Rama Setu is sacred, place of worship: UOI & SC should NOT play with fire

[Saab]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Mosque in Kolkata blocks airport .... did someone say Ram Setu ??
http://www.expressi ndia.com/ latest-news/ Kolkata-airport- Map-redrawn- land-to-be- acquired- highrises- trimmed-to- save-mosque/ 317195/

http://stepstosecon dpartition. blogspot. com/2008/ 06/mosque- in-kolkata- blocks-airport- did.html


Kolkata airport: Map redrawn, land to be acquired, high-rises trimmed to save mosque

Mouparna Bandyopadhyay

Posted online: Sunday, June 01, 2008

Kolkata, May 31 Development runs deep—but devotion runs deeper. So an ancient mosque on a tiny patch of 1,200 square feet of land right next to a runway has forced a redrawing of the entire Rs 2,000-crore map to upgrade Kolkata airport.

An extra 25,000 square metres has to be acquired, crores have to be spent on building a detour and several high-rise buildings have to be compensated because they have to knock off their top floors in line with the new plan.

The project, cleared yesterday by the Public Investment Board under the ministry of Finance is all set to go to the Cabinet—after a very public spat between Civil Aviation Minister Praful Patel and the Planning Commission over delays—and envisages extension of the second runway at the Kolkata airport.

The Kolkata airport has two runways: the main runway, 3,627m, that carries bulk of the air traffic, and a shorter one, 2,399 m, which is inadequate to service large aircraft, and so needs to be extended by another 440 m to the north.

But this is exactly where the 117-year old Bankra mosque — where on an average 30 people offer prayers each day under tight security — lies, less than 100 feet from the north end of the shorter runway, Also, the walls of the mosque cannot withstand vibrations caused by aircraft landing or taking off.

"We have tried to negotiate with the masjid committee numerous times. We have also tried to give them land outside the port and offered to create a replica of the masjid elsewhere but to no avail," says SPS Bakshi, Director (Projects), Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose International Airport. Result: the Airports Authority of India has decided to extend the runway towards the southern side.

"This means we have to lease out more than 25,000 square metres of land to the state government for the diversion," says another official of he AAI. The AAI will spend Rs 2 crore and the state government will provide Rs 3 crore. Also, an existing road, running from Kaikhali to Narayanpur (Rajarhat) will need to be diverted.

Then there is the issue of a new taxiway that needs to be constructed joining the northern end of both the runways. The taxiway needs to be at least 30 m wide to allow for wingspan of aircraft like A-380. As per the blueprint, the taxiway will intersect with the barb-wired path leading to the mosque. This poses a security threat and to circumvent it, a new path leading to the mosque has to be constructed. This, in all probability, will be a subway and will mean an extra Rs 20 crore, say officials.

"The authorities are in constant dialogue with the members of the masjid committee to bring out a viable solution to the problem. The extension of the runway towards the south will mean diverting the Kaikhali road and paying compensation to the building owners whose buildings will now come under height restriction. AAI is already conducting a survey to mark the buildings," said Deepankar Ghosh, leader of the AAI employees union.

Says Abid Ali, a senior influential member of the committee that runs the mosque, "Thirty years ago the civil aviation department of India had evicted us from our land and relocated us at Bankra on the understanding that the mosque will never be demolished. We cannot let the mosque be destroyed."

Amitava Nandi, CPM Member of Parliament, Dum Dum, passes the buck to the Centre. "The mosque is on AAI's land and the Centre should speak to the Imam in New Delhi to shift the structure to a different area. As of now the Centre is not taking any initiative about this. What can the state do?" he asks.

That's not all. Aviation regulations have height restrictions for buildings within 10 km of the runway. The extension of the runway to the south to keep the mosque intact means that multi-storeyed buildings that were permitted in the adjacent Rajarhat area, will now need to lose some of their top floors. "This will require us to pay compensation amounting to crores, we are working this out," said a senior AAI official. A mapping of the area is being done to identify which structures have to be trimmed accordingly.

In fact, this week, the DCL Housing Development Company is the first one to receive a notice to construct Ground plus 17 and not Ground plus 19 floors it had got clearance for. A detailed survey is under way to identify such houses that would have to conform to the height restrictions.

"We will be extending one runway to 12,000 feet and the other one to 10,500 feet without touching the mosque. It is wrong to say that top floors of some buildings will have to go for the 10,500 feet runway expansion, no such thing will happen
.
However, we are still negotiating to have the mosque relocated elsewhere and we will bear the cost of relocation as we usually do in case of shifting of religious structures. We had also taken up the issue with the West Bengal CM a couple of months back but then he had said that his hands were full so the issue could be addressed at a later stage. So we have not really lost hope on the issue", said a senior official from AAI.

 

[Saab]

Congress back to Hindu-bashing

The Pioneer Edit Desk


Soon after winning the trust vote the UPA Government seems to be in a hurry to reward those who voted in its favour. Nothing else can explain the remarkable absurdity of the latest stand of the Government in the case of the Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project, at present before the Supreme Court, other than an attempt to please ally DMK. This time the Government’s counsel has taken the plea that the Government was not destroying the bridge as there was no bridge. The argument is that there was no man-made structure but a superman-made structure that was broken by Sri Rama himself. The convulsions the Government’s arguments have taken in this case and the corner it has painted itself into would be exceedingly funny were it not that the faith of millions, as well as the highest court in the land, was involved. In its keenness to pander to crass commercial interests the Government seems quite willing to take everybody for a ride. Several months ago the Government had shocked the country by denying the very existence of Lord Ram in its petition before the Supreme Court. Now it has come up with another loose interpretation of Indian scriptures, derived from a lesser known work, to justify the demolition of the Ram Setu. It seems to escape the Government that the historicity or otherwise of the events that have the Ram Setu as their centre has little to do with the issue. The Ram Setu is associated in the minds of millions of people in the country with Lord Ram. They believe the site to be sacred and their feelings would be hurt were it to be damaged.
It is not that people who have been vocal about this issue have been inflexible. An alternative alignment of Sethusamudram Shipping Canal will preserve the Ram Setu while allowing the project to go through. This is in spite of the fact that many experts have deep reservations about the project. Over many months it has emerged that the project may not be commercially viable in the long run as larger modern ships will in any case have to continue to stick to the longer old routes. Serious doubts have been expressed over the ecological impact of the canal that will stress not just life in the sea but also human populations in coastal regions by altering climate patterns and opening the way for tropical storms and tsunamis. The issue requires more debate before the project is cleared. Yet the Government is bent upon railroading it, ramming it down the throats of an unwilling population just to please vested interests. It continues to completely ignore the sensitivities involved. Now that it has won the confidence vote, it feels it can go ahead. Yet there will be a price to pay. The Government’s unholy agenda will be undone, as indeed, shall this Government.

 

[Saab]

கம்பராமாயணத்தில் சேது:
சென்னை கம்பன் கழகம் வெளியிட்ட கம்பராமாயணம் (முதல் பதிப்பு 1976)

யுத்த காண்டத்தில் 37வது படலம்
மீட்சிப் படலம்

இதில் பாடல் எண் 166 முதல் 180 வரையில் 'சேதுவைக் காட்டி அதன் தூய்மையைப் புகழ்தல்" என்ற தலைப்பில் சேதுவின் மகிமைகள் ராமனால் பேசப்படுகின்றன.

ஆனால் முதல் ஆறு பாடல்களே சேது (166-171) பற்றிய புகழைப் பேசுகின்றன. (பக்கம் 1565)

அதாவது புஷ்பக விமானத்தில் ஏறி, இலங்கையிலிருந்து ராமன் அயோத்திக்கு திரும்பச் செல்லும்போது, நிலத்தில் இலங்கை அழகையும், போர் நடந்த இடங்களையும், யார் யாரை வதம் செய்த இடம் என்றெல்லாம் காட்டிக் கொண்டு வரும்போது, சேது அமைக்கப்பட்ட இடத்தையும் சேதுவையும் காட்டி, இது இல்லை என்றால் இம்மாபெரும் வெற்றி கிடைத்திருக்காது, இது நளன் அமைத்த பாலம் என்று கூறுகிறார் ராமன்.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
இவை கம்பன் பாடல்கள் ( 164-165 ) இந்தப் பாடல்கள், சேதுவைக் காட்டி அதன் தூய்மையைப் புகழ்தல் என்ற பகுதிக்கு முன்னால் வரும். இந்தப் பாடல்களில் இலங்கைக் காட்சிகளை ராமன் சீதைக்குச் சொல்கிறார். பிறகு வருபவை சேதுக் காட்சிகள்....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'இலங்கையை வலஞ் செய்து ஏக' என நினைந்திடுமுன், மானம்
வலம் கிளர் கீழை வாயில் வர, 'பிரகத்தன், நீலன்
நலம் கிளர் கையின் மாண்டது இவண்' என, நமன் தன் வாயில்
கலந்திட, 'ஈங்குக் கண்டாய், சுபாரிசற் சுட்டது' என்றான். 20-10

குட திசை வாயில் ஏக, 'குன்று அரிந்தவனை வென்ற
விட நிகர் மேகநாதன் இளவலால் வீழ்ந்தது' என் முன்,
வட திசை வாயில் மேவ, 'இராவணன் மவுலி பத்தும்,
உடலமும் இழந்தது இங்கு' என்று உணர்த்தி, வேறு உரைக்கலுற்றான்: 20-11

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
இதைத் தொடர்ந்து வரும் ஆறு பாடல்கள் சேது மகிமையைப் போற்றுகின்றன.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

'நன்னுதல்! நின்னை நீங்கி, நாள் பல கழிந்த பின்றை,
மன்னவன் இரவி மைந்தன், வான் துணையாக நட்ட
பின்னை, மாருதி வந்து, உன்னைப் பேதறுத்து, உனது பெற்றி
சொன்னபின், வானரேசர் தொகுத்தது, இச் சேது கண்டாய். 166

'மற்று இதன் தூய்மை எண்ணின், மலர் அயன் தனக்கும் எட்டா;
பொன் தொடித் தெரிவை! யான் என் புகழுகேன்! கேட்டி, அன்பால்
பெற்ற தாய் தந்தையோடு தேசிகற் பிழைத்து, சூழ்ந்த
சுற்றமும் கெடுத்துளோரும் எதிர்ந்திடின் சுரர்கள் ஆவார். 167
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

இதற்குப் பிறகு இடைச் செருகல் பாடல்கள்.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

கம்ப ராமாயணத்தில் பல்வேறு காலகட்டங்களில் அதனைப் படித்த புலவர்கள் தங்கள் மேதைமையை கம்பனில் சேர்த்து, தங்கள் பாடல்களையும் கம்பராமாயணப் பாடல்கள் என்று நுழைத்து விட்டார்கள். அப்படி, கம்பராமாயணத்தில் இடைச்செருகல்கள் நிறைய உண்டு என்று வருத்தப்பட்டார் ரசிகமணி டி.கே.சி. அவர் கம்பனில் கரை கண்டவர். கம்பராமாயணத்தில் உள்ள இடைச்செருகல்களை சரியாக அறிந்து, அவற்றை நீக்கி, அந்தப் பாடல்களை எல்லாம் தனியாக ஒரு பக்கத்தில் தொகுத்து பிற்சேர்க்கை என்று அறிவித்தார். அவர் தள்ளிய பாடல்களில் கம்பனின் கவிப் புலமையும் இல்லை; சொற்களில் பிற்காலத்திய கட்டுமானம் இருக்கும்; நவீன தமிழ்ச் சொற்கள் கையாளப்பட்டிருக்கும். பேச்சு நடை அமைந்திருக்கும்.

அப்படி அவர் முதலாக, அமரர் அ.ச.ஞானசம்பந்தன் போன்ற தமிழ் சான்றோர்கள் பலரும் நீக்கிய இடைச் செருகல் பாடல் ஒன்றில்தான், சேதுவின் முகப்பை ராமன் அம்பு கொண்டு கீறியதாக ஒரு வரி வருகிறது. அது கம்பன் பாடல் இல்லை என்று அறிஞர்கள் சொல்லியிருக்கிறார்கள்.

அந்தப் பாடல்...


கப்பை எனும் கன்னியையும், கந்தனார் தாதையையும்
அப்பொழுதே திருவணைக்குக் காவலராய் அங்கு இருத்தி,
செப்ப அரிய சிலையாலே திருவணையை வாய் கீறி,
ஒப்பு அரியாள் தன்னுடனே உயர் சேனைக் கடலுடனே.. (170-23)
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

- மேற்சொன்ன இந்தப் பாடலில் இரண்டு பேரை காவலுக்கு வைத்துவிட்டு, அதன் முனையை அதாவது (செப்ப அரிய சிலையாலே திருவணையை வாய் கீறி,) சிலை - அம்பு; வாய் - முனை என்றால், இருவரைக் காவலுக்கு வைத்துவிட்டு, அதன் முனையை மட்டும் அகழி போல் சிதைத்ததாகச் சொல்லியிருக்கிறாரே தவிர, அந்த அணையை முழுவதுமாக சிதைத்ததாகச் சொல்லவில்லை. இந்தப் பாடலும் இடைச்செருகல் பாடல் என தள்ளப்பட்டுள்ளது.


காரணம், ஒரிஜினல் கம்பன் பாடலிலோ, வால்மீகியிலோ, அணையின் அழகைக் காட்டி அதைப் பார்த்து சீதை பிரமிப்பது போல் வருகிறது. மேலும் இந்தப் பாலத்தை வந்து தரிசிப்பவர்களுக்கு சகல பாவங்களும் விலகும் என்று சொல்லப்பட்டிருக்கிறது.

பின்னாளில் இந்தப் பாலத்தினைப் பற்றிய ஆன்மிக நம்பிக்கை அதிகரித்ததால், பின்னாளில் கம்பனில் இடைச்செருகலாகப் பாடல்களைச் சேர்த்தவர்கள், உலகத்தில் என்னென்ன பாவங்கள் உண்டு என்று சொல்லி, அது இந்த சேது தரிசனத்தால் நீங்கும் என்று எழுதிவைத்திருக்கிறார்கள் என்பதால், சேது, சில நூற்றாண்டுகள் வரை அப்படியே தரிசனத்துக்கு இருந்திருக்கிறது என்பது தெரியவருகிறது.
அதனால்தான் அவர்களும் இப்படி எழுதி வைத்தார்கள். அந்தப் பாடல்கள் சில உங்களுக்கு உதாரணத்துக்காக, \
இந்தப் பாடல்களில் நவீன தமிழ் வருவதை கவனிக்கலாம். மேலும் பாவங்கள் என்ன என்ற லிஸ்ட் வருவதையும் கவனியுங்கள்.....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
கீழ்வரும் பாடல்கள் இடைச்செருகல் ( 162-6 முதல் 162-8 வரை)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'கருங் கடல் நிகர்ப்ப ஆன அகழி ஓர் மூன்றும் காணாய்;
மருங்கு அடர் களபக் கொங்கை மதி நுதல் மிதிலை வல்லி!
இருங் கட முகத்த யானை இவுளி, தேர், காலாள், துஞ்சி,
பொரும் சுடர் நிறத்தர் வீய்ந்த போர்க்களம் தன்னைப் பாராய்.

'கொடி மதில் இலங்கை வேந்தன் கோபுரத்து உம்பர்த் தோன்ற,
அடு திறல் பரிதி மைந்தன் அவன் நிலை குலையத் தாக்கி,
சுடர் முடி பறித்த அந் நாள், அன்னவன் தொல்லை வெம் போர்ப்
படியினை நோக்கி நின்ற சுவேல மால் வரையைப் பாராய்.

'பூக் கமழ் குழலினாய்! நின் பொருட்டு யான் புகலா நின்றேன்;
மேக்கு உயர் தச்சன் மைந்தன் நளன் இவன் விலங்கலால் அன்று
ஆக்கிய இதனை, வெய்ய பாதகம் அனைத்தும், வந்து
நோக்கிய பொழுதே, நூறும் சேதுவை, நீயும் நோக்காய்.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
169-1 மற்றும் 169-2 இப்படி பல பாடல்கள் இடைச்செருகலாக உண்டு. இவை உதாரணத்துக்கு
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ஆவினை, குரவரோடும் அருமறை முனிவர்தம்மை,
பாவையர் குழுவை, இன் சொல் பாலரை, பயந்து தம் இல்
மேவின அவரை, செற்றோர், விரி கடல் சேது வந்து
தோய்வரேல், அவர்கள் கண்டாய், சுரர் தொழும் சுரர்கள் ஆவார்.

மரக்கலம் இயங்கவேண்டி, வரி சிலைக் குதையால் கீறித்
தருக்கிய இடத்து, பஞ்ச பாதகரேனும் சாரின்,
பெருக்கிய ஏழு மூன்று பிறவியும் பிணிகள் நீங்கி,
நெருக்கிய அமரர்க்கு எல்லாம் நீள் நிதி ஆவர் அன்றே.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(contd.)

 

[Saab]

contd..

170-1 முதல் 170-12 வரை... இப்படி பல பாடல்கள் இடைச்செருகலாக உண்டு. இவை உதாரணத்துக்கு
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ஆங்கு அது காட்டக் கண்ட ஆயிழை, 'கமலம் அன்ன
பூங் கழற் புயல்போல் மேனிப் புனித! என் பொருட்டால் செய்த
ஈங்கிதற்கு ஏற்றம் நீயே இயம்பு' என, இரதம் ஆங்கே
பாங்குற நிறுவி நின்று, இங்கு இவை இவை பகரலுற்றான்:

'அந்தணர்தம்மைக் கொன்றோர், அருந் தவர்க்கு இடுக்கண் செய்தோர்,
செந் தழல் வேள்வி செற்றோர், தீ மனை இடுவோர், தம்பால்
வந்து இரந்தவர்க்கு ஒன்று ஈயா வைக்கும் வன் நெஞ்சர், பெற்ற
தந்தையைத் தாயைப் பேணாத் தறுகணர், பசுவைச் செற்றோர்,

'குருக்களை இகழ்வோர், கொண்ட குலமகள் ஒழியத் தங்கள்
செருக்கினால் கணிகைமாரைச் சேர்பவர், உயிர் கொல் தீம்பர்,
இருக்குடன் அமரும் தெய்வம் இகழ்பவர், ஊன்கள் தின்று
பெருக்கிய உடலர், பொய்ம்மை பிதற்றுவோர், பீடை செய்வோர்.

'வெய்யவன் உச்சி சேர மிக வழி நடந்து போவோர்,
மை அறும் முன்னோன் தன்னை வலிசெயும் தம்பிமார்கள்,
கை உள முதல்கள் தம்மைக் கரந்து தம்பிக்கு ஒன்று ஈயார்,
துய் அன சொற்கள் சொல்வோர், சோம்பரைச் சுளித்துக் கொல்வோர்,

'ஊரது முனிய வாழ்வோர், உண்ணும்போது உண்ண வந்தோர்க்கு
ஆர்வமோடு அளியாது இல்லம் அடைப்பவர், அமணே சென்று
நீரினுள் இழிவோர், பாவ நெறிகளில் முயல்வோர், சான்றோர்
தாரமது அணைவோர், மூத்தோர் தமை இகழ் அறிவிலாதோர்.

'கண்டிலாது "ஒன்று கண்டோம்" என்று கைக்கூலி கொள்வோர்,
மண்டலாதிபர் முன் சென்று வாழ் குடிக்கு அழிவு செய்வோர்,
மிண்டுகள் சபையில் சொல்வோர், மென்மையால் ஒருவன் சோற்றை
உண்டிருந்து, அவர்கள் தம்பால் இகழ்ச்சியை உரைக்கும் தீயோர்,

'பின்னை வா, தருவென்' என்று பேசித் தட்டுவிக்கும் பேதை,
கன்னியைக் கலக்கும் புல்லோர், காதலால் கள்ளுண் மாந்தர்,
துன்னிய கலை வல்லோரைக் களிந்து உரைத்து இகழ்வோர், சுற்றம்
இன்னலுற்றிடத் தாம் வாழ்வோர், எளியரை இன்னல் செய்வோர்.

'ஆண்டவன் படவும் தங்கள் ஆர் உயிர் கொண்டு மீண்டோர்,
நாண் துறந்து உழல்வோர், நட்பானவரை வஞ்சிப்போர், நன்மை
வேண்டிடாது, இகழ்ந்து, தீமை செய்பவர், விருந்தை நீப்போர்,
பூண்டு மேல் வந்த பேதை அடைக்கலம் போக்கி வாழ்வோர்.

'கயிற்றிலாக் கண்டத்தாரைக் காதலித்து அணைவோர், தங்கள்
வயிற்றிடக் கருவைத் தாமே வதைப்பவர், மாற்றார்தம்மைச்
செயிர்க்குவது அன்றிச் சேர்ந்த மாந்தரின் உயிரைச் செற்றோர்,
மயிர்க் குருள் ஒழியப் பெற்றம் வெளவு வோர், வாய்மை இல்லோர்,

'கொண்டவன் தன்னைப் பேணாக் குலமகள், கோயிலுள்ளே
பெண்டிரைச் சேர்வோர், தங்கள் பிதிர்க்களை இகழும் பேதை,
உண்டலே தருமம் என்போர், உடைப்பொருள் உலோபர், ஊரைத்
தண்டமே இடுவோர், மன்று பறித்து உண்ணும் தறுகண்ணாளர்,

'தேவதானங்கள் மாற்றி, தேவர்கள் தனங்கள் வௌவும்
பாவ காரியர்கள், நெஞ்சில் பரிவிலாதவர்கள், வந்து
'கா' எனா, 'அபயம்' என்று, கழல் அடைந்தோரை விட்டோர்,
பூவைமார் தம்மைக் கொல்லும் புல்லர், பொய்ச் சான்று போவோர்.

'முறையது மயக்கி வாழ்வோர், மூங்கை அந்தகர்க்குத் தீயோர்,
மறையவர் நிலங்கள் தன்னை வன்மையால் வாங்கும் மாந்தர்,
கறை படு மகளிர் கொங்கை கலப்பவர், காட்டில் வாழும்
பறவைகள், மிருகம், பற்றிப் பஞ்சரத்து அடைக்கும் பாவர்.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
இப்படி மேலே கண்ட பாடல்கள் பலவும் நவீன கால சொற்களைத் தாங்கி, கதையின் போக்கில் பாடலாசிரியரின் கருத்தை உட்புகுத்தி இருக்கின்றன. இவற்றை எப்படி சரியான கம்பன் பாடல்கள் என்று சொல்லி, கம்பராமாயணத்தில் பாடப்பட்டதாக ஏற்க முடியும்?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

வால்மீகி ரெபரன்ஸ்

யுத்த காண்டம், ஸர்க்கம் 126 - ராமன் சீதைக்கு வழியிலுள்ள தலங்களைக் காட்டியது... என்ற தலைப்பில்

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
இதில் எங்குமே ராமன் சேதுவை சேதப்படுத்தியதாக தகவல் இல்லை. நாம்தான் ராமசேது என்கிறோமே தவிர, ராமன் சீதைக்குச் சொல்லும் இடங்களில் எல்லாம், இது நளன் கட்டிய பாலம் என்று சீதைக்கு தெரிவித்து, தன்னுடைய இஞ்சினியர் பேரையே பயன்படுத்தியிருக்கிறார். இவ்வளவு கஷ்டப்பட்டு இந்தப் பாலத்தைக் கட்டியது உன் கண்களின் அழகுக்காக என்று சொல்கிறார்....

 

[anjankumar]

Mr Saab

Very Scholarly presentation. Tamil is a beautiful language. There had been insertions in various literature including Kamba Ramayanam. Unfortunately, our own brethern have done these insertions without knowing the immense damage it causes to Dharma.

To do the dirty bidding the Government has chosed a Parsi Advocate. It is glaringly obvious.

Truth always triumphs.

 

[anjankumar]

Mr Saab

The same Tamil post you have made has appeared verbatim in Kanchiforum.org, the poster is Kanchi Kamakoti. He has given credit to janamejeyan.wordpress.com Who has taken from whom.

 

[Saab]

Dear anjankumar,

The one that I posted is not my own 'research' that you seem to have concluded. This item was from forwarded message in my inbox. This is going round on the internet which is itself a nameless path for attributing credit.

Many members in this and other forums use fictitious names. Crediting fictitious people makes no sense. The original credit goes to Kamban which perhaps was also fictitious name!

The important thing is that is indeed Kambaramayanam. The entire Kamba Ramayanam is published on-line:

http://www.tamilhindu.com/2008/06/kambaramayanam-payiram-1/

Regards,

 

[Saab]

In Srinagar there is this Hazratbal Mosque where a strand of hair believed to be that of Mohammed is kept. In the year 1964 it was stolen. The Muslims went on a spree of violence and the tension mounted. Lal Bhahadur Sastri who was then the Home Minister 'produced' the 'sacred' hair and settled the issue.

If this happens again then Lal Bhagadhur formula, I am sure, would be repeated and not a challenge that 'the hair could not be confirmed to belong to Mohammed' would be advanced.

Only to the Hindus such challenges that Ram never existed, Ramasethu never existed or such twisting of our Puranas and our faith will be advanced by the secular congress.

Know them to be anti-Hindus.

 

[anjankumar]

Dear Saab-ji

Thanks for the frank clarification. As you rightly said, the original contributor is never given the rightful credit all over the internet by the copy posters.

Kamban may be the correct name though. As in those days people were not afraid to say the truth and tread the path of Dharma. It is only these days those who follow dharma have to hide their names. Kamban wrote Ramayana and therefore he need not have feared any in those days. If he were to be born now and write Ramayana , probably he will use a pen name as the Veeramanis, Kamalahaasans, Karunanithis, Arjun Singhs, TR Baalus, Ramadases(PMK - not the real Ramadasas!) and host of others might harm him.

 

[Saab]

Dear Anjankumar,

If I had the original author's name I would have certainly put that in. As you know many of our Hindu great souls went anonymous including the authors of the great Upanishads. Such is the loss of their ego, Great souls they are! They left their work behind for the benefit of the posterity. If we even do a small bit in defense and preservation of the great treasures of our ancestors, we would be paying immense tribute to them. I am praying to the Great Parabrahmam to help us tide over our difficult times.

Regards,
Saab

 

[Saab]

Dear Anjankumar,

Dr.Kalyanaraman sent the following:

Please do click on the urls in this write-up. You will see treasure-trough of Kambaramayanam quotations photocopied from the book.

Regards,
Saab

ttp://setubandha.blogspot.com/2008/07/replies-to-comments-of-uoi-counsel.html
Comments on the remarks of Mr. Nariman regarding destruction of Rama Setu by Lord Rama himself
By K.Gopalakrishnan (28 July 2008)


Comments on the remarks of Mr. Nariman regarding destruction of Rama Setu by Lord Rama himself

By K.Gopalakrishnan (28 July 2008)

Mr.Nariman submitted on behalf of the Govt. of India to the Supreme Court on 24th July, 2008 that “As per Kamba Ramayana, the Superman Rama himself destroyed the bridge Rama Sethu that was earlier constructed by him and anything that was broken is not a bridge, and we can not worship something that has been destroyed”.

Mr. Nariman also said”Kamba Ramayana also expressly says the bridge was destroyed by Lord Ram so that no one can cross over to Sri Lanka and ships can sail through”.

Kamba Ramayana is one of the many vernacular versions of the original Ramayana by Valmiki in sanskrit language. Kamba Ramayana itself has got many versions in its publications.

The verse in question being quoted by Mr. Narman is verse No. 171 in yudda kanda published in a version edited and published by one Sri, V.M.Gopalakrishnamachariyar.

Rama, after killing Ravana and other rakshasas in the battle and after rescuing his wife Sita, was returning from Lanka to Ayodhya by Pushpaka vimaana (an aero-plane) with Sita. It is described that from the plane, Rama was showing Sita and giving details about various places en-route. The above verse in Gopalakrishnamachariyar’s version forms one of the seven verses (166 to 172) describing the greatness and purity of Rama Sethu.

It is obvious that Rama could not have broken the bridge from the aero-plane. That means that Rama should have destroyed the bridge after winning the war and before boarding his vimaana/plane. There was no mention of such activity during this specific period anywhere in Kamba Ramayana. When Rama describes the greatness and purity of Rama Sethu in so many verses, it is not rational that he himself would have destroyed it. Besides, Goplakrishnamachariyar himself says in the explanatory notes for this verse that the break-up of this bridge was done from the western side and because of that reason, that place is known as Dhanushkodi. If that was the case, then Rama would have had to swim back to Lanka crossing the ship-sailable channel. Gopalakrishnamachariyar’s text does not talk about breakage in three places (see the annexured text); but Mr. Nariman says that as per Kamba Ramayana, the bridge was broken in three places. Then Rama would have to swim not one channel but three to get back to Sri Lanka to board the plane with Sita and all others.

Another aspect of many versions of Kamba Ramayana is that at many places, many later insertions have been made to the original text of Kamban. Even in his version of Kamba Ramayana, Gopalakrishnamachariyar himself had cited 43 such insertions between the above verses 166 and 172 (see enclosed annexures). Also, between verses 173 and 174, two more insertions are cited.

In another version of Kamba Ramayana edited by Poovannan, Srichandran and Manikkam, and published by Varthamanan publishers, there are only five verses describing the greatness and purity of Rama Sethu instead of the seven given in Gopalakrishnamachariyar’s version (see annexures). The verses 170, and 171 quoted by Mr. Nariman are not found in the latter’s version. It is therefore more likely that the verse under question regarding the destruction of Sethu by Rama himself as well as the one preceding it (no.170) in the former’s version may also be insertions.

The other contention of Mr.Nariman that we can not worship some thing that has been broken is also incorrect. This type of argument may hold good for idols, but not for kshetrams and thirthasthanams. It is to be noted that even in the quoted verse, in the later part, Rama talks about the virtue of Rama Sethu stating that one who takes bath in the Sethu thirtham will be absolved of all his sins and will live like Devas for the next 21 births. Thus, even if one accepts the above verse as original for arguments’ sake, the Sethu will still be a place of worship, contrary to the assertion of Mr. Nariman.

ANNEXURES (Tamil texts with translations into English of relevant Tamil verses/comments)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4202841/VMG1 Annexure 1: From VMG’s version – 1

Translation of Verse 167: Rama tells Sita: Lady wearing golden bangles! To talk of the purity of the Setu is an impossibility for even Brahma, what can I say? Yet, listen to what I have to say: even those who have harmed parents, guru, and relatives will attain purity and become deva-s by the mere sight of the Setu.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4202896/VMG2 Annexure 2: From VMG’s version – 2

Translation of Verse 168: There are some who say that the purity of Setu is because of the association with Gandhamadana mountain. The legend is that when Indra broke the mountain slopes, some mountains feared Indra and hid under the ocean.

Comment of Verse 171: When Rama traveled on the Pushpaka Vimana, to move amidst wooden trawlers smoothly, it is incorrect to state that he tore the Setu. It is an incorrect translation. Here criminals who have committed panchamahapatakas (five grievous misdeeds) took a dip. Even in 21 births, they will be healthy without illnesses and will attain the appreciation of deva-s. (Thus, it is explained that the tearing of the Setu was to facilitate the samudra snaanam).

(contd.)

 

[Saab]

contd..

http://www.scribd.com/doc/4202953/VMG3 Annexure 3: From VMG’s version - 3
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203003/VMG4 Annexure 4: From VMG’s version - 4
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203153/VMG5 Annexure 5 From VMG’s version – 5
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203689/VMG6 Annexure 6: From VMG’s version – 6
The three annexes – VMG3 to VMG6 explain Poojai padalam, that is, chapter of Setu worship.. (Note: The accent on the entire chapter on the sacredness of Setu and the procedures of worship).
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203247/Poovannan1Annexure 7: From Poovannan et al –1
Trans. Verse 4058 is titled: Showing Setu, explaining its greatness (cirappu) Translation of the verse: Rama said: ‘Lady with an exquisite countenance! After many days lapsed after I got separated from you, after I gained the friendship of Sugriva, the monarch of vaanara, after Hanuman met you in Lanka in the Ashokavana where you were held captive and relieved your anguish, after he informed us of your presence, to join battle with Ravana, to get you released from captivity, vaanarasena constructed this Setu to cross over the ocean. See this Setu.’
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203379/Poovannan2 Annexure 8: From Poovannan et al – 2
Trans. of verse 4059 (same as verse 167 in VMG1): Rama tells Sita: Lady wearing golden bangles! To talk of the purity of the Setu is an impossibility for even Brahma, what can I say? Yet, listen to what I have to say: even those who have harmed parents, guru, and relatives will attain purity and become deva-s by the mere sight of the Setu.

Trans. of verse 4061: If one immerses in sacred snaanam in Ganga river, Yamuna river, Godavari river, Narmada river, Kaveri river, evils will not be eliminated. By merely seeing the sacred waters of the Setu which takes on the incessant waves which throw the s’ankha onto the shore, all sins will be removed.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/4203435/Poovannan3 Annexure 9: From Poovannan et al – 3
Trans of verse 4063. Rama carrying the powerful kodanda bow which vanquishes evil people explained to Sita while traveling on the Pushpaka Vimana, showed the specific spot where Varuna had s’aranaagati (adaikkalam or surrender).

NOTE: At the following blogspot post, verses from another Kamba Ramayanam edition have been analysed, again pointing out the comments made by the editors about interpolations. This edition is: Setu in Kamba Ramayana (First edition, 1976, published by Kamban Kazhagam, Chennai).
http://setubandha.blogspot.com/2008/07/rama-setu-hindu-cosmolog-sea-level.html

The interpolated verse for example iss 170-23.

kappai enum kanniyaiyum, kandanaar taataiyaiyum
appozhude tiruvanaikku kaavalaraay angu irutti
ceppa ariya cilaiyaale tiruvanaiyai vaay keeri
oppu ariyaal tannudane uyar cenai kkadaludane

Appointing a lady-warrior called Kappai and a warrior named Kandanaar to guard the Setu, using an arrow (cilai) marking a line (vaay keeri -- line on the end of the Setu). This verse does NOT indicate that Rama destroyed the Setu. (Note: The word keeri has many meanings. In this context of engaging guards to guard the Setu, the line is drawn only as a demarcation of their zone of responsibility).

In the original verses of Kamban, and in Valimki Ramayana, Setu's beauty is described which makes Sita devi wonderstruck. The verses also extol the fact that pilgrms who see the Setu become blessed.. It is clear that even during the periods when the interpolations were made, Setu continued to be a place of pilgrimage and worship. (Sriram continues to cite verses which are interpolations pointing to the use of later-day Tamil words and poetry-styles not in tune with the original version of Kamban, citing verses from 162-6 to 162-8, 169-1 to 169-2, 170-1 to 170-12.)

----------------------------
My additional Note:

" In the original verses of Kamban, and in Valimki Ramayana, Setu's beauty is described which makes Sita devi wonderstruck."

Seetha had travelled by air as a hostage of Ravana and she knew there was no bridge from Bharatham to Lanka. That is why her 'bramippu' at the sight of the bridge that was constructed by Rama precisely to rescue her!

Saab

 

[anjankumar]

Dear Saab-ji

Thanks a lot. It is wonderful research. Dr Kalyanaraman is doing great job. He seems to have dedicated his life for this cause. He is a scholar in many disciplines, it seems.

You are right in saying that the original contributors of yore like those who contributed the Upanishads have all remained anonymous, evidencing the absence of ego in them. Obviously, they were and are one with the Parabrahman. In a way, the Parabrahman, who is omnipresent and omni potent, is anaadi and is anonymously existant everywhere and all through times.

 

[Saab]

Dear Anjankumarji,

In a way, the Parabrahman, who is omnipresent and omnipotent, is anaadi and is anonymously existant everywhere and all through times.

Quite true!

Aum Anamikaabhyaam Namaha!

Regards,
Saab

 

[Saab]

Illegality of Narimaan citing from a withdrawn affidavit, unhonoured assurances made by ASG before the SC on 14 Sept. 2007


When the affidavit of UOI was withdrawn on 14 Sept. 2007, Addl. Solicitor General made astatement before the Supreme Court that total respect for all religions and Hinduism in particular and respecting the religious sensibilities would submit fresh affidavits re-scrutinizing all aspects including change of alignment without destroying Rama Setu.
ASG also submitted to the Hon’ble SC that high democratic traditions will be followed responding to objections.
But this promise has NOT been kept. The committee appointed to gather objections and suggestions did NOT perform its functions transparently and its report is biased and does NOT reveal all the expert opinions and suggestions made. Why were the Geological Survey of India and National Institute of Oceanography not involved in project formulation studies?
Additional points in re the withdrawn affidavit, from Dr. Subramanian Swamy’s reply affidavit:
LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION
* When the UOI through the learned ASG, had given several assurances in writing and filed an Application before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 14.9.07 seeking permission to withdraw their affidavit there was an expectation created that the UOI in implementing the Project would therefore not therefore damage or defile the Rama Setu and insult the Hindu religion and search for the an alternative alignment or project to serve the same objective through transparent consultation. These assurances were:
* First: that the UOI “is alive and conscious of religious sensibilities including the unique, ancient and holy text of Ramayana”. Second: that the “UOI 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 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 on these explicit assurances, and on trust, that the Petitioner did not object to the withdrawal of the said counter- affidavit that contained some highly objectionable averments on Sri Rama, and Ramayana.
* This expectation of a different and conciliatory affidavit was fortified by the Respondent’s sworn affidavit on the Jallikattu question [in an Application for Modification of Court’s Order of 11.1.08 in I.A. 15 of 2008 in SLP No.11686 of 2007] before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, prior to listing of this instant Transfer Petition on 16.1.07 for further hearing. In that IA, the Tamil Nadu government on the basis of a police report [ SLP, p.28, paras. 4 to 6] took the stand that hurting religious sentiment would cause grave public disorder [Reply Affidavit p. 27-28, para.48].
These assurances read together created a right for the Petitioner to legitimately expect a different counter affidavit [(2008 2 SCC 161, para 58&60]. That is, the UOI after re-examining the entire matter in light of the obvious public sentiment of reverence for the Rama Setu, and it’s sacred status in Hindu society, would decide on a ship channel alignment that would not hurt the religious sensibilities of the nearly 1 billion Hindus or commit any sacrilege on the holy text of Ramayana, and thereby avoid committing a crime under Section 295 of the IPC.
For UOI now to claim that a decision has been taken not to declare Rama Setu a national monumet since it does not meet the criteria, is an affront to the due process of law and tantamounts to misleading the Petitioners and the Hon’ble Court, apart from the public at large, since the issue of objectionable averments on Sri Rama, Ramayana and Rama Setu caused consternation among the public.
Regrettably these assurances given by ASG in the 14.09.07 Application of the UOI, have not been honoured because their fresh counter affidavit filed 29.2.08, after six months of internal deliberation, only reiterates blandly the earlier decision to go ahead with the Alignment No.6 to rupture the Rama Setu, commit sacrilege, and commit a criminal offence.
Instead, the same stale stand was re-iterated on a biased and malafide re-examination of the matter, done for the Respondents by a hand-picked so-called Committee of Eminent Experts, whose members’ objectivity and impartiality suffered from questions of conflict of interests and prejudicial behaviour [ ref: paras. 56-59 in Reply Affidavit]. An IA is pending on this matter.
An IA is also pending to implead Hon’ble TR Baalu as respondent. He was a respondent in the transferred case from Madras HC.
The direction of the Madras High Court required the Respondents to look at the investigations of “other concerned departments” (apart from Archaeological Survey of India) as well. No mention has so far been made by the UOI on this direction and a bland statement is made about 1958 Ancient Monuments and Protection Act.
Moreover, there have been repeated suggestions [e.g., of Planning Commission in 2000. Ref: Counter Affidavit, Vol. V, Annexure R-1/19, p. 11] that for completeness not only alternative Alignments should be evaluated but also alternative projects, such as rail or road expressways, to connect Tuticorin to Kolkata. This has not been done hence the choice of Alignment No.6 is arbitrary. The right to choose by government is not an arbitrary power [Tata Cellular, (1994) 6 SCC 651, paras.77 to 81]. The failure to consider alternative projects to meet the same objectives is also unreasonable and disproportional since a more drastic alternative has been chosen. This too, therefore, is not compliance with the directions of the MHC.
Merely referring to the issue of modified alignment 4 to the Prime Minister is a haphazard way of treating the concerns raised by the petitioners and ignoring other issues which have been submitted for directions by the Hon’ble Court — issues such as environmental dangers, nautical and economic falsifications, illegalities (related to both national and intenational laws), concerns of livelihood of fishermen, absence of review by national security agencies and clearance by Tamilnadu Pollution Control Board.
The alternatives to be evaluated by the UOI include the scrapping of the project and the SC may like to restrain UOI from proceeding with the project until all project alternatives are evauated and make the stay order on damaging Rama Setu absolute, extend the stay order to the entire mid-ocean Channel project close to the medial line between India and Srilanka’s historic waters.
Kalyan
http://janamejayan.wordpress.com/

 

[Saab]

SHAM SECULARISM

What can Hindus expect when both Manmohan and Sonia are not Hindus? The congress is practising only pseudo-secularism. When militants in Kashmir caused damage to Hazratbal shrine, there was a furore. The government took every measure to assuage the feelings of muslims. At no stage, the govenment questioned the authenticity of the strand of hair. The same congress government is in the forefront in performing Babri divas. The government never questioned the historicity or the authenticity of the dilapidated mosque. In fact, in the recent confidence motion on nuke-deal,the Prime Minister castigated Advani for the destruction of Babri Masjid. The same government revoked the land allotment to Amarnath Shrine Board, to please the agitating muslims in Kashmir. As regards Sethu, the government questioned the very existence of Ram. Then abuses were hurled by the UPA partners - Ram was a drunkard - which Engineering college did he study etc. Then the
government said that Ram himself destroyed the bridge. So there is no question of protecting any bridge. Again Ram was called a superman. To what a pitiable condition hindus and hinduism have been reduced.Taslima Nasrin was correct in saying(in her book Loja) that Hindus have the skin of Rhinoceros - so thick skinned,that they never react even for the genocide of their own kith and kin. Shame on Hindus and shame on the sham secularism practised by the government.
Thanking you,
Yours sincerely
N.Mohan

http://janamejayan.wordpress.com/

 

[Saab]

In a letter to Dr. Kalyanji Sri Balakrishnan Hariharan, an expert seafarer, wrote:

DEAR DR. KALYANARAMANJI,

1. In addition to the "cost-benefit analysis", from a purely shipping perspective, if the "alternate route" comes closer to land, then, an 'additional headache' is being added to the Captain of the ship!!This, in addition to the "Shallow Water Effect" or "Squat Effect", which I had explained in Part- 2 of my Analysis of the SSCP - which warranted reduced speeds of 6 or 8 knots through the SSCP.

2. The "new headache" will be the factor of "inadequate searoom" for vessel safety, as the "alternate alignment WILL BE CLOSER TO LAND. It must be understood, a 30,000 - 32.000 DWT
vessel proceeding at a speed of 6 knots through the SSCP is going to "extremely sluggish" in her responses to rudder. In a situation of cross wind/tide, the problem gets exaggerated.
The only way out is to increase speed to get the needed rudder response. This increase in speed will acentuate the "Shallow Water Effect" or "Squat Effect" which is nothing but the
propellors seeking the sea bottom.

3. A HOBSON'S CHOICE FOR THE MASTER OF THE VESSEL!!!

4. I have a simple solution. SCRAP THIS DAMN PROJECT - LOCK-STOCK AND BARREL!! I intend writing to the Chief Hydrographer to the Govt. of India,a naval officer, on this aspect.He happens to be a member of the Pachauri Committee. If they hold any sitting in Chennai, I intend deposing before them.This 'fraud" called the SSCP has gone on long enough. Time to put an end to the antics of Papa Doc of Gopalapuram.

NAMASKARAMS
BALA

 

[Saab]

Unbridged gaps . The government of India has abided by the direction of the Supreme Court to consider an alternative alignment for the implementation of the Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project and has constituted a six-member committee headed by Dr R K Pachauri to study the feasibility of an ‘another line’.

. The six-member committee includes Dr. Subramanyam Kathiroli from NIOT, Rear Admiral B.R.Rao, Chief Hydrographer P.M.Tajale from GSI, Dr.T.Chakrabarthi from NEERI and S.R.Shetye from NIO. Incidentally, this is the seventh committee constituted after independence - first one being A Ramasamy Mudaliyar Committee in 1956 - and fifteenth since 1860 when the eight committees of pre-independence period are considered.
As the present panel members seem to be of high credibility and as they are from the relevant areas of operation, an unbiased study and recommendation can be expected from them.
The problem with the previous committee of ‘eminent’ persons set up by the DMK was that it never had experts from the requisite areas and it conducted a farcical ‘public hearing’ in ‘closed doors’ and laid down its recommendations in a manner that made allegations of ‘bias’ seem credible.
It was also quite obvious that the committee was constituted with predetermined notion and naturally ended up as a failure after spending a few crores of taxpayers’ money.
The constitution of the present committee comes after series of bungling by the central government.
First, it refused to abide by the direction given by the Madras High Court in June 2007; secondly it filed an affidavit in Supreme Court in September 2007 denying Bhagwan Rama as an entity and questioning the historicity of Ramayana and existence of Rama Sethu; thirdly, it withdrew the affidavit and accepted the truth of Rama; fourthly it constituted a committee of ‘eminent’ persons without credible experts; fifthly it said that there is no bridge as such and hence there is no need for an archaeological survey.
And then, wrongly quoted Kamba Ramayana on the criminal advise of DMK, it said Rama Himself had destroyed his bridge!
After realising that it made a blunder on Kamba Ramayana and that it cannot touch Rama Sethu in future, it has decided to buy some more time to avoid the undue pressure exerted by the DMK and constituted the present panel of experts.
Even while doing so, just to satisfy the atheistic ego of the DMK, it has said in the Supreme Court that the idea of declaring Rama Sethu as a National Heritage Monument is ruled out.
This is going to be a ‘monumental’ mistake topping all the previous mistakes. Having decided to go for an alternative alignment, it would have made better sense for the government to declare Rama Sethu as a heritage monument and unfortunately it has lost a golden opportunity to soothe the hurt feelings of Hindus.
Bhagwan Rama, who permanently resides in the hearts of millions of Hindus, is worshipped by them day in and day out and Ramayana is a part and parcel of the culture of this great country.
When the whole country stands as a testimony for Rama’s avatar having clear historical evidences in each and every place he has travelled during his life-time, is it not the responsibility of the government to declare Rama Sethu, an engineering marvel, as a heritage monument? It is very sad that the main opposition party, which has grown and is still growing in the name of Rama, has still not come out with the statement that it would declare Rama Sethu as a monument if it comes back to power.
It is commendable that the Pachauri committee would be studying the project from all angles keeping in view the technical aspects, economical viability, cost benefit analysis, social and cultural impact, environmental impact, law and order aspect and any other related matters like security and naval defence.
Notably, the government has not given any time frame to the committee for submission of report. In this context it can be recalled that the previous committee of ‘eminent’ persons constituted by the DMK had categorically concluded that the other five alignments are totally unviable for the project.
So, it will be interesting as to how the present committee is going to view the other alignments.
The present development in the controversial issue points to the fact that the project stands as good as scrapped! It is good for the government and the people; it is good for the religion and culture; it is good for the fishermen and their families; it is good for the environment and thousands of marine organisms and rare species; it is good for nation’s security and mariners’ safety and it is good for the taxpayers and the government’s treasury! It is bad only for dredgers and bridge-busters and they deserve it!

http://newstodaynet.com/newsindex.php?id=9619 & section=13

 

[Saab]

SC should be told that UOI counsel Nariman has misquoted the Padma Purana


I hope that Pachauri committee while reviewing cultural aspects also takes note of the tradition of Setu worship and the imperative of scrapping SSCP to save the ecosphere and the millennial tradition venerating a world heritage biosphere called Setusamudram.

This is also a note for making a submission to the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
SC should be told that UOI counsel Nariman has misquoted the Padma Purana. This misquotation has led to a false allegation that Rama himself destroyed Setu. The counsel went on to claim without any basis that Hindus cannot worship something that has been destroyed. That Hindus should worship Setu is mentioned in the very same Padma Purana in the very same string of verses which the learned counsel misuses to make an erroneous argument. Any number of sacred texts establish that the very darshan of Setu is a life-fulfilment in the triad tradition of setu yatra, setu darshana, setu puja.

This is too serious a matter to be ignored by the SC and left uncontested, since an attempt has been made, using erroneous readings of sacred texts, to distort the tradition of worship of Setu in a continuum for millennia by millions of people. Setu snaanam on ashadha amavasya day (which falls this year on 1 August 2008), for example, is to pay homage to our ancestors by pitru tarpanam. Normally over 5 lakh pilgrims have a samudra snanam in the Setu. Skanda Purana, a sacred text notes: “One, who prostrates in the middle of the Setu’s sandbank (setu-saikata- madhye), his sins becomes dulled.“

Sri Rama did NOT destroy the Setu is clear, if there is a careful reading of the sacred texts of Padma Purana and Skanda Purana and the Valmiki Ramayana or Kamba Ramayana. Sri Rama was responding to Vibhishana’s apprehension about use of Setu to approach his domain. (The tradition has it that Vibhishana’s pattabhishekam- -ascension to the throne — took place near Dhanushkodi) . Setupati raja are traditionally the guardians of the Setu in the tradition of the guards established by Sri Rama as mentioned in Kamba Ramayana (in an interpolated verse).
I am thankful to Sarvesh Tiwari for citing the devanagari text of Padma Purana at http://bharatendu.com/2008/07/30/on-rama-setu-in-padma-purana/

The key verse is: 133: “kArmukaM gR^ihya hastena rAmaH setuM dwidhAchChinnattrivibhaajya cha vegena madhye vai dashayojanaM ||”

The key verb in this verse is chinnat in dvidhaachinnat trivibhaajya.

The meaning of the word, chinna is this:verse should be taken to be ‘division marker’, that is making two division markers to creat three segments in a continuous stretch of Setu.

The idiom often used is chinna-bhinna (even in many vernacular languages derived from Sanskrit), meaning: divided and cut up. There is no reference to such an action of ‘cutting up’ or ‘breaching’ the Setu in this verse of Padma Purana.

chinna mfn. cut off , cut , divided , torn , cut through , perforated AV. &c. ; opened (a wound) Sus3r. ; interrupted , not contiguous Bhag. vi , 36 R. iii , 50 , 12 VarBr2S. ; disturbed (%{kiM’naz’chinnam} , what is there in this to disturb us? “‘ there is nothing to care about Amar.) Hariv. 16258 Mr2icch. ; ? (said of the belly of a leach) Sus3r. ; limited by (in comp.) Bhartr2. iii , 20 ; taken away or out of. R. ii , 56 , 23 Ragh. xii , 80

What Rama did was this. He divided or perforated the Setu in two spots — as boundary markers — creating three segments of 10 yojana each (out of the 30 yojana-long Setu). The chinna was to install the s’ivalinga as he Padma purana verse immediately following this dvidhacinnat reference confirms; the verse number is 135:

The correction translation of the sequence of verses should be as follows:

(130) Hearing this from rAghava, vibhIShaNa responded to him. ‘All that you have ordered shall be obediently executed, O rAghava. (131) (However,) O Lord, this sacred setu of yours could be used by all the people of the world to approach (into laMkA) and therefore should be obstructed. (132) What control do I have in this matter O deva, but this is a need of mine. Hearing these words uttered by the best rAkShasa, The Scion of Raghu (133) took in his hands the missile kArmukaM, and DIVIDED the setu in the middle at two places over a length of ten yojana, (134) therefore dividing it into three parts with a one-yojana gap on the either side. Then approaching the shore-forest, he worshipped mahAdeva the Lord of umA. (135) There he established The Three- Eyed mahAdeva by the name of rAmeshwara. rAma, the Great Prince then prohibited the God sAgara, (136) that the Southern Sea should neither thunder there, nor flow across. Issuing his prohibitions this way, rAma then sent off the God sAgara.

‘DIVIDED’ does NOT mean ‘cutting through’ or creating breaches in the Setu at two places. It just means that two division markers were made to create spaces for installing hte s’ivalingas for worship one each in each segment 10 yojanas long – thus installing three s’ivalingas in the three segments..

If this interpretation of the verb chinnat is not made, the subsequent verses stopping the crossing of the ocean waters beyond the Setu — ocean does NOT flow across the Setu — do not become meainingful. So, chinnat here means only two division markers were made to create three segments of 10 yojanas each.

Clearly following this episode in Padma Purana, Kamba Ramayana version refers to the appointment of two warrior guards — Kappai and Kandanar — at each of the perforated spots to guard the Setu, This is Rama’s answer to the concern of Vibhishana about protecting him since “this sacred setu of yours could be used by all the people of the world to approach (into laMkA) and therefore should be obstructed.”

The interpolated verse in Kamba Ramayana for example iss 170-23.
kappai enum kanniyaiyum, kandanaar taataiyaiyum
appozhude tiruvanaikku kaavalaraay angu irutti
ceppa ariya cilaiyaale tiruvanaiyai vaay keeri
oppu ariyaal tannudane uyar cenai kkadaludane
Appointing lady-warriors called Kappai and Kandanaar to guard the Setu, using an arrow (cilai) marking a line (vaay keeri — line on the end of the Setu). This verse does NOT indicate that Rama destroyed the Setu. (Note: The word keeri has many meanings. In this context of engaging guards to guard the Setu, the line is drawn only as a demarcation of their zone of responsibility) . Two guards to guard at the two division-markers.

And, the tradition has it that he installed three s’ivalinga in each of these three segments. One in Rames’waram, one in Tirukkedees’varam (Talaimannar end) and the third in the middle segment of the Setu. It is the responsibility of the Pacauri Committee who ever is asked to stud the cultural aspects of the project to find this third s’ivalingam. The tradition is emphatic. Kuppuramu’s mother has said that her great grandfather went to this setu-madhya s’ivalingam and offered sankalpam for the 16th child. Pamban Swamigan also sings in Tamil about this setu-maddiyil irukkum s’ivan (s’iva in the middle of Setu).

(contd.)

 

[Saab]

contd..

Kumara Guru Dasa Swamigal or Pamban Swamigal 1848-1929 had sung 6666 songs. In the compilation realated to tirthasthana dars’ana, (referred to in Tamil as Tiruvalam); in the second kaanda (kat.t.al.aik kavittur-aikal. ), there is a song titled: Tiruccetumatti (In the middle of Rama Setu);
Translation from Tamil rendering is as follows:

In the middle of Rama Setu enveloped by the ocean and the clouds, is the s’ivalinga worshipped by vibhuti-wearing Rama, the Kaakutsa ; I bow down with love imagining S’iva in the form of Kugesa Muruga who is searching for me and finds me.

This and other textual and archaeological evidences are contained in the Second Part of Setubandhanam (Ramar Palam), a book authored by R. Subbarayalu and published in March 2008 by Thanjavur, Mamannan Padippagam, 126 Natcattiranagar, Thanjavur 613005.

Skanda Purana’s third book, Brahmakhandam, opens with a section called Setu-Mahatmya and the 48th and 49th verses from its first chapter known as setu-gamana- phalAdi-varNanam are:

setusaikatamadhyeya H shete tatpAMsukunThitaH |
yAvantaH pAMsavo lagnAstasyAnge viprasattamAH || (48 )
tAvatAM bramhahatyAnAM nASaH syAnnAtra saMSayaH |
setumadhyastha vAten yasyAngaH spR^syate-akhilaM || (49)
meaning:

(48 ) One, who prostrates in the middle of the Setu’s sandbank (setu-saikata- madhye), his sins becomes dulled. And ultimately his sins are subdued, O Best of the Dvija-s. (49) (So much so), that the grimmest sin that arises from killing a Bramhana, no doubt, even that is destroyed by performing rites there - (when) every part of the (sinner’s) body touches the winds in the middle of the Setu ( setu-madhyastha- vAta ).

kalyanaraman
http://janamejayan.wordpress.com/

 

[Saab]

கருணாநிதி, டி.ஆர்.பாலுவுக்கு சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட் கடும் கண்டனம்

புதுடில்லி: சேது சமுத்திரத் திட்டத்தை வலியுறுத்தி, சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட்டின் தடையை மீறி "பந்த்' நடத் தப்பட்டதாக தொடரப்பட்ட வழக்கில், பதில் மனு தாக்கல் செய்யாததால், தமிழக முதல்வர் கருணாநிதி, மத்திய அமைச்சர் டி.ஆர்.பாலு மற்றும் நான்கு பேருக்கு எதிராக கைது வாரன்ட் பிறப்பிக்க நேரிடும் என, சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட் கடுமையாக எச்சரித்துள்ளது. இருப்பினும், அரசு தரப்பு வக்கீல்களின் கோரிக் கை யை ஏற்று, புதிதாக மனு தாக்கல் செய்ய நான்கு வார காலம் அவகாசம் அளித்து உத்தரவிட்டது.


சேது சமுத்திரத் திட்டத்தை வலியுறுத்தி, கடந்த ஆண்டு அக்டோபர் முதல் தேதி தமிழகத்தில் அரசு தரப்பில், "பந்த்' அறிவிக்கப்பட்டது. இதை எதிர்த்து, அ.தி.மு.க., பொதுச் செயலர் ஜெயலலிதா, சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட்டில் வழக்குத் தொடர்ந்தார். வழக்கை விசாரித்த சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட், "பந்த்' நடத்த தடைவிதித்தது. இதை மீறினால், தமிழக அரசை டிஸ்மிஸ் செய்யும் படி ஜனாதிபதிக்கு பரிந் துரை அளிக்கப் போவதாகவும் எச்சரித்தது. இதையடுத்து, "பந்த்' போராட்டம், உண்ணாவிரத போராட்டமாக மாற்றப்பட்டது. இருந்தாலும், அரசு பஸ்கள், வாகனங்கள் இயங்கவில்லை. தமிழகம் முழுவதும், "பந்த்' போன்ற நிலையே இருந்தது.


இதைத் தொடர்ந்து, ஜெயலலிதா தரப்பில், தடையை மீறி, "பந்த்' நடத்தப்பட்டதாக புதுவழக்கு தொடரப்பட்டது. இந்த வழக்கில், குற்றம் சாட்டப்பட்ட முதல்வர் கருணாநிதி, அமைச்சர் பாலு, தலைமைச் செயலர், டி.ஜி.பி., மற்றும் இருவருக்கு பதில் மனு தாக்கல் செய்ய சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட் உத்தரவிட்டது. இவ்வழக்கு விசாரணைக்கு வரும் போதெல்லாம், தமிழக அரசு சார்பில் கால அவகாசம் கோரப்பட்டது. பல முறை வழக்கு விசாரணை ஒத்திவைக்கப் பட்டது. நேற்று இவ்வழக்கு விசாரணைக்கு வர இருந்த நிலையில், ஜூலை 30ம் தேதி, முதல்வர் கருணாநிதி, அமைச்சர் பாலு மற்றும் நான்கு பேர் மீது கோர்ட் அவமதிப்பு நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கக் கோரி ஜெயலலிதா தரப்பில் புதிதாக மனு தாக்கல் செய்யப்பட்டது.


நீதிபதிகள் பி.என்.அகர்வால், ஜி.எஸ்.சிங்வி ஆகியோர் கொண்ட பெஞ்ச் முன், நேற்று வழக்கு விசாரணைக்கு வந்த போது, ஜெயலலிதாவின் மனுவும் விசாரணைக்கு எடுத்துக் கொள்ளப்பட்டது. அப்போது, நீதிபதிகள் கூறியதாவது: தொடர்ந்து கால அவகாசம் கோரி, பதில் மனு தாக்கல் செய்வது தாமதப்படுத்தப்பட்டு வருகிறது. இதே நிலை நீடித்தால், குற்றம் சாட்டப்பட்டுள்ள தமிழக முதல்வர் கருணாநிதி, அமைச்சர் பாலு, தமிழக தலைமைச் செயலர், டி.ஜி.பி., மற்றும் இருவரை கைது செய்து ஆஜர் படுத்துமாறு உத்தரவிட நேரிடும். இவ்வாறு நீதிபதிகள் கடுமையாக எச்சரித்தனர். இருப்பினும், தமிழக அரசு தரப்பில் ஆஜரான வக்கீல்களின் கோரிக்கையை ஏற்று, பதில் மனு தாக்கல் செய்ய நான்கு வார கால அவகாசம் அளித்து, விசாரணை ஒத்திவைக்கப்பட்டது.
http://www.dinamalar.com//fpnnews.asp?News_id=1453