hi guys today on the show we're going to summarize a Srijan foundation talk
this one by Meenakshi jain ji on creating a case for the Ram mandir in Ayodhya my
name is Sham Sharma welcome to the Sham Sharma show
hello hello and welcome welcome to another edition of the Sean Sharma show
thank you very much for joining me today thank you very much for watching I
appreciate you okay first and foremost guys the full version of this talk you
can go find on the Srijan foundation YouTube channel the link to that YouTube
channel is provided in the description below I am just going to be summarizing
some of the main points from the lecture that has been given there by Shreemati
Meenakshi Jain Ji I would really recommend that you go check out the full
lecture as well okay so a case has always been made by the left historians
that the worship of Shri Rama is actually a 19th 18th century phenomenon
and didn't really exist before the British times but there's plenty of
evidence of Rama Kathas and of stories of RAM that have been circulated and that
have been told for several centuries even before the Common Era in fact
Valmiki wrote much before the Christian era that the Ramayana or the story of
Rama has been recited by the sons of Rama as well the popularity of the Rama
and pervades the entire country in such a way that there are around 25 versions
of the Ramayana in Sanskrit alone and there are over 300 vernacular versions
of the Ramayana all around the country as well in fact VS Suptankar says
that the Ramayana was known as an ancient work even before the Mahabharat
came into its present form also in the second century AD the Buddhist writer
Kumar Lata talks about the public recitation of the Ramayana as well so again
there is no doubt that the Ramayana and the respect of the Ramayana and the love
for the Ramayana and the pervasiveness of Ramayana across the country existed
well before the 18th and 19th century in fact RC Dutt wrote that the Ramayana is
a living tradition and a living entity and it forms the basis of a moral
instruction of a nation in fact there are examples of temples that were built
in the 12th century AD across central and eastern India where you can see
entire scenes from the Ramayana being inscribed onto the walls again all of
this goes to refute the claim that Rama worship was some 18th 19th century
phenomenon in fact there is a lot of accounts written in the seventeenth and
eighteenth and nineteenth century in Arabic
in urdu and in persian about the Babri Masjid and none of them mentioned that
the Babri Masjid was built on vacant land all of them mentioned that the
Babri Masjid was built after the destruction of A Rama temple and then the
masjid was built on top of it in fact Abul fazl also wrote that Ayodhya is
important and has a deep spiritual significance for Hindus because Rama was
born there and there are also records throughout the Middle Ages of the
significance of Ayodhya the significance of Ram Janmabhoomi and the fact that
Hindus considered the Ram Janmabhoomi to be the actual birthplace of Rama but had
given around six bighas of land to Hanuman Teela to the Hindus in 1600 and
when that lease was being renewed in 1723 the scribe who was writing the
lease from Ayodhya from Hanuman Tila also wrote that he is writing this
record from the birthplace of Rama more records of the spiritual significance of
the Ram Janmabhoomi to Hindus are also there William Finch a trader with the
British East India Company also wrote a detailed account of that area during his
visit and he also wrote that around the Babari masjid and around the round the
Ramjanmabhoomi, the Hindus come and offer their prayers the Hindus come and take a dip
in the river he made no mention of Muslims going to offer prayers in that
area another very detailed account of that area comes from the Jesuit
missionary Joseph Tiffin teyla Joseph Tiffin teyla also wrote a very detailed
account of that area because he lived in that area for about seven to eight years
he wrote that Hindus have created a Bedi or a cradle in the mosque complex and that
they do a parikrama around that complex during the Rama Navami
again importantly he makes no mention of Muslim presence in that area or Muslims
going to offer prayers in that area as well so again as you read these accounts
it starts to become increasingly clear that Muslims actually did not really
have a historical deeply spiritual connection to that area what starts to
become clear is that the reason a mosque was built there by babar is because he
just wanted to rub the nose of the Hindus in it he knew the spiritual
significance that the Hindus had to the Ram Janmabhoomi and to that temple and
he just wanted to take that land away from them now in the modern era so to
say the first record of the dispute comes from 1822 where a court
official says that the Babri Masjid was built after destroying a Rama temple and
it is situated right next to the Sita ki Rasoi now again there's a record
in 1855 where the bairagis, who had control of the area they had a couple of
serious skirmishes with Muslims to maintain control of that area where
the babri masjid stood now the Bairagis said that they had never been a mosque
previously on that area and if there had been a mosque previously on that area
that the Muslim rulers of the area would not have given them this land and they
they also demanded that an independent
committee be set up and that the independent committee determined whether
or not there had been a mosque previously on this area and the
independent committee was set up and they also did not find a presence of a
mosque in that area previously then in around 1870 a settlement officer of the
British Empire in the area named Patrick Carnegie he also noted that there was a
dispute between Muslims and Hindus for control of that area about a decade and
a half ago and then to resolve that dispute what the British essentially did
is they created a railing in the mosque complex where on one side of the railing
inside the mosque the Muslims were allowed to go and offer prayers and on
the other side of the railing in the mosque complex the Hindus were allowed
to keep offering their prayers and thus after that that became the status quo
but before that the Hindus had free access to the mosque so it goes on to
show as well that this feeling of claiming this area within the Muslims
has been a relatively new entity but the spiritual significance and the feeling
of reclaiming the area within Hindus has been a very very old phenomenon in fact
over the years right under the noses of the British as well through some sneaky
means the Hindus ended up adding a chula a kothri, to put the ram lalla
statue in and and Sri Ram's charan paduka within the temple complex as well this
just shows their commitment to not lose the area and to eventually reclaim the
area because they had such a deep connection to that area then also in
1885 the mahants filed a case with the British government to build a small
temple in the Masjid complex because since there was no
structure there in the monsoons they were susceptible to the rain and in the
winter they were susceptible to the cold so they asked the government to build a
temple there and then this case went through actually three layers of courts
and all the courts recognized that the Hindus actually have a very very strong
case to build a temple there on the premises but they decided at the end of
the day that because this was such a sensitive issue that they would not
actually take a decision in the Hindus favor
then the Amin Commission was also set up which also found that there were deep
depressions all around the masjid complex which actually showed that
people had been performing parikrama around the Masjid and treating it as the
Rama temple for centuries before as well there are also numerous Muslim accounts
and numerous Muslim complaints to the police that the Hindus are deeply
extremely unhappy with the Muslims' occupation of the Ram Janmabhoomi and
thus they're having trouble offering namaz in that area in 1861 the British
also compiled some revenue reports and and in those revenue reports the Masjid
land the plan where the masjid stood is notified as government land and
importantly the Mahants are stated as the under proprietors and in all the
reports since then as well the mahants are noted as the under proprietors as
well then in 1944 the government of the United Provinces made a list of the
mosques and in the list of those mosques there was information as to who built
the mosque when the mosque was built and who the Wakf was now the wakf was
created so that money could be raised to maintain the mosque but importantly
there was no wakf notified for the Babri Masjid and then when the courts asked
the pro babri camp for why there was no work for the Babri Masjid they had no
explanation then as people are aware of course in 1992 the mosque was destroyed
and during the destruction of the mosque, a big inscription actually fell on the
ground which was later came to be known as the Vishnu hari inscription which
gave details about who built the Ram temple before the Babri Masjid and when
the temple was built and so on and so forth but interestingly then the left
historians created another narrative where they said that well this is not
actually from the masjid, this was actually planted there by the people who were
destroying the Masjid so they said the this was stolen from the Lucknow museum
but turns out that the inscription that they were talking about stolen being
stolen from the Lucknow museum was the treta-ka-Thakur inscription which was a
completely different inscription from the Vishnu hari inscription so again
they didn't really offer a convincing explanation as to what this inscription
was and how this inscription could have been placed there then in 2003 the
courts also asked the Archaeological Survey of India to go and excavate the
area and determine whether there had been a presence of a temple before the
Babri Masjid was built and the ASI actually found that the site was in
continuous usage since the second millennium BC there was an evidence of a
shivalinga like structure that was present there since the Gupta period
then there is also evidence of a grand temple being built there in the 12th
century AD which was there till it was destroyed in the 16th century AD and
then as we all know a mosque was built on top of the walls of that destroyed
temple then the left historians created another narrative you know the
left historians like RS Sharma like Suraj Bhan like Romila Thapar like Irfan
Habib these guys created their own narrative and in fact a member of the
ASI KK Muhammad he saw all this information he was actually talking to
the Muslim community that they should hand over this temple to the Hindus
because it would be such a good gesture of goodwill but again the left
historians created this narrative that they had enough proof that there was no
Hindu claim on this land and that the Muslims should fight it and then they
were able to convince the Muslim community to keep fighting this issue
and then they went to the courts to give testimonies as to what case there was
against Hindu claim on this land to listen to some of the testimonies that
these people gave you really should go and watch that entire video again the
link is provided in the description below you really should go and listen to
the claims number one the historians didn't even go and represent this case
themselves they actually sent their understudies and people that were doing
MAs or PhDs under them to go and give testimonies and many of these people who
went and gave testimony said that they had no working knowledge of Urdu or
Persian or Arabic or Sanskrit and they had actually not even read the
Baburnama or many other historical accounts that are associated with the
history of the Ram Janmabhoomi & the history of the Babri Masjid but they
had only Read books and papers that were written by these leftist historians
and they were going off the information that they had from those books and those
papers the courts obviously recognized the weakness of the arguments that they
made and thus the Allahabad High Court in 2010 gave the decision that they gave
and there doesn't seem to be much to indicate that the Supreme Court decision
is going to be much different or the left historians would be able to
overturn the Allahabad High Court's decision so this is basically a summary
of the talk that Meenakshi jain Ji gave in this Srijan foundation talk again I
would recommend that you go check out that full lecture a lot of these leftist
historians are Hindus "Ghar Ke Bhedi
Lanka Dhaaye", that saying holds a lot
of water even today so guys I hope you got a small understanding of the Ram
Janmabhoomi issue and their arms and the Ramjanmabhoomi story so far the reason this story
is important to reach as many people as possible is because the left is again
creating this narrative around the Ram Janmabhoomi and the Babri Masjid even
though it's a false narrative so for us who are trying to create the right
narrative and for people in the surgeon foundation and people like Meenakshi
Jain Ji who are trying to create the right narrative it is very important that this
narrative and this story and the facts reach as many people as possible so if
you find this video useful in any way please share this video with as many
people as you can go watch the original video on the vision foundation YouTube
channel and go share that video with as many people as you can and let's create
the spread of correct information and let's create our own narrative around
this let me know what you think about this whole story and the Left narrative
created in the comment section down below if you enjoyed today's video you
can make sure to give this video a thumbs up give it a like helps me out
helps the channel a lot also you can make sure to subscribe to the shows
channel down below over here or over here I will see you for the next episode
and until then stay happy stay healthy and I'll see you soon