Lord Ram didn't exist, claims Centre in SC

Lord Ram did not exist. The Centre on Wednesday made this controversial claim before the Supreme Court, invoking angry protest from several quarters and adding a new twist to the ongoing Ram Setu dispute.

In an affidavit filed in the apex court, the Centre said merely by relying on the epic Ramayan, neither the Ram Setu nor the characters or events it contained could be treated as historical facts.

In other words, the Government has attacked the basis of Hindu faith by suggesting that Lord Ram and Hanuman, venerated as Gods, cannot believed to have existed unless any scientific data exists to prove their existence.

The submission forms part of a Government affidavit filed in response to a bunch of petitions challenging the Government?s decision to damage the prehistoric Ram Setu (or Adam?s Bridge) as part of the Setusamudram Ship Canal Project to open a shorter route for ships between the east and west coast of the country. The court has stayed any attempt to damage the Setu after learning that the work of removing sand forming part of the Setu is on. The matter is expected to come up for hearing on .riday.

Backing with scientific studies, the affidavit filed by the Archaeological Survey of India (A SI) through the Ministry of Culture termed the Setu (bridge) to be a ?natural formation made up of shoals/sand bars? and not a man-made structure as alleged in the petition.

The petitioners, Subra manium Swamy and R ama Gopalan, had relied upon the epic Ramayana to indicate the presence of a bridge built by Lord Ram. They even demanded the bridge to be declared a historical monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.

The Canal Project being built along a 167-kilometre corridor crosses the Adams Bridge between Rameshwaram Islands in the south Indian coast and Thalaimannar in Sri Lanka.

The Centre?s affidavit said, ?The petitioners have primarily relied upon the contents of the Valmiki Ramayan, the Ram charitmanas by Tulsidas, and other mythological texts... which cannot be said to be historical record to incontrovertibly prove the existence of the characters, or the occurrence of the events, depicted therin.?

Recognising the ?deep religious import? attached with these texts by the Hindu community, nonetheless the Centre said, ?the existence of human remains, whether in the form of bones or in the form of other artifacts, is primary to prove archaeologically the existence and veracity of a historical fact.? In the case of Ram Setu, it added, ?no such human remains have been discovered at the site of the formation known as Adams Bridge.?

All said and done, the Centre?s claims are in dispute as within the affidavit the ASI admits that till date it has not undertaken any study on Ram Setu to ascertain its historical or religious relevance. The affidavit, sworn by C Dorjee, Director (Monuments) of ASI said, ??there has been no occasion for the ASI or the Government to even make a prima facie determination that the said formation could be an ?ancient monument? entitled to protection under the Act and therefore, the ASI has not undertaken any study in this regard as yet.?

But employing reports of Geological Survey of India, Space Application Centre (Ahmedabad) and NASA, the Centre concluded that the Setu is not man-made or pre-historic as claimed by the petitions. The study concluded that Adams Bridge actually comprises 103 small patch reefs lying in a linear pattern with reef crest, sand cays, and intermittent deep channels.

The affidavit, in conclusion said, ?in a country as rich in cultural and historical diversity as India which has an established history ranging over nearly 9,000 years, the line between myth and reality is often obliterated.? Choosing to adopt a neutral stand in such circumstance, it added, ?at best this is a case of disputed mythology and not a matter of historical importance.?

Lord Ram did not exist. The Centre on Wednesday made this con- troversial claim before the Supreme Court, invoking angry protest from several quarters and adding a new twist to the ongoing Ram Setu dispute. In an affidavit filed in the apex court, the Centre said merely by relying on the epic Ramayan, neither the Ram Setu nor the characters or events it contained could be treated as historical facts. In other words, the Government has attacked the basis of Hindu faith by sug- gesting that Lord Ram and Hanuman, venerated as Gods, cannot believed to have exist- ed unless any scientific data exists to prove their existence. The submission forms part of a Government affi- davit filed in response to a bunch of petitions challenging the Government?s decision to damage the prehistoric Ram Setu (or Adam?s Bridge) as part of the Setusamudram Ship Canal Project to open a shorter route for ships between the east and west coast of the country. The court has stayed any attempt to damage the Setu after learning that the work of removing sand forming part of the Setu is on. The matter is expected to come up for hearing on .riday. Backing with scientific studies, the affidavit filed by the Archaeological Survey of India (A SI) through the Ministry of Culture termed the Setu (bridge) to be a ?nat- ural formation made up of shoals/sand bars? and not a man-made structure as alleged in the petition. The petitioners, Subra manium swamy and r ama gopalan, had relied upon the epic ramayana to indicate the presence of a bridge built by lord ram. they even demanded the bridge to be declared a historical monument under the ancient monuments and archae- ological sites and remains act, 1958. the canal project being built along a 167-kilometre corridor crosses the adams bridge between rameshwaram islands in the south indian coast and thalaimannar in sri lanka. the centre?s affidavit said, ?the petitioners have primarily relied upon the contents of the valmiki ramayan, the ram charitmanas by tulsidas, and other mythological texts... which can- not be said to be historical record to incontrovertibly prove the existence of the characters, or the occurrence of the events, depicted therin.? recognising the ?deep religious import? attached with these texts by the hindu community, nonetheless the centre said, ?the existence of human remains, whether in the form of bones or in the form of other artifacts, is primary to prove archaeologically the existence and veracity of a his- torical fact.? in the case of ram setu, it added, ?no such human remains have been discovered at the site of the formation known as adams bridge.? all said and done, the centre?s claims are in dispute as within the affidavit the asi admits that till date it has not undertaken any study on ram setu to ascertain its historical or religious relevance. the affidavit, sworn by c dorjee, director (monuments) of asi said, ??there has been no occasion for the asi or the government to even make a prima facie determination that the said for- mation could be an ?ancient monu- ment? entitled to protection under the act and therefore, the asi has not undertaken any study in this regard as yet.? but employing reports of geological survey of india, space application centre (ahmedabad) and nasa, the centre concluded that the setu is not man-made or pre-historic as claimed by the petitions. the study concluded that adams bridge actual- ly comprises 103 small patch reefs lying in a linear pattern with reef crest, sand cays, and intermittent deep channels. the affidavit, in conclusion said, ?in a country as rich in cultural and historical diversity as india which has an established history ranging over nearly 9,000 years, the line between myth and reality is often obliterated.? choosing to adopt a neutral stand in such circumstance, it added, ?at best this is a case of dis- puted mythology and not a matter of historical importance.?