Historian, historical politician, political historian, and historian politician – how do they differ with each other?

Historian, historical politician, political historian, and historian politician – how do they differ with each other?

Historians and corruption: Based on court case laws, complaints lodged at the police station and other sources, cases of corruption are also noted. This is mainly related to the students who complain that he is not getting reservation benefits, stipends, scholarships, grants etc. Many times, such issues are sorted out at the student, departmental level, so that it is compromised among themselves. When it is elevated, they go to Principal / Vice-Chancellor, committees and then, gets settled. Internal committees are formed and sorted out and settled. M.Phil / PhD students, theses presentation–related issues, sometimes may go to court. Thus, from the court cases only, the details are gathered and briefed here without mentioning the names of the students and the faculty involved.

Historians, courts and judicial judgments: Pro K. Rajayyan has gone to court to recognize the “1800 rebellion” as a part of 1857-Independence movement. Like Rebellion in Tirunelveli, Tamilnadu in 1755, Rebellion in Dhalbum, Bengal in 1769, Rebellion in Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh in 1778, Rebellion in Rangapur and Dinajpur, Bengal in 1783 and Rebellions in Orissa and Coastal Andhra in 1794, he argued it should be included.  ICHR documents say that he received some grant, he submitted the papers and the result is not known[1]. Thus, whether his volume published by ICHR came out or not – is not known, however, his book came out published by one private publisher. Like any other historian, Romila Thapar had been a member of the Prachar Bharathi Board till 1999 and of course, she gets many-many positions from the foreign countries also. She used to file petitions in the courts supporting the Leftist ideologists[2]. Barun De had been a member of NCERT, State Heritage Committee (West Bengal), etc. , and vociferous in supporting BM (Babri Masjid) cause.

How the eminent, elite and emeritus historians deposed before the courts in the case of BM-RJB case and get exposed: Many “independent experts”, historians and archaeologists appeared on behalf of the Sunni Waqf Board but in the end, the special bench of three judges unanimously dismissed the objections raised by them about the ruins of a temple under the demolished structure. Supriya Verma, Suvira Jaiswal, Shereen Ratnagar, D. Mandal, Suraj Bhan, R. S. Sharma, M. Athar Ali, D. N. Jha, Shireen Musavi, and others posed as “experts” and deposed before the courts giving manufactured or manipulated details as evidences[3]. It was Justice Sudhir Agarwal who put their claims to judicial scrutiny. Interestingly many of these “experts” had deposed twice in the court — once before the ASI excavations and another after[4]. Before the excavations, they asserted that there was no temple beneath the disputed structure and after it was dug up they began to claim that what was unearthed was a mosque or stupa. Not only that, they found themselves withering under judicial scrutiny in spite of writing signed articles and issuing pamphlets and long public letters. The judge asked pointed queries which might have never been asked by their students. The cross-examination covers several pages and gripping reading. It shows the levels to which our academics have fallen and become handmaidens of the political machinery.

Historians, historian politician, historical politician and political historian: Woodrow Wilson, Thomas Masaryk, Jawaharlal Nehru and Mikhail Gorbachev are mentioned as “historian politicians.” Now, there have been more political historians than historian politicians, as interestingly, though English allows using “historical politician” in the context, historians do not use it. Ironically, “historical politician” makes him hysterical, but, “historian politician” makes him comfortable. Till the World Wars, the historians had to obey to the rulers or the Church, as otherwise, they were killed and in some cases, they escaped to save themselves from getting killed to other countries. The politicians with a close interest in history were often more interested in power than in wisdom, and thus, their histories have been hysterical. The category of “political historians” rule roost to talk anything and historians have to accept and authorize, thus, histories are written accordingly. So naturally, they have to assert that historians do not require objectivity.

Historians, reality and objectivity: The reality of the social, economic, political, fiscal and related issues and problems have to be sorted out, solved and made conducive to all common people. The intellectual historians have to tell honestly, as to how the 1947 – one dollar = one rupee economic condition was changed. Even up to 1980, it was one dollar = 10 rupees. Generally, in India, the production by mass has been the criterion than the mass production. That is why, the Indian society survived and survives also, but, now, artificial infrastructure and logistics have been created to force them to come to the wholesale market, cold storage and other techniques that are not required for Indian conditions. The fundamental “Roti, Kapda aur Makhan = the food, dress and house,” have been taken care of them by themselves without expecting from the government. The entire agriculture, textile production, metal industries and other related production have been village and rural oriented and thus, there has not been any problem.

Historians cannot forget the tradition, heritage, culture and civilization of India: As the urbanization has started increasing, encroaching water bodies with the disappearance of tanks (including temple tanks), lakes and rivers (the kudals = where two or more rivers join together). The remote sensing and other scientific studies bring out the details that cannot be ignored by the historians. As exports of leather finished products, knitted garments, yarn and other goods increased, they only started affecting the water bodies polluting, besides the encroachments pointed out. Thus, during the last 1300 years of rule of the Moghuls and the European companies, the production and manufacturing processes have been changed. As India started depending upon other countries, particularly European and American, the dollar-rupee, pound-rupee, euro-rupee parities crept in and the rupee value started coming down. Thus, the Indian goods and services have become cheaper for European and American companies.

The modern economy and the ideology of historians coincide with dates also leading to harm for common people: During 1960s industrialization, modernization and urbanization started affecting the real Indian economy and the 1980s LPG (Liberalization-Privatization-Globalization) perhaps killed the crawling economy. However, historians have been shying to tell the truth, instead, they interpret in terms of ideology and induce the village and rural communities to fight against the government. Here only, the anti-national aspect comes into play, taking it to separatism. Therefore, history should not be misused to divide people, but to help them to understand the real past and preserve the past. That cannot be interpreted as “nationalism,” and kill the spirit of the common people.  As they use such English words and expressions, jingoism, chauvinism, medieval mindset, sectarianism, communalism, and so on, they try to kill the real patriotism.

© K. V. Ramakrishna Rao

17-02-2022

---

[1] 1. Before 1857: K. Rajayan: Rs 12,000; Submitted but not traceable.

2. 1857–1885: S.R. Mehrotra: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

3. 1885–1886: Bipan Chandra: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

4. 1896–98: Not assigned

5. 1899–1902: B.R. Grover: Rs 12,000; Submitted and published.

6. 1902–1903: Not assigned.

7. 1903–1905: Not assigned.

8. 1905–1907: Sumit Sarkar: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

9. 1907–1909: Sumit Sarkar: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

10. 1910–1915: M.N. Das: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

11. 1915–1919: T.K. Ravindran: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

12. 1919–1920: V.N. Dutta: Rs 12,000; Submitted and published.

13. 1920–1922: Sita Ram Singh: Rs 12,000, Submitted, under production.

14. 1922–1924: Sreekumaran Nair: Rs 12,000; Submitted and published.

15. 1924–1926: Amba Prasad: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

16. 1927–1929: Bimal Prasad: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

17. 1930–1931: Bimal Prasad: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

18. 1932–1934: Bipan Chandra: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

19. 1934–1937: Gopal Krishna: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

[2]  Recently, her name figured in the Elagar Parishad arrest case. Supreme Court of India – RomilaThapar vs Union Of India on 28 September, 2018, Author: A Khanwilkar –  REPORTABLE,  

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA,

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION,

WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 260 OF 2018

                         Romila Thapar and Ors.                         ….. Petitioner(s)

:Versus:

                         Union of India and Ors.                        ….Respondent(s)

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/52834611/

[3] The judgment gives the details as to how they manipulated and caught in the court through their “quoted-quoted” methodology, etc.

[4] And these very ‘historians’ are cited as witnesses in the pleadings filed by the Sunni Waqf Board in the courts which are considering the Ayodhya matter –

Witness number 63: R.S. Sharma;

Witness number 64: Suraj Bhan;

Witness number 65: D.N. Jha;

Witness number 66: Romila Thapar;

Witness number 67: Athar Ali (since deceased); …

Witness number 70: Irfan Habib;

Witness number 71: Shireen Moosvi, also from Aligarh Muslim University;

Witness number 72: B.N. Pandey (since deceased); …

Witness number 74: R.L. Shukla; …

Witness number 82: Sushil Srivastava; …

Witness number 95: K.M. Shrimali;

Witness number 96: Suveera Jayaswal; …

Witness number 99: Satish Chandra; …

Witness number 101: Sumit Sarkar;

Witness number 102: Gyanendra Pandey; …

Why the “Buddhist relics” are talked about at Ayodhya even after the rejection of the Buddhist petition by the Supreme Court and settled the issue? [1]

Why the “Buddhist relics” are talked about at Ayodhya even after the rejection of the Buddhist petition by the Supreme Court and settled the issue? [1]

12-05-2020 – Construction of Ram temple at Ayodhya has become a People movement: Ram Janmabhoomi Teertha Kshetra Trust chairman Mahant Nritya Gopal Das on 12-05-2020 Tuesday paid obeisance to deity Ram Lalla at the makeshift temple in Ayodhya, performed puja and announced the construction of the Ram temple[1]. Meanwhile, a huge sum of donations has been pouring in for the construction of a grand temple in Ayodhya, thus, making it as a people movement. So far, it appears no “Babri historians” have noticed this phenomenon, as otherwise, they might start writing in the EPW, Frontline, The Hindu etc., about the communalization of “Temple building”!  Acharya Satyendra Das, the chief priest of the Ram temple, said[2], “We are confident that there will be no shortage of money for the temple. People are donating huge sums of money for the project and we will make sure that the temple that is built is unmatched in magnificence and grandeur.” In those days, the temples might have been built by the Kings, queens, commanders, rich traders and others, but, nowadays, most of the temples are built with the contributions received from the devotees.

After 27 years, on March 25, 2020, Lord Ram Lalla was moved out of the makeshift temple in Ayodhya: The so-called “Ramlalla” idol was shifted in a palanquin to Manas Bhawan in the presence of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath. The makeshift temple structure is made of fibre and is bulletproof. An innocent devotee might wonder as to why it requires a bullet-proof protection. Ending a century-old dispute, the Supreme Court on November 9, 2019 paved the way for the construction of a Ram Temple by a Trust at the disputed site at Ayodhya. While announcing its verdict, a 5-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi had said, “The faith of the Hindus that Lord Ram was born at the demolished structure is undisputed.” The SC bench, also comprising Justices S A Bobde, Ashok Bhushan, DY Chandrachud, and S Abdul Nazeer asked the Centre to allot an alternative 5-acre plot to the Sunni Waqf Board for the construction of a mosque. The apex court in a unanimous 5-0 verdict had said the possession of the disputed 2.77 acre land rights will be handed over to the deity, ‘Ram Lalla’.

Preliminary work for the construction of the temple started at Ayodhya: The preliminary work for the construction of Ram temple started on May 11, 2020. According to Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra, as the work for levelling of land and removal of the gangway in Shri Ramjanmabhumi Complex was resumed on 20-05-2020 after the coronavirus lockdown, the workers at the site unearthed the remains of pillars adorned with old Hindu carvings, likely of a temple during the excavation. The objects included various archaeological artefacts and stone pillars with carvings of flowers, Kalash, Aamalak, etc. Naturally, only, the temple parts could be recovered underneath the disputed structure. Moreover, till the medieval periods, the temple contained many sannidhis-separate small temples for other divinities and parivara devatas. Thus, the existence of the temple proved already and confirmed by the Court is again vouchsafed.

Buddhist relics found –  media hype!: Suddenly, some persons with the picture of “Amalaka” (आमलक) have started a misinformation campaign through social media that “Buddhist relics” were found[3]. Definitely, these persons do not the meaning of “the Buddhist relics,” and indulged in, definitely dirty games without any care for history, judiciary and society[4]. It is well known that, in a religious context, a relic usually consists of the physical remains of a saint like skull, bone, teeth, nail, etc or the personal effects of the saint or venerated person or the dead body itself in an embalmed condition preserved for purposes of veneration as a tangible memorial and an important aspect of some forms of Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Shamanism, and other religions. Here, the broken pieces, parts and chunks of the old temple that was destroyed by the Mohammedans cannot be equated with relics. However, here, nothing has been found of the nature of “relic” connecting it to Buddhism and making it as news, but, the media has started reporting in such a way to create such an impression. Here, only, the responsible historians should have come out and informed the facts, but, they keep quiet for obvious reasons.

September 9, 2019 – The Supreme Court divided the land to the Hindus and Mohammedans: As pointed out above, the Supreme Court, had in November 9. 2019, in a historic decision, accepted the Hindu claim and handed over the Ram Janmabhoomi site to Hindus to build Ram Mandir and finally end the century-long dispute. The five-judge bench had unanimously come to the decision after weighing the arguments presented by all sides for 40 days. The Muslims were given a 5-acre site at an alternate location by the government of Uttar Pradesh, as per the SC order. The Buddhist claim was already rejected. Thus, the land has been distributed to the claiming Hindus and the Muslims. The Supreme Court judgment has amply gone through the evidences and decided accordingly. Therefore, now, commenting, criticizing and making claims are infructuous, redundant and useless. But, knowingly, why the learned, respectable and eminent historians have again and again indulged in such propaganda is intriguing.

A petition filed in June 2018 for Buddhist claim: As more petitions were filed, the court had ordered to find out as to whether a temple was demolished to build the mosque. Thus, the final excavation was conducted on the orders of the Allahabad High Court, when it was seized with the Ayodhya title suit. The ASI reported that there was massive structure standing on dozens of pillars existed at the disputed site before the construction of the Babri Masjid mentioning the presence of stupas and pillars at the disputed site from pre-mosque era. Ayodhya was called as Saket, a renowned Buddhist centre of the time, of course, Rama was also called “Saketa Rama”. This connection was taken as an argument in the writ petition that the Supreme Court admitted in 2018 making Buddhist the third religious stakeholder in Ayodhya title suit. The writ petition in the Supreme Court referred to five archaeological excavations beginning with the one under British archaeologist Alexander Cunningham, the founder of the ASI, in 1860-62. The petitioner Vinit Kumar Maurya, said Cunnigham had failed to find any evidence of a Hindu temple in Ayodhya but found ruins of a Buddhist shrine. Maurya, a postgraduate in ancient Indian history, says earlier, too, other Buddhist petitioners tried to intervene in the matter[5].  But the Buddhist applications filed, were dismissed on the grounds that there was no merit in their contention that the Babri Masjid was raised either by force or demolition on any Buddhist religious structure, which belongs to any Buddhist Society[6]. The Buddhist angle in Ayodhya title dispute emerged in July 2018, when the Supreme Court admitted an intervention petition[7] and tagged it with 13 other appeals making Maurya, a lawyer, the 14^th petitioner[8]. The petitioner was represented by KKL Gautam his lawyer. The Supreme Court had dismissed other intervention petitions in the Ayodhya title suit. The Ayodhya case reached the Supreme Court after petitioners challenged the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment ruling for tri-partition of the 2.77 acre land among deity Ram Lalla, the Nirmohi Akhara and the Sunni Waqf Board. Thus, the Buddhist claim was rejected.

In May 2020, after the Supreme Court Judgment, the Buddhist bogey raised: Now, in May 2020 without understanding and caring for the Supreme Court Judgment, on assumptions and presumptions started repeating old stories without any relevance to the judgment[9]. They had not suggested such things, when Maurya filed a petition. Of course, they never raised any issue about their place of worship was demolished by any Mohammedan. That too, the petition filed by Maurya to look into Buddhist angle was taken care of. No doubt, the eminent historians have been opining about the issue, criticizing the court judgments and even threatening that they would file appeals against the judgments. But, their claims, threatening and other politicization of the issue had been more vociferous in the media. Every time, when there was a judgment, Romila Thapar and Irfan Habib used to come out and assert that they would file an appeal against the order.

© K. V. Ramakrishna Rao

01-06-2020

[1] Times Now, Ram Mandir construction work begins today in Ayodhya; Ram Janmabhoomi trust chief performs puja, May 12, 2020; Updated May 26, 2020 | 11:56 IST

[2] https://www.timesnownews.com/india/article/ram-mandir-construction-work-begins-today-in-ayodhya-ram-janmabhoomi-trust-chief-performs-puja/597032

[3] News Click, Babri Masjid, Ram Janmbhoomi and Buddhist Relics, Ram Puniyani, 31 May 2020.

[4] https://www.newsclick.in/Ram-Temple-Ayodhya-Babri-Demolition-and-Buddhism

[5] Economic Times, New twist: Supreme Court accepts Buddhist claim in Ayodhya dispute, ET CONTRIBUTORS|, Last Updated: Jul 28, 2018, 11.00 PM IST

[6] https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/new-twist-supreme-court-accepts-buddhist-claim-in-ayodhya-dispute/articleshow/65180728.cms?from=mdr

[7] India Today, Ayodhya: A Buddhist stakeholder in Ram Janmabhoomi in Supreme Court, Prabhash K Dutta , New Delhi, September 3, 2019UPDATED: September 3, 2019 20:57 IST

[8] https://www.indiatoday.in/news-analysis/story/ayodhya-dispute-mandir-masjid-or-buddhist-stupa-1595002-2019-09-03

[9] The Tribune, Dig deep to explore Ayodhya’s Buddhist link, Posted: May 30, 2020 06:44 AM (IST), Updated : 1 day agoMallepalli Laxmaiah, Chairperson, Centre for Dalit Studies, Hyderabad.

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/dig-deep-to-explore-ayodhyas-buddhist-link-91858

National Seminar on “Historicity of Ramayana” held at Ongole, Andhrapradesh on November 8th and 9th 2014.

National Seminar on “Historicity of Ramayana” held at Ongole, Andhrapradesh on November 8^th and 9^th 2014.

Historicity of Ramayana – stage

The question of writing Indian history from “national perspective”: “The Hindu” reported that as part of efforts to write Indian history from “national perspective”, Bharatiya Itihas Sankalana Samiti (BISS) held a seminar on Ramayana here on November 8^th and 9^th 2014 at Ongole, Andhrapradesh[1]. BISS State unit secretary K. Lakshmana Rao said “Indian history had been distorted during the British rule”. Research papers were invited from scholars on various topics, including Ramayana’s historicity, by October 15 to BISS functionary there in Ongole P. Ramachadramurthy, whose contact no. was given – on 9640300507[2]. Writing history in the “national perspective” cannot be questioned, criticized or suspected, when “Indian history” written down and available in the print has been incomplete, unfinished and imperfect, as many important dates have not been fixed conclusively, but arrived at in a hurried way ignoring many material evidences and thus forced on Indians, during the last 100-150 years. Just because writing of Indian history the “national perspective” is anathema, others cannot think that what has been written has been not in the “national perspective”. In fact, such proposition becomes precarious in the academic circles[3], as some of them have already made such divide among themselves involving Rama, Ramayana and historicity[4]. The delegates were accommodated at the Swati Kalyanamantapam, Ongole and the entire proceedings of the seminar academic and as well as hospitality were held there comfortably.

Registration of the delegates at the Swati Kalyanamandapam

Theme of the National seminar and the subjects suggested: Topic Earlier, the organizers invited to present your research papers with an insight into the following topics in Ramayana:

 

Ramayana period The Sages and Rishis (Scientists) Administration Urban Culture & Social Life Public life Dharma (Duties) Special Women characters Lakes & Rivers Tribal Life Genealogical Histories & Kingdoms

Astrological & related sciences Path of Rama’s Journey Geographical science Science of Weapons Science of Industries Marital relations Military Strategies and Techniques Science of Mantra Sastra Rearing of children Influence of Ramayana on other countries

Organizers at the Seminar hall before inauguration on 08-11-2014

They also gave the following Instructions to submit Research Papers and Registration :

1. Research Paper should not exceed 5pages of A4 size one side pages in Font Size 12. Both the soft and hard copies have to be submitted on the first day of the seminar.
2. To register, send one page synopsis of your topic emphasizing your key points on or before October 15th to the email id: yogabalug@gmail.com. Participation is strictly based on registrations made in this format.
3. The entire paper cannot be read during the seminar. Please project only the highlights within the allotted 10 minutes duration.
4. A registration fee of Rs.200/- towards participation in the seminar is to be paid on the first day of the seminar.
5. Research Papers can be submitted in any of Telugu, Sanskrit, Hindi or English languages.

Getting ready to light lamp for inauguration

Inauguration of the seminar (08-11-2014): The seminar was inaugurated as per the schedule on 8^th morning, though the Chief Guest Hon. Sri Siddha Raghavaa Rao, Ministry of Roads and Buildings, A. P. did not turn up. As Sri P. Ramulu, the key-note address presenter was also not turned up, Sri M. M. Rao spoke. The organizing secretary of ABISY, Sri Balamukund Pandeya also did not come with his preoccupation.  The Sectional presidents Dr / Sri D. Ramanadha Sastry, Nelamraju Pardhasarthi, J. Janakirama Sharma, A. Hanumantha Rao, K. Srinivas, and B. V. Subba Rao were present. The lighting of lamp and other rituals went on and then the technical sessions started.

Lighting lamp

Ramayana is no myth, claim experts at seminar (as reported by “The Hindu”[5]): “Ramayana is no myth. It is very much an historical account of the great emperor Rama who shaped the character of Indian civilization for centuries and also the Indian diaspora elsewhere including southeast Asia.” This view was articulated by speakers at a seminar on the historicity of Ramayana organised by Bharatiya Itihas Sankalana Samiti (BISS) here on Saturday (08-11-2014). Speaking during the inaugural session, archaeologist[6] M.M. Rao said archaeological evidence was abundant both in India and southeast Asia, Egypt and Afghanistan to prove the historicity of the Lord Ram. Indian history should be rewritten from Indian perspective, he added. The Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) should promote research in India and other countries including Southeast Asia to enlighten people on facts of history, BISS organising secretary D. Mohan Rao said. Over 100 research papers were presented at the seminar on various aspects including the lives of women during the Ramayana era, seminar organising committee president P. Ramachandramurthy said[7].

A section of the audience

The front and back cover of the Abstract volume issued to the delegates –

Abstract volume issued to the delegates – front cover

The papers and paper presenters: The paper presenters had been from the Universities of SCSVMC, Kanchipuram, Rastriya Sanskrit Vidhyapeet, Tirupati, Osamania, Sri Venkateswara, Krishnadevaraya, and the Institute for the Study of Ancient Indian Arts and Sciences, Chennai.  More than 85  / 100 papers were received, most of them were in Telugu and Sanskrit one in Hindi and few in English[8] as listed below.

	Title of the paper	Paper presenter
	Sanskrit papers
1	Srimad Valmiki Ramayana manusrutyavisheshstri patrani	Mahatnti Rajyalakshmi
2	Valmiki Ramayane – Suktisamiksha	Gowri sankara Shenai Devadas
3	Adhunikale Ramayanavaishisytyam – Ekamadhyayanam	Balakrishna
4	Bharatashya bhatrubakti: ekam anusilanam	Jayamanikya Shastri
5	Ramayane-stri-patra	Harikrishna Kondapalli
6	Srimadramayane srushyaha: (Bhrahmarsharshyaha).	Sujatha Raghavan
7	Abhinandhakruta ramacarita me nyayadharshana	Sridhar
8	Ramayane pramukh stripatranam parisilanam	Hiralal Dash
9	Ramayane dharmastatha naitikta	Thakur Rana
10	Ramayane pramukpatranam rastrabakti	Sudeshana Dash
11	Valmiki: bharatiya samkruti	Lanka Venkatasubramanyeswar Sharma
12	Purushata catushtayam – srimath valmiki ramayanam	Pawan Kumar
13	Ramayanashya Pandulipivishyakamekam sarvekshanam (A Manuscript survey on Ramayana)	G. Arjun Kashyap
14	Ramayane sainikavyavasta	Narendrakumar
15	Srimathramayane jyotisham	Harikeshasahu
16	Adharsharamarajyastapane – sitayashsasyogaha	Asavadi Sudhama Vamsi
17	Ramayana yatra	Shivanag Sandip
18	Ramarajyam	Shekar Reddy
19	Valmikiyaramayane jyotisham	Pradeep Sharma
20	Jyotishashastranusare ramavayavarnanam	Rojalin Sahu
21	Ramayanadhyastaya haridhasidhantavagishaviracitram vadakiyatapanatakasyam anushilanam	Sumanta pramanik
22	Srimathrramayane dharmapatipadhanam	Lakshmi Tulasi
23	Ramayane adhyanini samajikam adhyayanam	Charan
24	Srimatharamayane rushinam varnanam	Kasturi VVSAR Chandekhar
25	Vidhyaparinayananatakadhyashtaya	Shaik. Jamal Basha
26	Mimamsamatdhyataya (ritya) ramayane yaga	Venkat Narayana
27	Hanuman uttamo dhuta	Ravi Teja
28	Srimathramayane yagaha: tadhmarshyaca	Nageswar Rao
29	Srimathramayane sharanagatitatva	T. G. Ranga Ramanujacharlu
30	Srimathramayane ramalakshmanyo: adharshabhraturtatvam	Lakshminarayanan
31	Ramayane prashasanatatram	H. Arya
	Telugu papers
32	Ramayanamulo Stripatrala jautityam	SeshavaraLakshmi
33	Strinityachaitanyaspurti-Baktasabari	Nareshkumar Naik
34	Ramayanamulo vishista strilu (Sita)	Dasaratha Ramaraju
35	Sundarakandaloni hanumanthuni karyanirvahana dakshyata	Ramanujula Reddy
36	Sri Ramayanamulo nadhinadhamuli	Mrs and Mr Chiralavamsa Vamsi Krishna
37	Ramayanamulo Viswamitradu	Jagadesh
38	Ramayanumulo Ramuni Vanavasam	Sasikumari
39	Ramayanam Mallayudddham leka Bahuyuddham	Jayalakshmi
40	Ramayanumulo Rishulu	Venkateswarlu
41	Srimath Ramayanamu – Ramarajyam – Rajadharmam	Narasimha Acharya
42	Ramayanam – Dhanurvigyanam	Himachalam
43	Prabhuswamyamlo Prajasamyam	Ravishankar
44	Sri Ramayanam – Baktirasam	Ravi Kishore
45	Mahasadhvi Mandodhari	Sudharshan
46	Mahabalasali Vali	Dheena Dayal
47	Ramayanmulo Naitika Vilavulu	Mukkaranna and D. Nallanna
48	Ramayana kalamulo Vidhyavidhanam	Murali Mohan
49	Srimathramayanulo dharmika samastalapalanaku sampadhincina vishesharta	Sriramulu
50	Ramayanumulo vishesha stri patralu	Mallikarjuna
51	Ramayanumulo Jatayu patra	Ashok Kumar
52	Ramayanumulo Rishulu	Venkateswaraulu and D. Prurosottam
53	Ramayanamu – Dharmalu	V. Sai Babu
54	Ramayanamulo Maharishilu	Siva Prasada Reddy
55	Ramayanakalamulo Manavasambandalu	Ramakanta Sharma
56	Ramayanumulo Pakshilu	K. S. Pavan Kumar
57	Ramayanumulo Vishista Stripatralu	Ravindra Babu
58	Ramayanam – Strijivanam	Sampurna
59	Ramayanumulo Vyvahika jivanam	Siva Praveen
60	Ramayanumulo Manavata Dharmalu mariyu viluvalu	L. Narasimha Prasad, M. Ramachandra Murty
61	Ramayanumulo Stripatralu:  Auicityamu mariyu pradharnayata	R. lalita and M. Ramachandra Murthy
62	Ramayanamulo kutumpa vivasta	Gurujada
63	Ramayanumulo Rishilu	Mallikarjuna
64	Ramayanumulo Pillala pempakam	Sitaramamurthy
65	Ramayanamulo Ramuni Toliprayanam	Alamvali
66	Ramayanamulo Samajika Jivanam	Muthiyalappa
67	Badhradhri Ramudu Ayodhya Ramuda, vera?	S. G. Hanumath Prasad
68	Ramayana sandhesham	M. Tharakeswar
69	Ramnayanam – Ayodhyakandam – Acharya-bavavisleshana	Malakondaiah
70	Ramayana Samajam – Samajikata	Samiulla
71	Ramayanam – Matrutvam	Mrudula
72	Women in Ramayana – Selected characters	Sharanya
73	Rama – the perfect role model for Dalit liberation: A counter, native and efficacious theology.	K. Sathyapraksh Rao
74	Monkey God in the Ancient Cultures of the World	K. Chirta Rao
75	Social Status as depicted in Ramayana	Debajyoti Jena
76	Tribal characters in Ramayana	Srresamulu
77	Ramayanamulo Dharmalu	Venkateswarlu
78	Ramayanamulo Vishesha Strtpatralu	Bhardwaja
79	Ramayanamulo – Rishulu	Kameswari
80	The Historicity of Ramayana and its spread in the West	K. V. Ramakrishna Rao
81	Ramayana, Mahabharata and Gilgamesh	K. Vivekananda Rao

Abstract volume issued to the delegates – back cover

During the paper reading session, there was some discussion about the “Historicity of Ramayana”, but by and large, that aspect was not taken care of, as had been mentioned. The first day seminar was concluded with a Bharatanatyam performance by the young girls of Manimekala Natya Sanga of Ongole.

A section of the audience – another view

The nature of papers and paper presenters: The paper presenters in Sanskrit had been HOD, Professor, Assistant Professor, lecturer, Research Scholar in Sanskrit of various branches like sahitya, nyaya, vyakarna, mimansa and so on. They talked, discussed, debated and argued in Sanskrit (So none could say that Sanskrit is dead). So also, the paper presenters in Telugu had such positions. As the titles reveal, not only the topics, but also the subject matter dealt with by the paper presenters show that they were about the literary glib, scholarly discourse, bookish syntax, epical prosody, poetic fantasy, lyrical rhyming, prosaic flow and so on. Though, it was a national seminar, the brief of the paper presented was not given in a language understandable to others. In fact, the research scholars have to give their brief in English even for the academic purposes. They had been of repetitive, monotonous and customary. They never touched upon the seminar theme the “Historicity of Ramayana”. When I conversed with them, I understood that they were not aware of the books written by H. D. Sankalia[9] (noted archaeologist), B. B. Lal[10] (former Archaeologial Survey of India Director General), D. C. Sircar[11] (eminent epigraphist) and others, the WAC-3 proceedings (New Delhi, 1995)[12], excavations conducted at the traditional sites connected with Ramayana and connected issues. Most of them did not know about the existence of Jaina and Buddhist versions of Ramayana and their interpolations[13], modification and recast of Ramayana in different ways[14]. The paper presenters even did not mention about the papers and proceedings volumes brought out by the earlier conferences and seminars conducted at national and international levels. Though some of them lamented for the mythologization of the epic, they never brought out the methods for demythologization in historical perspective.

A section of the audience – yet another view

inauguration went on with rituals.

P. Ramachandramurthy managing the show

Technical session.

Dr Sujatha Raghavan of SCSVMV presenting a paper

The paper reading session went on with active participation of the delegates.

Audience view – technical session morning 08-11-2014

The delegates were attending the session with enthusiasm.

Audience – another view – technical session morning 08-11-2014

The Sanskrit and Telugu papers reading sessions went on simultaneously.

Sanskrit session – Sastry of SCSVMV presenting a paper

From Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati Viswa Vidhyalaya, Enathur, Kanchipuram one group of Sanskrit scholars had come and presented papers.

Sanskrit session –

Sri Hanumantha Rao, Sanskrit Pundit was heading another session

Sri Hanumantha Rao, Sanskrit Pundit was heading another session

On 08-11-2014 evening, there was a “Bharata natyam” program performed by Manimekhalai Dance Academy.

Young girls performing Bharata natyam

Cultural programme – another view

Young girls performing Bharata natyam

A request to Sanskrit pundits, scholars and experts: The Sanskrit professionals of all fields should tackle the question of dating and chronology of Vedas, Itihasas and Puranas. They should bring out the correct interpretation of the Kruta, Treata, Dwapara and Kaliyuga periods and correlate and corroborate with the events mentioned in the scriptures. As the “Indian history writers” of the Europeans used the data given in the Sanskrit literature about the dynasties and kings ruled, and corresponded with that of inscriptions, they should be rechecked to verify the correctness. As many Kings and Kingdoms were rejected as myth by them in spite of their recordings in the literature and inscriptions, they should be reassesses and scrutinized thoroughly. When the Jains, Buddhists, Greeks, Moghuls[15] and Europeans started interpolating the scriptures and the purpose should be exposed categorically. The myths that Dasaratha had 60,000 wives, Rama ruled for 10,000 years, Rana had many wives[16] etc., should be demythologized and the facts brought out. Other aspects like the existence of Pushpaka Vimana, three-four tusked elephants, dinosaurs like strange animals and birds etc., also should be fixed within the dating framework of geology if not history. The pseudo-works can also be identified and categorized accordingly, so that any vested persons or groups tried to exploit, the fact would be recorded to check them.

A scholar from SCSVMV presenting a paper on 09-11-2014 morning

Fundamental concepts, precepts, hypotheses and theories could have been taken into consideration: Unfortunately, except 5 papers all delved upon the routine matters of Rama-bakti, popularity of Ramayana, characters, etc., without touching upon chronology, dating, archaeology or historicity. Though many delved upon the “female characters” of Ramayana, they did not discuss critically and decisively in the modern context and the social issues, the Indian society facing today. Many fundamental concepts, precepts, hypotheses and theories were taken into consideration –

1. that Bharat / India of Ramayana period was different from that of today in all aspects;
2. the geographical setting, location of the places, hills, rivers etc., were different (historical development of knowledge of geography, geology, astronomy, longitude-latitude to locate the places etc);
3. chronological correlation and corroboration of events consonance with the archaeological evidences;
4. sculptural depiction of Ramayana, characters and other related aspects in India and outside and their correlation and corroboration;
5. the dating of Vedas, Epics and Puranas connecting with Ramayana characters and events;
6. overcoming or refuting the hypotheses and theories that Valmiki copied from Homer, Gilgamesh etc., effectively with the expertise of Sanskrit;
7. the issues related to the origin and development of script, language and literature –
   1. script, language and literature used in the epical context,
   2. origin of philosophy (which is considered as the origin of all modern subjects) and its dating
   3. correlation and corroboration of literary evidences with the material evidences in historical perspective.
   4. the importance of recitation (or recording literature in memory),
   5. necessity of writing down an some material medium,
   6. the lag between such transitional periods, the nature and longevity of the memory and the material medium used,
   7. the continuity of preserving the “writing down” material, availability of them etc.,

Here, the dating of the present-available “written-down” material medium could not be the date of the historical processes went on in stages.

Second day morning session – audience

The second day session was also conducted first jointly and then, separately to cover all papers.

audience – another view

Sri Ramakanth Sarma, Tirupati presenting his paper.

Sri Ramakanth Sarma, Tirupati presenting his paper.

The paper reading session.

09-11-2014 paper reading session

Though, there was rain on the second day, some local delegates joined and presented papers.

09-11-2014 paper reading session

A large number of women-scholars participated and presented papers.

A large number of women-scholars participated and presented papers.

The VIPs on the stage during the valedictory function held after lunch.

Sri Ramanadha Sastry, Janakirama Sastry, Hanumantha Rao, Chidambaram Sastry on the stage during valedictory function

The second day proceedings and Valedictory function (09-11-2014): The technical session of paper reading continued on the second day (Sunday, 09-11-2014). Suddenly, the climate was changed in Ongole  and there was heavy downpour of rains. After paper reading session and lunch the valedictory function started. During the valedictory function, some important points were brought out by the scholars who presided over different sections of the proceedings.

1. Original Ramayana composed by Valmiki contained only 24,000 verses.

2. The Jains and Buddhists manipulated the epic Ramayana to throw slur on Rama, Sita, Agalya and other characters, as Ramayana was so popular with the mass even during those periods.

3. Rama and Sita were considered as “Anna sakti” i.e, “power of food”. Sita was born out of earth and during ploughing of land, she was discovered as baby. So also Rama in giving life to Agalya, so that the stone turning into life from the dry and parched land to fertile. The “payasam” producing Rama, Lakshmana, Bharata and Catrugana has been also involving such “power of food”[17].

4. The controversies like killing of Chambuka by Rama were one of them[18].

5. Most of the paper presenters did not stick to the theme of the seminar, “Historicity of Ramayana”.

6. Translations of Ramayana also played an havoc for misinterpretations in other languages[19].

The first four points were clarified by Sri Chidambaram Sastry, five by J. Janakirama Sharma.

audience during the valedictory function

The work of organizing and conducting of seminar or conference has been involving man and material. When much money, energy and others were spent on the conduct of seminars, it is not known why and how they are become emaciated on such repetitive issues that have been well-recorded already in many-many books. The papers received could have been scrutinized before and the presenters could have been advised to revise, reorient and redraft their papers in the thematic frame work of the seminar. Sri J. Janakirama Sharma pointed out this.

Sri Mohan Rao briefing the proceedings

All the persons – from philanthropists to volunteers who worked for the conduct of the seminar were honoured with mementos.

…………………………, …………….., Koti Lakshmana Rao, M. M. Rao

During the valedictory function, the scholars brought out some important points as mentioned above.

Janakirama Sastry, Ramanadha Sastry, Hanumantha Rao

Sri Mohan Rao was clarifying some points.

Sri Mohan Rao was clarifying some points.

The audience during the valedictory function

The audience during the valedictory function

Particularly, the food offered by Baba Ramdev group was produced by natural manure and healthy. Food packets were provided to the outstation delegates by them. By 5 pm evening, the seminar proceedings were over and the delegates started moving out to catch buses and trains, as the climate was rainy. They may be meeting again in another seminar or conference with their past memories.

the AP – BISS group

Rewriting of Indian history: P. Ramachandramurthy, president of the committee that organised a national seminar on ‘The Historicity of Ramayana’ said, “Much of Indian history has been distorted, and this needs to be corrected”[20]. Briefing reporters on Monday (10-11-2014), he said 120 papers were presented during the two-day seminar by scholars, and that they would be brought out in the form of a book later[21]. However, how it has to be rewritten has not been brought out. As already, historians have been divided on this issue also[22] as reflected in the IHC proceedings, RJB-BM and Ramasethu Court cases, and then, as happened in the case of CBEC books as to what constitutes “right” or “scientific” history[23] etc, a consensus may have to be arrived at immediately, as the objections raised by the historians who accused “saffronization” of text books was held void already. Enough has been pointed out as to how the accusing group of historians has also been indulged in the ideologization of historiography without any balance[24] and therefore, again, such outpour need not be brought to the public domain. As now youngsters, particularly who pursue and pursued and qualified in the subjects of science and technology, have been exposed to knowledge, they have capacity to think scientifically and understand what is right or wrong and they would not be worried about “right” or “left” as “centre” in India has never identified by itself or by others, as only “left” dominated[25]. In the Supreme Court judgment dated 12^th September, 2002, pronounced in the matter of “The National Curriculum Framework for School Education, 2000”. the following issues were discussed and the Court decided that there was nothing in the issues[26]:

1. Regarding Sanskrit language.
2. Regarding Vedic astrology.
3. Regarding Vedic Mathematics.
4. Regarding Hindu festivals being treated as National Festivals.

Therefore, now historians need not confuse the issues of nationalism, Marxism, secularism, communalism etc., and come forward for updating the Indian history with the material evidences obtained during the last 60 years.

.

[1] http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-andhrapradesh/seminar-on-ramayana-from-tomorrow/article6572756.ece

[2] http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-andhrapradesh/seminar-on-ramayana/article6227448.ece

[3] The suspecting of writing history in the “national perspective”, may pose a counter question of anything “written down in anti-national perspective”. Sir Robert Eric Mortimer Wheeler, 5000 years history of Pakistan: An archaeological outline, London, 1950. He was in Pakistan during 1949 and 1950, as an archaeological adviser in Pakistan helping to establish the Archaeological department of Pakistan and National Museum of Pakistan at Karachi. As Pakistan paid him, he faithfully wrote such history for Pakistan!

[4] The WAC-3 proceedings, the Court cases and judgments of Ramajanmabhumi and Ramasethu give enough proofs and evidences to prove how the responsible Indian historians behaved differently and strictures passed by the courts for their wrong presentation of facts.

[5] The Hindu, Ramayana is no myth, claim experts at seminar, Ongole, November 9, 2014.

[6] M. M. Rao is not an archaeologist, but as “The Hindu” has mentioned, it has to be taken seriously as to whether it mentioned euphemistically or otherwise.

[7] http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-andhrapradesh/ramayana-is-no-myth-claim-experts-at-seminar/article6579469.ece

[8] This is based on the “Summary / abstract” book provided to the delegates with the kit.

[9] H. D. Sankalia, Ramayana Myth or Reality?, Peoples Publishing Company, New Delhi, 1973.

.……………, The Ramayana in Historical Perspective, MacMillan India Limited, New Delhi, 1982.

[10] B. B. Lal conducted excavations at traditional Ramayanic sites.

B.B. Lal, ‘Was Ayodhya Mythical City’, Puratattva, #X, 1978-79, pp. 45-49.

B.B. Lal ‘ Ayodhya of the Valmiki Ramayana: An Energising Debate on its Identification’, Puratattva, #XVI, 1985-86.

3. B. Lal, A Note on the Excavations at Ayodhya with reference to the Mandir Masjid issue, paper presented during the WAC-3.

B.B. Lal, Director General (Retd.) Archaeological Survey of India

[11] D. C. Sircar, Problems of Ramayana, A. P., Govt. Museum Series No.19, Hyderabad, 1979, p.28.

…………………, Select Inscriptions, Vol.I, 1965, pp.77-78.

For the name “Rama” in earlier records, he draws attention to –

Luders’ List of Inscriptions, Nos.125I, 979.

[12] Jack Golson, What went wrong with WAC 3 and an attempt to understand why, Australian Archaeology, Number 41, 1995, pp.48-54.

[13] During valedictory function, Sri Chidambaram Sastry pointed out this point.

[14] However, I found that ABVP and others opposed the inclusion of “Three Huindred Ramayanas” of A. K. Ramanujam in the curriculum. This essay was taken from – Many Ramayanas, edited by Paula Richman, 1991, University of California Press, USA, pp.22-49.

[15] Allahupanishad, Yasur Vedam etc., composed by the Mohammedans and Christians for various purposes. The interpolations made in Bhavishya Puranam about the prediction of Jesus, Mohammed etc., should be pointed out.

[16] B. R. Ambedkar, The Riddles of Hinduism, Bombay.

[17] The origin of Ramayana as an “agricultural myth” has been pointed by many scholars already. Interestingly, the Zend Avesta mentioning Rama Hvastara also substantiate the myth.

[18] It is not found in the Valmiki Ramayana. Uttara Ramayana and other versions of Ramayana contain many manipulations that are not in the original Valmiki Ramayana.

[19] This aspect  was pointed out earlier in April 2014 by Gottumukkala Venkata Satya Narasimha Sastry. Those who translated Valmiki Ramayana into different languages had interpreted the epic in their own way and it led to a series of controversies over the essence of Ramayana, according this scholar and president of ‘Aaswadana’ literary organization.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/translations-of-ramayana-led-to-controversies-says-scholar/article5892070.ece

[20] The Hindu, Time to rewrite history from Indian perspective, Ongole, November.11, 2014

[21] http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-andhrapradesh/time-to-rewrite-history-from-indian-perspective/article6585105.ece

[22] Makkan Lal, The NCERT Social Science Books – False propaganda, Political Agenda and the “Eminent Historians”, Aligarh, 2002.

[23] Makkan Lal, A Review of the Class VI Text book of History (Ancient) published by the Govt. of West Bengal, Aligarh, 2002.

[24] Meenakshi Jain, Flawed Narratives – History in the old NCERT textbooks – A Random survey of Satish Chandra’s Medieval History of India, Delhi historians Forum, New Delhi, 2003.

[25] Atul Rawat, Prof. Arjun Dev: “An Eminent Historian” or a Fraud?, Delhi historians Forum, New Delhi, 2002.

[26] Supreme Court judgment dated 12^th September, 2002, pronounced in the matter of “The National Curriculum Framework for School Education, 2000”, NCERT, New Delhi, 2002.