Dancing dervishes of UPA vs Rama and Rama Sethu-I
V SUNDARAM | Fri, 01 Aug, 2008 , 03:18 PM
In these columns during the last four years I have been consistent in describing the UPA Government in New Delhi under the stranglehold of a Catholic lady from Italy as ‘Islam-embracing, Christianity-coveting and Hindu-hating’. Her main agenda, owing her allegiance to the Pope in Rome and not to the Indian Constitution, is to destroy Hinduism and Sanatana Dharma, by hook or by crook, in India and the world.
Congress – DMK together in Ram Sethu Destruction Dance http://newstodaynet.com/images/stories/columns/sharpshot/2008-images/0108-sun.gif
Anti-Hindu Sonia-Congress Party and the equally anti-Hindu and atheistic DMK Party are working together to destroy the sacred Rama Sethu bridge in Rameshwaram using the political umbrella of Sethu-Samudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP). Both Sonia Gandhi and Karunanidhi are totally committed to the political marginalisation of Hindus, social debasement of Hindus, cultural devaluation of Hindus, religious decimation of Hindus and above all to the national de-recognition of Hindus as the main pith and core of our nation.
This patent fact has now become very clear because of the hardened criminal fashion in which the anti-national and anti-Hindu Sonia-directed UPA Government, filled with Sonia-chosen nincompoops, have been presenting the Rama-Sethu case of the government of India, not in a District Munsif’s Court, but in the Supreme Court of India. The recent stellar performance of Fali Nariman, the Chief Counsel for the government of India, would make any third grade mofussil lawyer in a District Munsif’s Court laugh with unconcealed contempt! Nariman stated that Lord Rama himself destroyed the Rama-Sethu Bridge and therefore the question of Government of India destroying it cannot arise. As an international authority of Tamil and Sanskrit Literature (apart from law!), he was quoting from Kamba Ramayana and Padma Puranam. He also arrogated to himself the Supreme legal wisdom and authority to question the timeless faith of more than 800 millions of Hindus of India in the timeless sacredness and sanctity of Rama Sethu. When he was reading out certain portions from an affidavit relating to Rama Sethu which was earlier filed in September 2007 by the government of India and which was later withdrawn by Gopal Subramaniam, the counsel for government of India, the Supreme Court Judges asked Fali Nariman as to whether he was stating the same facts from the same affidavit which was withdrawn earlier, Fali Nariman replied ‘Yes’. Government of India has somersaulted as many times as the Rama Sethu case has come up before the Supreme Court so far!
To begin with government of India said that there is no evidence regarding the existence of Ramayana, Lord Rama or the Rama Sethu Bridge. They said that Lord Rama is a fictitious character. Lord Rama is a mythological character. Rama Sethu Bridge is a natural formation and not a man-made Bridge etc. etc. The atheistic and anti-Hindu Karunanidhi went overboard and had the temerity to ask, ‘Where did Lord Rama get his Engineering Degree from?’ In its earlier affidavit government of India had said ‘There is no scientific or historical evidence to prove the existence of Lord Ram. Issues of faith cannot be resolved by taking recourse to science or scientific evidence. India is a secular state and respects all religions and religious faiths and beliefs. A secular state cannot espouse the cause of any religion, faith or belief. In a multi-religious, multi-cultural society, the state cannot and should not be called upon to determine issues of faith’. This callous anti-Hindu attitude led to widespread public protests and agitation throughout the country. Panicked by the political repercussions and the VHP’s move to go to the streets to mobilize public support, the central government in a knee-jerk response decided to withdraw the ‘offending remarks’. Gopal Subramanian, the Counsel for the government of India told the Supreme Court that government of India had withdrawn their earlier affidavit and that they would be filing a fresh affidavit. The Union Minister for Law (-lessness!) H.R.Bhardwaj shamelessly somersaulted from his earlier pseudo-secular, anti-Hindu position and said with calculated and diabolic dissimulation ‘Lord Rama is an integral part of Hindu faith and its existence can never be doubted. As Himalaya is Himalaya, and, Ganga is Ganga, Rama is Rama. It is a question of faith. There is no requirement of any proof to establish the existence of Lord Rama based on faith. The Government of India would be filing a supplementary affidavit on this issue before the Supreme Court and that would be cleansed of offending remarks that were noticed in the earlier affidavit which has been withdrawn’.
Accordingly Gopal Subramanian told the Supreme Court of India in September 2007, ‘The government will form a committee shortly, which will be entrusted with the task of hearing the grievances of the people including the petitioners on this issue. The government has total respect for all religions, and Hinduism in particular, in the context of the present case. The government is alive and conscious of religious sensibilities, including the unique, ancient and holy text of Ramayana. The government is also keen that its decisions bind and bring the society together rather than cause any disruption in the religious and social psyche of one true India. The centre respects each and every individual within the parameters of the Constitution, and acknowledges every citizen’s fundamental right to feel a part of the composite cultural and religious heritage of the country’. Thus acting on behalf of government of India, Gopal Subramanian became a great legal somersault in India’s legal history. This distinguished record was squarely beaten by Fali Nariman through his resplendent performance of ‘secular’ somersault in the Supreme Court last week. Here are the laughable details of his unsurpassed performance.
In his arguments in Supreme Court on 23 July, 2008, (Wednesday), Fali Nariman had stirred a hornet’s nest by quoting from the scriptures like Kamba Ramayana and Padma Puranam. He said that these scriptures show how Lord Ram himself broke Ram Setu. The basis of objection by several petitioners in the Supreme Court (Individuals and NGO’s) stemmed from the fear of possible destruction of Ram Setu as it fell in the way of the projected alignment. With the existence of Rama Setu itself being a matter of doubt (or under cloud) as per the scriptures, Nariman wondered how anything that does not exist could be revered. Great Tamil scholars and Sanskrit scholars whom I have consulted have categorically confirmed that Nariman has misled the Supreme Court in a calculated manner as desired by the Government of India.
Government of India somersaulted shamelessly for the nth time in open Supreme Court last week by saying that Rama Sethu cannot be declared as a national monument and backed its stand by relying on an affidavit, which it had withdrawn earlier in September 2007, in the wake of a country-wide furore over its contents doubting the existence of Ramayana, Lord Rama and their link to Ram Sethu. Its Special Counsel Fali S Nariman read out portions of the withdrawn affidavit to show that the Centre had taken a consistent stand that ‘Rama Sethu does not fulfil the criteria to be declared as a national monument. The stand of the government is crystal clear on this all the time in Parliament and in courts.’
But it soon became a little awkward, especially for a counsel of Nariman’s standing, when a bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices R V Raveendran and J M Panchal, taking a cue from petitioner Subramanian Swamy, pointed out that the centre could not rely on an affidavit that had already been withdrawn. The Bench asked Nariman: ‘Are the paragraphs from the withdrawn affidavit, which you are reading in support of the centre’s stand, incorporated in the fresh affidavit?’ Mr. Nariman said: ‘we take the entire blame for the withdrawal. The affidavit was withdrawn because people reacted in a certain manner. The assertion of the Union government that it is not a monument does not get diluted by the withdrawal of the affidavit’. This did not impress the bench, which said: ‘Why did you not re-file the affidavit if you are relying on it except for the paragraph which was objected to by public on the issue of faith? You did not say you are withdrawing only the problematic paragraph, but you withdrew the entire affidavit. The problem is that it cannot be relied upon as it had been withdrawn’.
This was a moment of infamy in the chequered history of our Supreme Court after Independence. By reading out in open court from an earlier affidavit already withdrawn by the government of India in September 2007, Nariman indirectly showed that he has contempt for law, rule of law, rule of equality before the law and the overriding majesty of law. He also made it clear through his political somersault that the rule of law can be vetoed by the rule of men, depending upon the exigencies of the moment, from time to time!
The VHP General Secretary Pravin Togadia has rightly said: ‘The Centre’s affidavit in the Supreme Court is the result of a trade-off between Sonia Gandhi and Karunanidhi as part of which the latter agreed to support the confidence vote sought by Manmohan Singh (on 22 July, 2008) on the condition that the UPA government will ensure that the Rama Setu is brought down. The centre’s stand before the apex court is fraught with dangerous consequences for the country... The same people (the centre) who first questioned the very existence of Ramayana, Lord Ram and Ram Setu are now invoking Kamba Ramayana and Padma Purana to say that Lord Rama destroyed the Rama Setu, but are not willing to look at the original Valmiki Ramayana, which has no such mention. It is a clear case of conspiracy to divide the nation, which will go up in flames and Sonia Gandhi will be responsible for it. The VHP would launch a nation-wide protest against the ‘conspiracy’ to destroy the Ram Setu’.
TAILPIECE: Karunanidhi And T R Baalu To Sonia Gandhi:
‘Will you, won’t you, will you, won’t you, will you join, with gusto and enthusiasm, the Dravidian Ram Sethu Destruction dance?’
Sonia Gandhi: ‘Would not, could not, would not, could not, could not join your delightful Dravidian Ram Sethu Destruction dance. Let us secularly plot for broader lands and better days’.
Saturday, 02 August, 2008 , 03:32 PM
When the government of India through their Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam gave several assurances in writing and filed an application before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 14-9-2007 seeking permission
to withdraw their earlier affidavit, a reasonable public expectation was created throughout the country to the effect that the Government of India would not damage or defile the Rama Sethu while implementing the SSCP and that care would be taken to see that the time-honoured religious feelings and sentiments of the Hindus in absolute majority are not hurt in any manner whatsoever. The following assurances were given by Gopal Subramaniam before the Supreme Court;
First that, ‘The government of India is alive and conscious of religious sensibilities including the unique, ancient and holy text of Ramayana’. Second that, ‘The government of India is also keen that its decisions bind and bring the society together, rather than cause any disruption in the religious and social psyche of one true India’. Third that, ‘without any reservation, in a spirit of inclusiveness and high democratic tradition, to consider a different point of view, withdraw the present affidavit to re-examine the entire matter’.
It was based on these explicit assurances, and on trust, that the petitioners like Subramaniam Swamy and others did not object to the withdrawal of the said earlier counter-affidavit that contained some highly objectionable averments on Sri Rama, and Ramayana.
These assurances read together created a right for the petitioners to legitimately expect a different counter affidavit from the government of India at a later stage. Unfortunately when the government of India filed their revised counter-affidavit in the Supreme Court in the last week of February 2008, they stuck to their original position and said that the SSCP can be effectively implemented only by destroying the Rama Sethu Bridge. In other words they made it clear that Alignment No.6 (which involved the destruction of Rama Sethu) will not be given up. Thus the government of India showed indivisible contempt for the popular and widespread public sentiment and religious belief of reverence for the Rama Setu, and it’s age-old sacred status in Hindu society. Government of India in a shameless manner said that we are a secular country and that the government cannot take note of matters of faith. They left it to the Supreme Court of India to adjudicate on this aspect.
When the Rama Sethu case came up again before the Supreme Court last week, Fali Nariman, Special Counsel for the Government of India gave a death blow to the religious feelings, beliefs and sentiments of more than 800 million Hindus in India when he informed the Supreme Court that a decision has been taken not to declare Rama Sethu as a national monument since it does not meet the prescribed criteria. It is indeed a deliberate affront to the due process of law and tantamount to misleading the petitioners and the Honourable Supreme Court, apart from the public at large. After ten months of deliberation or no deliberation, the government of India have somersaulted full circle and completely gone back on the assurances given by the Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam in open Supreme Court on 14.9.2007.
The UPA is hell bent on hurting Hindu religious feelings. As part of its political deal to win the confidence vote with the help of the DMK Party, the UPA within 24 hours of winning the sham confidence vote, told the Supreme Court through its Special Counsel Nariman that Shri Ram himself destroyed the Sethu and therefore the broken Sethu has no spiritual sanctity and therefore there is no harm in demolishing it to complete the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP).
Fali S.Nariman quoted the scriptures of Padma Puranam and Kambha Ramayanam to show how Shri Rama himself destroyed the Sethu to ensure nobody else would cross over to Sri Lanka. He said, ‘we are not destroying any bridge, as there is no bridge. We believe it was not a man-made structure. It was a super man-made structure, which was broken by Lord Ram himself. If it was something that was destroyed by the same man who built it, we are dealing with only a belief’. In order to counter the arguments of Nariman, the petitioners quoted from another scripture, Skanda Puranam, in point of time anterior to the Padma Puranam and the Kambha Ramayanam. There is no reference to the destruction of Sethu by Sri Rama in Skanda Puranam.
Arguing in the Supreme Court, Subramanian Swamy reiterated that the SSCP should be scrapped altogether if the government could not proceed further without destroying Ram Sethu. It is not economically viable as has been pointed out by the Union Planning Commission. He said the centre is not complying with the Court directions to find out whether Ramar Sethu is an ancient monument or not. Subramaniam Swamy pointed out that the centre wrote to the UNESCO urging that the Majuli Island in Assam be declared an ancient monument. Similarly the Brahma Sarovar in Punjab was declared a national monument, as people believed that Lord Brahma had a bath there. The centre is now seeking to implement SSCP by demolishing Ramar Sethu. Subramaniam Swamy told the Court that Ramar Sethu couldn’t be destroyed, as it is a place of worship for countless centuries. Anyone who tries to damage it should be booked for criminal offence under Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code. Swamy also told the Supreme Court that it should issue notice of contempt of Court to the Union Of India, particularly taking note of the way the courts’ directions and sentiments of millions of people are being toyed with by the government of India. Finally he said, ‘Scrap the SSCP; declare Rama Setu as a national monument and a world heritage centre; finally declare Rameshwaram as a divyakshetram’.
http://newstodaynet.com/images/stories/columns/sharpshot/2008-images/0208-sun2.gif Dr T N Ramachandran A great scholar and savant from Thanjavur
Let me now take up the flippant and casual observations of Nariman relating to Rama Sethu based upon his secondary knowledge of Kamba Ramayanam and Padma Puranam. Nariman has relied upon the following verse to reach his wrong and baseless conclusion that Bhagwan Rama himself destroyed Rama Sethu:
Marakkalam iyanga vendi,Varisilai kudayal keeri th
Tharukkiya idathhu,Pancha pdhagarenum saarin,
Perukkiya ezhu mundru piraviyum, pinikal neengi
Nerukuriya amararkku ellam nin needhi aavar anree (22.2)
I have consulted Dr T N Ramachandran of Thanjavur who is a great Tamil Scholar and savant on the point made by Nariman. I have it on his authority that the above verse upon which Nariman seems to have relied does not refer to the breaking of Rama Sethu by Lord Rama at all. Moreover the above verse is a verse which was later interpolated into the original text of Kambha Ramayana and which cannot be taken as either authentic or correct or reliable. This point relating to the fact of later interpolation has been clearly brought out in Murray Rajam’s edition of Kamba Ramayana published in 1959. The same point was also made by Prof.P.S.Sundaram who was commissioned by government of Tamil Nadu to translate Kamba Ramayana into English in 1992.
Dr.T.N.Ramachandarn says ‘How can Rama making a mark by scratching with his bow (‘keeri’ in Tamil) on the opening (mouth) of the Divine Bridge (causeway) be viewed as his breaking the Bridge?’ The scratching is done where the causeway begins. It is just an identification mark made on the causeway bridge. From there the cause way extends upto Ceylon. Lord Rama ordered that the Causeway Bridge should be guarded by Kappai and Siva. We should thank Fali. S.Nariman for citing the verse, though interpolated, which speaks about the careful safe guarding of the Bridge or Causeway by two divine Powers who were appointed by Bhagwan Rama to safeguard the Bridge. The information furnished to Nariman is by DMK Pundits. It is this DMK party which publicly burnt the Kamba Ramayana, the Periapurana and other puranams.
I fully endorse the assessment of Dr.T.N.Ramachandran: ‘The gubernatorial machinery of India, that is Bharath, pursues consistently a policy aimed at the accomplishment of impoverishment of Sanatana Dharma. India is today a paradise for the so-called Minority Communities. For the Hindus it is an inferno of ‘ever-burning sulphur unconsumed’. Ram Sethu is the greatest symbol of Indian integration. A pilgrimage to Kasi meets with its full fruition only when the pilgrim completes it by his visit to Rameswaram. To the Hindus the beckoning potency of Rameswaram is ineffably great. It is lofty, sacred and sublime. It is ecstatically hailed by the Hindus and it is here discriminations of caste, clan and the like stand subsumed traceless. The very thought of damaging Ram Sethu exceeds the combined and cumulative truculence of the pentad of all great sins (Panchamaha Pathakam ). It is an anathema pronounced on the unity of Bharath, which according to our Constitution shall be a Union of States. The suicidal policy pursued with crass obstinacy by our government is unexampled in the annals of the world. It was initially announced that Ram Sethu was but a natural formation and not one manually wrought. This stultifying proclamation perished the moment it was born. Then Bhagwan Rama stood condemned as one who had not graduated through a College of Engineering. This nefarious declaration received its fatal jolt when citizens, particularly women, debunked its utter untenability. Then was voiced forth the argument that Rama himself destroyed his bridge (the word ‘bridge’ is a misnomer. It is a causeway). The Senior Counsel who made bold to present this argument in the highest forum of India, alas, is only learned enough to misquote. Mahatma Gandhi dreamed of Rama Rajya. Lo! We are cursed to live in Congress Rajya!!’
To conclude with a beautiful and soul-stirring poem of PASUVAI UMA:
This beautiful poem gives a clarion call to all of us to join together on a pilgrimage to Rameshwaram to have the divine darshan of the sacred Rama Sethu. It motivates us to consider the pilgrimage as our sacred duty, and, the prayer as our penance. It encourages us to take on those who questioned the historicity of Bhagwan Rama and the existence of Rama Sethu and show them the divine reality, which has been existing for ages, protecting us. It advises us to continue our service to humanity by taking the Blessings of Bhagwan Rama at shores of Sethu.