Recent Ayodhya Discoveries

[Guest guest]

Discoveries at the site I: The Temple City of Ayodhya

Until recently, much of the evidence was literary, based on accounts

in chronicles, supplemented by some archaeology around the site. Even

then, archaeology left little doubt regarding the existence of a

previous temple at the site at which the Babri Masjid is situated.

Ayodhya has drawn the attention of competent archaeologists including

a few internationally known experts like B.B. Lal and S.P. Gupta. As

a result, the volume of data available is huge running into several

volumes. Some of it has probably been rendered obsolete by

discoveries following the demolition of December 6, 1992. They settle

once and for all the question: Was there a Hindu temple at the site

before Babri Masjid was built in 1528?

 

Let us next look at what archaeology has to say about the Ayodhya

site. The first point to note is that Ayodhya lies in a region that

is generously watered, and has therefore been densely populated since

time immemorial. As a result, archaeological work at Ayodhya is more

difficult, and has not been on the same scale as at Harappan sites

lying a thousand miles to the west. And for the same reasons, luck

plays a large role in the success of any exploration at Ayodhya,

which is true of archaeology in general. Here is what a leading

archaeologist, Dr. S.P. Gupta (former director of the Allahabad

Museum), has to say about recent excavations at Ayodhya. Gupta

probably has the most extensive experience among the archaeologists

to have explored the site.9

 

>From 1975 through 1980, the Archaeological Survey of India under theship of Professor B.B. Lal, a former Director General of the

Survey, undertook an extensive programme of excavation at Ayodhya,

including the very mound of the Ramajanmabhumi on which the so-

called "Janmasthan Masjid" or Babri Mosque once stood and was later

demolished on 6th December 1992.

 

This is an interesting observation: the Babri Mosque was known also

as the 'Janmashtan Masjid' even to the Muslims! Obviously they

believed it to be the birthplace of Rama - not Babar. We shall see

later that until the Secularists showed them the value of it, the

Muslims never used Negationism; far from it, they took great pride in

their record of vandalization of Hindu sacred places. To continue

with Gupta's account:

 

At Ayodhya, Professor Lal took as many as 14 trenches at different

places to ascertain the antiquity of the site. It was then found that

the history of the township was at least three thousand years old, if

not more ... . When seen in the light of 20 black stone pillars, 16

of which were found re-used and standing in position as corner stones

of piers for the disputed domed structure of the 'mosque', Prof. Lal

felt that the pillar bases may have belonged to a Hindu temple built

on archaeological levels formed prior to 13th century AD ...

 

On further stratigraphic and other evidence, Lal concluded that the

pillar bases must have belonged to a Hindu temple that stood between

12th and the 16th centuries. "He also found a door-jamb carved with

Hindu icons and decorative motifs of yakshas, yakshis, kirtimukhas,

purnaghattas, double lotus flowers etc."

 

What this means is that Lal had found evidence for possibly two

temples, one that existed before the 13th century, and another

between the 13th and the 16th centuries. This corresponds very well

indeed with history and tradition. We know that this area was ravaged

by Muslim invaders following Muhammad of Ghor's defeat of Prithviraj

Chauhan in the second battle of Tarain in 1192 AD. This was

apparently rebuilt and remained in use until destroyed again in the

16th century by Babar.

 

Impressive as these discoveries are, Lal had actually been somewhat

unlucky. He had barely missed striking a trench containing a treasure

trove of Hindu artifacts from the medieval period. As Gupta tells us:

 

Prof. Lal had hard luck at Ramajanmabhumi. His southern trenches

missed a huge pit with 40 and odd sculptures just by 10 to 12 feet.

But he did get the pillar bases of the pre-16th century demolished-

temple which others did not get.

 

Excavation was resumed on July 2, 1992 by S.P. Gupta, Y.D. Sharma,

K.M. Srivastava and other senior archaeologists. This was less than

six months before the demolition (which of course no one then knew

was going to take place). Their particular interest lay in the forty-

odd Hindu artifacts that had been discovered in the pit missed by

Lal. These finds had been widely reported in the newpapers. Gupta, a

former Director of the Allahabad Museum and an expert on medieval

artifacts had a special interest in examining the finds. He tells us:

 

The team found that the objects were datable to the period ranging

from the 10th through the 12th century AD, i.e., the period of the

late Pratiharas and early Gahadvals. The kings of these two dynasties

hailing from Kannauj had ruled over Avadh and eastern Uttar Pradesh

successively during that period.

 

These objects included a number of amakalas, i.e., the cogged-wheel

type architectural element which crown the bhumi shikharas or spires

of subsidiary shrines, as well as the top of the spire or the main

shikhara ... This is a characteristic feature of all north Indian

temples of the early medieval period and no one can miss it - it is

there in the Orissa temples such as Konarak, in the temples of Madhya

Pradesh such as Khajuraho and in the temples of Rajasthan such as

Osian.

 

There was other evidence - of cornices, pillar capitals, mouldings,

door jambs with floral patterns and others - leaving little doubt

regarding the existence of a 10th - 12th century temple complex at

the site of Ayodhya. So Lal had been right in believing there was an

earlier temple - prior to the one destroyed by Babar. More

discoveries were made following the demolition of December 6. All

these discoveries leave no doubt at all about the true picture.

 

The discovery of a number of Kushana period terracotta images of gods

and goddesses earlier made it clear, first, that at the Janmabhumi

site Hindu temples were built several times during the 2000 years

with the interval of only 450 years, from 1528 to 1992, when the

Muslims destroyed the temple and occupied the site and also built a

new structure they called 'Janmabhumi Masjid' in their own

record; ... And finally, the temple was destroyed sometime after the

13th century AD, in every likelihood in the early 16th century, as is

fully borne out by the inscriptions of Mir Baqi found fixed in the

disputed structure from back in time, during the British days as is

clear from the accounts given by Mrs. A. Beveridge in her translation

of Babur-Nama published in 1926. (op. cit. 115)

 

So archaeology also leaves little doubt about the existence of the

prior temple. Then came the explosion of Decembr 6, 1992. This

demolished not only the Babri Masjid but the whole case of the

Secularists and their allies. It revealed a major inscription that

settles the question once and for all.

 

Discoveries at the site II: the Hari-Vishnu inscription

The demolition on December 6, 1992 changed the picture dramatically,

providing further support to the traditional accounts - both Hindu

and Muslim. Some of the kar-sevaks, no doubt influenced by all the

publicity about history and archaeology, went on to pick up more than

two hundred pieces of stone slabs with writing upon them. These

proved to belong to extremely important inscriptions, more than a

thousand years old. In effect, the kar-sevaks had done what

archaeologists should have done years ago; they had unearthed

important inscriptions - in howsoever a crude form - something that

should have been done years ago by professional historians and

archaeologists. The inscriptions, even the few that have been read so

far, shed a great deal of light on the history of not only Ayodhya

and its environs, but all of North India in the early Medieval, and

even the late ancient period.

 

In any other society, these inscriptions and other archaeological

artifacts would not only be greeted with glee - as Biblical scholars

did the Dead Sea Scrolls - but there would also be a mad scramble

among researchers to see what new discoveries they could make. But

the Secularists' reaction was the exact opposite of this: they wanted

the whole thing suppressed. They claimed, without examination, that

all the two-hundred and fifty odd pieces of epigraphical records were

forgeries planted during the demolition, and demanded a police

investigation. This is a point worth noting: they wanted not an

investigation of artifacts by scholars, but a police investigation.

They were acting like the Pope and other Church officials who wanted

the Dead Sea Scrolls suppressed. By no stretch of the imagination can

such conduct be called scholarly.

 

This brings up an interesting issue. It is now a well worn cliche

that the Hindus had no sense of history. While this may have been

true in the Medieval period, it is certainly not true today; of all

the people that I am personally familiar with, the Hindus, especially

the younger generation, have the most acute sense of their history

and culture. (This of course is what the Secularists want to see

destroyed.)

 

More to the point, the conduct of mainstream historians and their

allies in the media and the government suggests that they have left

an enormous wealth of sources untouched. If a single accidental

episode like the Ayodhya demolition could yield such a bonanza, it

does not take much imagination to see how much more remains to be

discovered. To take just one example, the famous Taj Mahal in Agra

has more than twenty rooms that have been sealed off. Opening them to

scholars would go a long way towards settling disputes about the Taj -

whether it was built by Shah Jahan, or if it is an older Rajput

palace as some scholars maintain.

 

Through sloth or incompetence - or a combination of both - the

Secularist scholars that dominate the history establishment in India

are enjoying the perks and privileges of a pampered group despite

their abysmal contributions to scholarship. Considering that their

scholarly accomplishments lag well behind their political activism

(and opportunism), they seem more like courtiers and political

hangers-on than true scholars.

 

To return to the inscriptional finds, it will be years before

scholars can come up with a complete picture, but they have already

yielded much valuable information. Here is what S.P. Gupta found upon

examining the two-hundred and fifty or so stone pieces with writing

upon them:

 

Not all were ancient, since scores of them, generally rectangular

marble tiles, bore the dedicatory inscriptions in the Devanagari

script of the 20th century. However, at least three dozens of them

were certainly ancient, belonging to the period bracketed between

10th and 12th centuries AD. (In The Ayodhya Reference: pp 117-18)

 

The most important of these deciphered so far is the Hari-Vishnu

inscription that clinches the whole issue of the temple. It is

written in 12th century AD Devanagari script and belongs therefore to

the period before the onslaught of the Ghorids (1192 AD and later).

Gupta tells us:

 

This inscription, running in as many as 20 lines, is found engraved

on a 5 ft. long, 2 ft. broad and 2.5 inches thick slab of buff

sandstone, apparently a very heavy tablet ... Three-fourths of the

tablet is found obliterated anciently. The last line is also not

complete since it was anciently subjected to chipping off. A portion

of the central part is found battered, maybe someone tried to deface

it anciently. The patination [tarnishing including wearout] is,

however, uniform all over the surface, even in areas where once there

were inscriptions. (op. cit. pp 118-19)

 

This is a massive slab that must weigh not less than 400 pounds. And

this was the object with a large inscription written in a thousand

year old script that the Secularists were clamoring was a modern

forgery - planted during the demolition! There are probably not more

than a dozen experts in the world - none from the Secularist camp -

who can even read the inscription, let alone compose one. This should

give an idea not only of their values and priorities, but also the

content of their scholarship. So I was not being uncharitable when I

called them more poltical hangers-on than scholars.

 

Gupta is an archaeologist and not an epigraphist trained to read

ancient inscriptions. It was examined by Ajay Mitra Shastri, Chairman

of the Epigraphical Society of India. Shastri gave the following

summary. What the inscription tells us is of monumental significance

to the history of Medieval India.

 

The inscription is composed in high-flown Sanskrit verse, except for

a very small portion in prose, and is engraved in chaste and

classical Nagari script of the eleventh-twelfth century AD. It has

yet to be fully deciphered, but the portions which have been fully

deciphered and read are of great historical significance and

value ... It was evidently put up on the wall of the temple, the

construction of which is recorded in the text inscribed on it. Line

15 of this inscription, for example, clearly tells us that a

beautiful temple of Vishnu-Hari, built with heaps of stones ... , and

beautified with a golden spire ... unparallelled by any other temple

built by earlier kings ... This wonderful temple ...

was built in the temple-city of Ayodhya situated in

Saketamandala. ... Line 19 describes god Vishnu as destroying king

Bali ... and the ten headed personage (Dashanana, i.e., Ravana). (op.

cit. 119; emphasis mine. I have left out the original Sanskrit quotes

given by Shastri.)

 

Need we say more - a temple for Hari-Vishnu who killed the ten-headed

Ravana, in the temple city of Ayodhya? So Ayodhya was known as a

temple city even then; Saketa was the ancient name of the district.

The inscription confirms what archaeologists Lal and Gupta had

earlier found about the existence of a temple complex. And yet the

Secularists and their allies have been telling the world that there

was no temple!

 

Shastri also tells us: "Line 20 contains an allusion to the serious

threat from the west (paschatya-bhiti), apparently posed by Sultan

Subuktugin and his son Mahmud of Ghazni, and its destruction by the

king." This, as I earlier pointed out, is echoed in some of the

Puranas also.

 

This last fact is interesting - that Subuktugin and Mahmud Ghaznavi

were stopped by an eastern ruler, the one who had the inscription

made, probably Sallakshana known also as Sallakshanavarman. This

shows there is probably a great deal more that remains to be

discovered by archaeologists and historians. Most important of all

for our purposes here, the existence of the temple at Janmasthan and

of the temple complex are established beyond all doubt. The Ayodhya

demolition has demolished more than the Babri Masjid - it has

demolished also any claims to honest scholarship on the part of the

JNU-AMU Secularists.

 

Summary of findings

We may now sum up the findings based on both literary and

archaeological/epigraphical evidence:

 

1. All the literary sources without exception, until the Secularists

began their negationist masquerade, are unanimous that a Rama temple

existed at the site known since time immemorial as Rama Janmabhumi.

 

2. Archaeology confirms the existence of temples going back to Kushan

times, or about 2000 years. This date may well be extended by future

excavations assuming that such excavations will be permitted by

politicians.

 

3. Archaeology records at least two destructions: the first in the

12th-13th century; the second, later, in all probability in the 16th.

This agrees well with history and tradition that were temple

destructions following the Ghorid invasions (after 1192 AD) and

restored, and was destroyed again in 1528 by Babar who replaced it

with a mosque. This is the famous - or infamous - Babri Masjid that

was demolished by kar-sevaks on December 6, 1992.

 

4. A large inscription discovered at the site dating to 11th-12th

century records the existence of numerous temples including a

magnificent one in which Hari-Vishnu was honored as destroyer of the

ten-headed Ravana. Ayodhya was always known as a temple city.

 

With this record of the Secularists exposed, it is for the reader to

judge if the Secularists of the JNU-AMU clique should be treated as

scholars or as obstuctionists and impostors.

 

With their madness exposed, it is now time to look at the method

behind it. It is called Negationism.