Ayodhya before 19th century

What the Marxist gang did not have was solid evidence on their side or the scholarship to refute the pro Ram Janmabhumi evidences. The court observed them as non-qualified. Counter questioning kept bursting the bubble of their knowledge and also nullified all false claims and opinions. Judgment from Honorable Justice Sudhir Agarwal is the longest, 21 volume, 5000 pages—and is a gold mine of interesting information.

The most important discovery from the demolition of the disputed structure was a Gahadavala inscription. Ideally this stone slab that fell from the wall of the disputed structure should have settled the controversy once and for all. It was the proof that a temple lay beneath the masjid. Prof Ajay Mitra Shastri, specialist in Epigraphy and Numismatics stated:

Inscription is in chaste and classical Nagari script Dated to 11th or 12th century recorded beautiful temple of Vishnu Hari, unparalleled by any other temple built earlier. “Constructed in temple city of Ayodhya, situated in Saketa mandala. Described God Vishnu destroying King Bali (in Vamana avatar) & Dashanana (Ravana).”

But Sr Irfan Habib made baseless remark that the found inscription was the one stolen from Lucknow Museum in 1953 and further complicate the mater.

Home ministry and Allahabad High court quizzed Dr KV Ramesh, former Director of Epigraphy, ASI in this regards. Lucknow inscription was ‘fragmentary’ while Ayodhya inscription was 5 feet by 2 feet. The dates didn’t match as alleged by Irfan Habib—to have been stolen in 1953 and to be kept hidden till 1992.

1000 yrs old stone inscription recording the construction of Vishnu temple found from the ruins of Babri mosque by archaeologists. 

This 20 line inscription composed in chaste Sanskrit & written in Devnagari script records the construction of a stone temple on a scale.. never before seen(purvvair-apy-akrtam krtam nrpatibhir) & beautified with suvarna kalasa/spire. It further states that this ati adbhut,

Temple was built in temple city of Ayodhya located in Saketa mandala. It further says that Temple was dedicated to Vishnu hari who is described as slayer of Bali and the 10 headed one (ie Ravana). 

Most importantly it also states that temple was built during the reign of King Govindchandra an illustrious ruler of Gahadvala dynasty who were mainly Vaishnava in their faith..  Most probably it was a renovation of original brick temple with stone construction which was done at a time when threat of Islamic invaders was already looming over gangetic plains, 

Since inscription also talks abt  "fear caused by westerners" (ie Jihadis from the west). 

It was originally placed on the temple wall & ultimately used in construction of Babri mosque. It was discovered after demolition of mosque. The authenticity of inscription was confirmed by the most expert scholars in the field such as Ajay Mitra Shastri. IIRC he was labelled "sanghi" as we ...call it now a days. This inscription proved beyond any doubt that Ramjanmabhoomi temple existed on the same place. 

Actually it has been accepted as evidence by the court. Leftists tried to dismiss it on various grounds.  

For eg. 

They said that nowhere in inscription name of Lord Rama is mentioned. As if the Vishnu hari slayer of Bali & Ravana mentioned in that inscription isn't lord Rama himself but some other god! 

When nothing worked they said that it is a forgery by sanghis & not real inscription found from the site! 

When one of the best epigraphist of India such as Ajay Mitra Shastri gave his opinion that it is an authentic inscription dating back to 1000 yrs they tried to defame them! 

Infact they even tried to show that the threat from west mentioned in the inscription didn't mean threat from Jihadis from Hindukush but Rajput rulers from the western UP!

Beware the bearers of FALSE gift their BROKEN PROMISES. Much PAIN but still time. BELIEVE. There is GOOD out there. We oppose DECEPTION.

First Ram Mandir was on mercy of Babur

Then Congress

Then VP Singh

Then Ms' consent

Then majority in Loksabha

Then majority in Rajyasabha

Now Court+Ordinance ki koshish

Tomorrow elections

Day after communal harmony

I can clearly see evolution in Mandir case. Who can stop it now?

Conflict in Ayodhya is an issue of TRUTH being sabotaged by invaders 2 change history 2 suffocate Sanatan dharma but TRUTH always WINS

Spirituality is the basic characteristic of every indian. Now a days it is decreasing because of faulty norms and criteria of progress and happiness. Such spiritual places like Ayodhya will revive our original nature as a human and culture too.

Hindu patience over Ayodhya has rightfully come to an end, not simply after a few decades but after many centuries of struggle, waiting and false promises. Hindu patience over this crucial issue of reclaiming their most important sacred site from outside control is perhaps unprecedented for any major religious group in the world. It occurs within the background of numerous Hindu temples destroyed or occupied during the long period of Islamic invasions and adverse rule over the Hindu community. It is not an isolated issue or merely a politically whipped up sentiment but the main enduring Hindu concern over the centuries.

The people’s struggle over Sri Ram Janmabhoomi and reinstating the Sri Ram Mandir on the site has a long history. 

To Understand it Now let’s go back a little in time…

THE UNHEARD HISTORY OF AYODHYA STRUGGLE THAT'LL BLEED YOUR HEARTS:

77 small and big battles were fought for the temples which are recorded as follows: 

Babar: 4

Humayun: 10

Jalaludin Mohammad (turk lutera/Akbar): 20

Aurangzeb (probably): 30 

Nawab Saadat Ali: 5

Nasiruddin Haider: 3

Wajid Ali: 2

British: 2 

Kaale Angrez (khangress/Namazwadi) -last1

Ram Temple is not only an issue of Religious belief. 

Hindus have contested the Ayodhya site of Ram Janmabhoomi since the area was taken over by the Muslim invader Babur in 1528 and since then many lives have been lost defending or trying to reclaim the site. 

IN 1528- 1530,

SHRI SHYAMANAND JI MAHARAJ

1) When Babur's ruled Delhi, Ayodhya Temple was under Shyamanand Ji Maharaj. Khwaja Kajal Abbas Moosa Ashi Khan on hearing Shyamanand’s Divinity was attracted & became disciple of Shri Shyamanand Maharaj, Jallal Shah came to know about this and became a disciple too. Brimming with the love for Islamic rule in India,

Jallal shah stabbed his guru Shyamanand with Khwaja Kajjal Abbas Moosa, 

Babur started forcefully burying dead bodies of muslims around Ayodha to gradually pave way towards Khurd Makka or Mini Mecca. Meerbaki Khan received orders from Babur for demolition of the Temple.

Shyamanand Maharaj was deeply hurt when he came to know that his disciples had conspired against him.With a heavy heart, Shyamanand Maharaj immersed the Idols into Sarayu and left for Himalayas. The priests of the temple shifted all the remaining things from Sanctum Sanctorum

According to the Orders of Jallalshah, all four priests aka guards were beheaded. He ordered his men to demolish the temple and build an islamic structure. But the Structure was supposed to have no place for Worship or for Uzu before a namaz. 

KING OF BHITI- RAJA MEHTAB SINGH

As soon as the declaration was made, 

The king of Bhiti Raja Mahtab Singh was on a pligrimage to Badrinath. On reaching Ayodhya, he came to know about the ongoing issues at Ayodhya and sent around 1.8 lakh soldiers to safeguard Ram Bhakths.

 Baburs Army had 4.5 lakh soldiers .The Staunch Ram Devotees had taken a pledge that they wouldnt stop until the last drop of their blood. 

The battle went on for 70 days and all the soldiers and Raja Mahtab Singh himself was beheaded, Entire Ayodhya was painted with the blood of Rambhakths . 

Mir Baqi demolished the Temple with Cannons. Mir Baqi was so barbaric that he built the Islamic Structure with the remnants of the Temple Debris and used Human Blood instead of Water for construction.

( Historian Cunningham in his Lucknow Gazetteer mentions in the 66th point, Page 3 that despite the falling of 1 Lakh 74 thousand Hindu Bodies, Mir Baqi succeeded in his plans by bombarding the Temple from all 4 sides in 1528.)

Representative Image

Another historian named Hamilton mentions in the Barabanki Gazetteer that 

Jallalshah had ordered Mir Baqi to use the blood of all dead Hindus for construction of the Islamic Structure, 

SWAMI DEVIDEEN PANDEY OF SANETHU

Around 6 miles away frm Ayodhya, Sanethu village lived Devideen Pandey. He created militia by collating Suryavanshi kshatriyas Rajputs from Saray, Sisinda n Rajepur. 

He told Mahabat singh n other Suryavanshi Kshatriyas that my ancestor was Rishi Bharadwaj n ur ancestor was none other than Ayodhya Naresh Shri Ram, 

The moghuls are converting Ayodhya into an Islamic Burial Ground. It is better to die in a battle against them than being a silent spectator to all these atrocities. 

Within 2 days, around 90,000 kshatriyas Rajputs from far away places under Devideen Pandey n launched attack, The battle with the Moghul Army went on for 5 days. On the 6th day, Devideen Pandey eliminated several commanders and had a direct confrontation with Mir Baqi. One of Mir’s personal body guard’s attacked Devideen Pandey’s Skull with a Heavy Brick.Taking advantage of the situation, Mir Baqi fired at an already injured Pandey and he later succumbed to his injuries. 

Devideen Pandey from Sanethu and Mahabat Singh attacked Meer Baanki’s men. 

Devideen Pandey alone is said to have killed 600 men in five days. 

Ayodhya bathed in the blood of 90,000 hindu martyrs once again. The descendents of Devideen Pandey still reside in a village called Sanethu, 

KING OF HANSVAR -RAJA RANVIJAY SINGH

Just after 14 days of Devideen Pandey’s Martyrdom, the king of Hansvar Ranvijay Singh along with 24000 soldiers attacked the huge and well armed army of Mir Baqi. Raja Ranvijay attained martyrdom after a ferocious battle of 10 days. 

Ayodhya saw blood of 24000 hindu soldiers.

Representative Image


IN 1530 - 1556,


QUEEN OF HANSVAR- RANI JAYAKUMARI KANWAR

Rani Jayakumari was widow of Raja Ranvijay. 

After her husband’s martyrdom, she took the responsibility of rescuing Ayodhya from the clutches of Invaders and formed an army with 3000 female soldiers. 

They fought till Humayun (Nasiruddin Muhammed) became emperor in 1530. Ranis Guru Swami Maheshwaranand Ji had been recruiting Ram Bhakths and Training them under Maharani’s Supervision and expanding the army. He simultaneously raised an army of 24 thousand saints and sadhus. 

Both the Armies fought valiantly against Humayun’s forces in over 10 battles to gain back Ayodhya from Moghul Clutches.

The end of the 10th battle witnessed considerable damage in the Moghul Army and Ayodhya came under Rani Jayakumari’s Control, 

But the happiness was shortlived. Just after a month, Humayun sent his entire army to Ayodhya and crushed both the armies and publicly beheaded Swami Maheshwaranand Ji AND Rani Jayakumari. 

Ayodhya once again bathed in the brave blood of 24 thousand Ascetic Saints; 3 thousand Ferocious Female Soldiers.

IN 1556 TO 1606,

SWAMI BALRAMACHARI JI

After their death, the rebellion was led by Swami Balramachariji. 

He visited village after village and raised a strong army of Hindu Youngsters and Saints. 

He attacked Ayodhya 20 times, 

He succeeded in gaining control around 15 times but had to retreat to the Moghul deception (Nocturnal attacks were considered illegal in Warfare). This went on till Humayun’s son Akbar ascended the Throne in 1556. 

The Moghul Army was getting weaker and weaker day by day due to the ongoing battles and bravery of Hindu Saints who did not care for their lives. 

As Al Taqia, Akbar built a small temple of 3 inches, 

Continuous wars took toll on Swami Balramachari’s health. He left divine abode on auspicious day of Prayag Kumb near Triveni Sangam

 Submissive Hindus were fooled by Akbar’s Al-Taqia. His plan was to safeguard remaining Moghuls from being killed n allocate sufficient time for resurrection, 

IN 1611, 

An English traveller William Finch visited Ayodhya and recorded the Ruins of the Ranichand [Ramachand] castle and houses but made no mention of any mosque.

IN 1628 To 1656

Shah Jahan followed the same strategy since his rule in 1628. 

 IN 1634, 

Thomas Herbert described a “pretty old castle of Ranichand [Ramachand]” which he described as an antique monument. 

IN 1656 TO 1707

Shah Jahan son Aurangzeb had dreamt of killing all the kafirs in the country and converting the entire country into an Islamic State. He attacked temple around 10 times and started destroying the temples built by Jalaludin Akbar

SAMARTH GURU SHRI RAMDAS JI MAHARAJ

That is when Samarth Guru Shri Ramdasji Maharaj’s Disciple Shri Vaishnavdas took the responsibility of protecting Ayodhya. He attacked Aurangzeb around 30 times with the help of Suryavanshi Kshatriyas from the nearby villages

 The most prominent among them were :-

KING OF SARAY - SARDAR GAJRAJ SIINGH

KING OF RAJEPUR - KUNWAR GOPAL SINGH

KING OF SISINDA - THAKUR JAGDAMBA SIINGH

Despite knowing that their might is very small before the Moghul Army of Aurangzeb, they chose to fight n attained Martyrdom 4 Ayodhya.

REPRESENTATIVE IMAGE

Thousands of great warriors like them gave up everything to protect Ramlala and Ayodhya. 

The descendents of Thakur Gajraj Singh still reside in Saray. Fauzabad is still full of Suryavanshi Kshatriyas. 

Till this date, some do not wear pagdis or shoes.

Their ancestors had taken an oath that they wouldn't wear shoes till Ayodhya is Secure, 

IN 1640, 

CHIMTADHARI SADHUS AND BABA SHRI VAISHNAV DAS JI

Aurangzeb entrusted the job of demolishing the temple structure completely to Jaanbaaz Khan. Chimtadharai Sadhus and Baba Vaishnav Das confronted the huge army of Jaanbaaz Khan at a place called Urvashi Kund and the battle went on for 7 days.

The Sadhus were adept in all martial arts. They defeated the moghul army and their prominent weapon was Chimta ( An Iron Rod moulded into a Tong ). 

 10000 chimtadhari sadhus had defeated aurangzeb's army with their 'tongs' alone!! 

Unbelievable! 

Aurangzeb was infuriated over the defeat of Jaanbaaz Khan at the hands of Chimtadhaari Sadhus. They fought several battles together and killed Sayyed Hassan. This was an unexpected jolt to Aurangzeb. 

This setback and damage was so huge for the Moghul Army that they were not in a position to wage another war for next 4 years.

 IN 1664, 

Sudden attack by Moghuls was so intense that 10,000 Hindus died and even citizens werent spared. All dead Hindus were dropped inside a well named Kandarp Koop .

Today that well is known as Gaj Shaheeda n located near Eastern Door of Temple Premise. 

IN 1672,

However by 1672, the appearance of a mosque at the site can be inferred because Lal Das’s Awadh-Vilasa describes the location of birthplace without mentioning a temple. 

IN - 1717, 

The Ruler of Jaipur, Maharaja Jai Singh-II purchased land surrounding the site from moghul and his documents showed a mosque. 

IN - 1766-71

The Jesuit missionary Joseph T visited the site during 1766-71, wrote that either Aurangzeb or Babur had demolished the Ramkot fortress, including a house. The house was considered birthplace of Rama.

The colonial British similarly prevented the Hindus from reclaiming Ayodhya, though they tried through various protests. 

IN - 1770 TO 1814, 

KING OF AMETHI - RAJA GURUDUTT SINGH

PRINCE OF PIPARPUR - KUNWAR RAJKUMAR SINGH

Navab Sahadat Ali was attacked 5 times by King of Amethi Raja Gurudutt Singh ; the Prince of Piparpur Rajkumar Singh. 

Everytime, hindu dead bodies piled up in Ayodhya. 

In Lucknow Gazeteer, Colonel Hunt writes that after realizing that Hindus wont stop till they got control of Ayodhya, 

The Nawab allowed Hindus to offer prayers alongside Namazi Muslims. But he never officially handed over the property to Hindus. 

IN 1814 TO 1836

KING OF MKARHI - RAJA KRISHNA PRASAD SINGH PALWAR

In Page No. 62, In Lucknow Gazeteer, Colonel Hunt mentions that during the rule of Naseeruddin Haider, the King Krishna Prasad Sinh Palwar of Mkarhi unified Hindus and attacked Ayodhya thrice and they suffered heavy casualties. 

The third battle was the bloodiest one.

On the 8th day, Hindu Kings started losing but they kept on retaliating with their entire might. 

The kings of Bheethi, Hanswar, Mkarhi, Khajurhat, Deeyara and Amethi were all present in the war. 

But some Chimtadhari Sadhus made a miraculous entry n turned the fate of war. 

The support from Chimtadhari Sadhus helped the Kings in Crushing the entire Royal Mughal Army and every Muslim Soldier was dragged mercilessly to death. Thus, Ayodhya was once again in the control of Hindus.

IN 1847 TO 1857,

Even during Wajid Ali Shah's rule, Hindus tried to reclaim Ayodhya. In Faizabad Gazetteer, Historian Cunningham writes that battle was very violent n lasted for 4 days resulting in death of hundreds of Local Rajputs and Hindus. Hindu Rajputs captured Ayodhya again but spared muslim women n kids.

 Hindus successfully rebuilt a Grand Ram Mandir which was destroyed by Aurangzeb. 

In 1858,

BABA SHRI RAMCHARAN DAS JI

On 18th March 1858 during Shah Zafars rule, Baba Ramcharan Das was hanged to death by Britishers.

(There are many such proofs attested in history from 1822 , Hafizullah, an official of the Faizabad law court, which claimed Babri was situated at Janm bhoomi. And then the story gets into the records such as P. Carnegy's Faizabad (1870), Nevill's Faizab)ad Dist.Gazetteer, and footnote in Mrs.Beveridge's Babur's Memoirs (1922)

Police officer and writer Kishore Kunal states that all the claimed inscriptions about date on the Babri Mosque were fake & very recent. They were affixed sometime around 1813 (almost 285 years after the supposed construction of the mosque in 1528 CE. Till 1940s, the Disputed Structure was called Masjid-i-Janmasthan including in the official documents such as revenue records. Shykh MD Azamat Ali Kakorawi Nami (1811–1893) wrote: “the Babari Mosque was built up in 923 AH”

Azamat Ali attributes construction to have happened under the patronage of Sayyid Musa Ashiqan in the Janmasthan temple in Faizabad-Avadh, which was a great place of (worship) and capital of Rama’s father. H.R. Neville, the editor of the Faizabad Dist Gazetteer (1870), wrote that the Janmasthan temple “was destroyed by Babur & replaced by a Mosque. “He also wrote, “The Janmasthan was in Ramkot and marked the birthplace of Rama. In 1528 Babur came to Ayodhya and halted here for a week.” Neville goes on mention, “Babur destroyed the ancient temple and on its site built a mosque, still known as Babur’s mosque. The materials of the old structure (i.e., the temple) were largely employed especially temple columns. 1853, a group of armed Hindu ascetics belonging to the Nirmohi Akhara occupied the Babri Masjid site, and claimed ownership of the structure.

All the versions of Ramayana irrespective of origin state that the capital of Sri Ram was Ayodhya. For billion of Hindus, Ayodhya has always been the place where Sri Ram was born. The alleged Mosque is believed to have been constructed during 1528-29 by ‘Mir Baqi,’ the commander of the Mughal emperor Babur. Interestingly there is scant evidence for the fact regarding Mir Baqi and construction of Mosque. Even Baburnama doesn’t find a mention of same.

Issue under the Colonial State

Subsequently, the civil admin stepped in and in 1855 divided the mosque premises into two parts: one for Hindus & the other for Muslims. A Muslim party claimed that the Hanumangarhi temple had been built over a mosque and organised a raid in 1855 to occupy its premises. The raiders were beaten back, some killed, and others chased to the Babri Masjid where they took refuge. However, the victorious Hindus did not make claims to the Babri Masjid. This suggests that the mosque had not yet become contentious in Ayodhya’s local memory. The Nawab of Oudh instituted a committee of inquiry into the conflict of 1855. The inquiry concluded that the Hanumangarhi temple hadn’t been built over a Mosque. However, to placate Muslims the Nawab toyed with the idea of constructing a mosque adjacent to the Hanumangarhi temple. It perhaps prompted the construction of a parallel story around the Babri. Few years after the revolt of 1857, the Mahant of Hanumangarhi built a chabutra or near the Disputed Structure. A complaint regarding the appropriation was made to the magistrate by the then muezzin.

In 1861, the administration built a wall to separate the mosque from the chabutra. In 1883, the Hindus launched an effort to construct a temple on the platform. When the administration denied them the permission to do this, they took the matter to court. In 1885, the Hindu Sub Judge Pandit Hari Kishan Singh dismissed the lawsuit. Subsequently Court also dismissed the lawsuit in 1886, in favour of status quo.

But most strangely, the courts and governments in India, both National and State, since independence in 1949 have kept the case in continual unresolved litigation that only demeans Hindu sentiments further.

In December 1949, some Hindus placed idols of Rama and Sita in the mosque, and claimed that they had miraculously appeared there. As thousands of Hindu devotees started visiting the place Government declared the ‘so called mosque’ a disputed area & locked its gates. Subsequently came lawsuits from Hindus, asking for permission to convert the site into a place of worship. 

In the 1980s, the VHP etc. launched a campaign to construct the Ram Temple at the site. The Rajiv Gandhi Government allowed Hindus to access the site for prayers in late 80s.

Have any other national governments failed to support the most honoured historical leaders of their country and culture, like Sri Ram in India? Has any other judiciary taken so long to resolve what is the most crucial and watched legal case for decades, particularly that of its majority religious community? The judiciary has declined responsibility, perhaps not wanting to be the deciding factor in this monumental case, which is not simply a legal or property dispute, but an issue of tremendous historical relevance, cultural symbolism and profound faith.

In 1992,

Final Balidan was made on 6th Dec 1992 by Brave n Dharmpremi Kar Sewaks and rest is History. Hope you all went through the journey well.

|

|

Bhavya mandir Shri Ram Janambhumi pe hi banayenge

|

Ayodhya is not an issue for compromise but of respecting Hindu sentiments that have been trampled on for centuries. Why can't independent India honor Sri Ram, as the independence movement evoked Ram Rajya?

|

_/\_BOL SIYA VAR RAJA RAM CHANDRA BHAGWAN JI KI JAY_/\_

|

|

|

_/\_ PAWAN PUTRA BAJRANG BALI HANUMAN BHAGWAN JI KI JAY_/\_

Modern Interlude

It was well understood that it happened in order to appease Hindus post the damage while appeasing Muslims through Shah Bano case. Few also say that it happened to hide off Gumnami Baba issue which was causing red flag for the INC. Extensive works by Anuj Dhar clearly proves that Gumnami Baba living in Faizabad was none other than Netaji and INC holistically wanted to divert countries attention when Gumnami Baba was turning into pop wind of time. On December 6, 1992 the disputed structure was razed off. Though million of people had actually congregated for Bhajan and Puja, few took law in hand. It followed with communal violence nationwide leaving at least 2000 dead. On January 7, 1993, the Rao Government issued an ordinance taking over 66.7 acres of land in Ayodhya, including the 2.77 acres, the site of disputed Structure.

The ordinance was turned into the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993. The Act prescribed maintenance of status quo that prevailed just before the acquisition. It meant that the makeshift temple was to remain and puja was to be continued. The Act also abated court proceedings on disputes over ownership rights to all properties in the acquired land. In other words, the Ayodhya title suits pending in the High Court too abated. Either the Government was willing to let the mosque become a temple or planned to use the prevailing status quo to negotiate a deal between Hindus and Muslims.

A 5-member bench heard a challenge to the Act in what is known as Ismail Faruqui vs Union of India (1993-94) and also debated over the Presidential Reference. The reference asked SC to give its opinion on “whether a Hindu temple or any Hindu religious structure existed prior.” The SC refused to give its opinion on the Presidential Reference as it didn’t involve a point of law. As former CJI AM Ahmadi pointed out “We were being asked to give an opinion on structure, not whether a Rama temple existed.” CJI further said, “However, the cause of the dispute was that a Rama Temple had been demolished to build the Babri Masjid in 1528. It was akin to shifting the goalpost, so to speak.”

Time to end the hypocrisy of no Ram temple in Ayodhya and restore the Ram Rajya that India's Independence Movement sought.

There is a growing demand for a final resolution of the Ayodhya issue. In the backdrop of Vishwa Hindu Parishad rally, and growing mobilisation around it, it is timely to revisit the significance of the Ayodhya movement

Resolving the Ayodhya dispute would require special legislation since the courts refuse to rule decisively on it. Let us examine the issues involved in this process.Today, under Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP, India, at last, has a government that honours Hindu sentiments, including festivals, temples and sacred sites. Hindus feel that since they have a Government no longer against them, this painful issue can finally be resolved in their favour.

Few queries regarding misconception with this movement

As for the BJP,  it made the Ayodhya movement its own, was rewarded with election victories in 1989 & 1991, then dropped it. When impatient Kar Sevaks demolished the BM & jubilated, LK Advani broke down in tears, called it Black Day. BJP's involvement with Ayodhya is tainted. 

Did rajiv neo gandhi help ramjanamabhumi movement more than any hindutva prime minister after him? Strictly, not Rajiv neo gandhi but the court ordered the unblocking. Still, his policy was facts-based, pragmatic, solution-oriented. Had the eminent communist distorians and snake V.P Singh (who give snakes a bad name)had not declared  the tyrant invader babri masjid the mecca of secularism, he would have suceeded and the rama temple been built.

Just Remembering

when Balasaheb Thackeray went to Lucknow, to attend court hearing, People asked him "when u wil come again?"

Balasaheb calmly replied the people" Destruct 1 more Masjid and I will come again"; pointing towards Kashi Mathura. Times saw whenever issue of Ram Mandir arise, it was only Balasaheb ji, who stayed on his ideology.

The one and only one Balasaheb ji who took responsibility of Babri Destruction and only Leader who fought w/o any post. we don't know where were the others. whether it's Ram Mandir Issue or Mandal-Kamandal debate, He fought for Hindutva. He paid price too. This is whr MH was saved by Balasaheb Thackeray who threw out commie-southies, secularists and pecefuls. Else today MH wd hv been worse than WB. 

05 AUGUST 2020