Ram Mandir Hearing! Here are the interesting developments taking place in Supreme Court

A five-judge Constitution Bench is hearing ram janmabhoomi issue on daily basis now. Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi asked, had asked whether anyone from the Raghuvansha (descendant of Lord Ram) was still residing in Ayodhya?

Days after Supreme Court asked this question, Diya Kumari, BJP MP and member of the royal family of Jaipur took to Twitter to announce that her family descended from Lord Ram’s son, Kush.

“Yes, Descendants of Lord Ram are all over the world, including our family who descended from his son Kush,” Diya Kumari, wrote in her tweet.

Diya Kumari said she felt proud to be a descendant of Lord Ram. She cleared out that, royal family do not have any motive. Nor they have claim to the title or land at the disputed site.

According to genealogical documents at the City Palace Museum in Jaipur, the current king of Jaipur, Padmanabh Singh, is the 309th generation of Kush.

Ramu Ramdev, officer on special duty (OSD) at the museum pointed out rama janmabhoomi sthana in an old map belonging to the palace museum.

The rulers of Jaipur belonged to the Kachhwaha clan of Rajputs, which historians say descended from Kush, Lord Ram’s son.

Historian and former head of department of history and culture at University of Rajasthan in Jaipur, Professor R Nath, wrote in his book, ‘Studies in Medieval Indian Architecture’, that

“a large number of pattas, parwanas and chak-namas, letters and other documents, maps and plans preserved in the Kapad-Dwar collection of SMS-II City Palace Museum testify, that the ownership of the Jaisinghpura of Ayodhya, where the Ram Janmasthan Temple was situated, vested perpetually with the Kachhwahas”.

A very ancient map of Ayodhya and the temple is preserved at the museum, The old documents, which have a record of the genealogy of the Kachchwahas, are also put out in the public domain.

Historian Nath before his death a few years ago had written  many letters to centre to consider few proofs. One such letter, a 24-page document, is preserved at the museum in Jaipur.

Meanwhile Lakshyaraj Singh of the Mewar royal family  have claimed that they are the descendents of Lord Ram’s son, Luv, who had established Luvkote (Lahore) in the ancient times. His ancestors, had come to Ahad (Mewar) and established the Sisodia dynasty. the traditions and customs of the Mewar royal family as recorded by many historians are proofs that they descended from Lord Ram.

Laksharaj Singh mentions Col James Todd, his book ‘Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan’. Where he writes Lord Ram’s capital was Ayodhya. His son Luv established Luvkote (Lahore). Luv’s ancestors had moved to Gujarat in ancient times and from there to Ahad (Mewar) where they established the Sisodia dynasty. Initially their capital was Chittor and later it was shifted to Udaipur. The sun is the emblem of the Mewar royal family. Lord Ram was a worshipper of Lord Shiva and the Mewar royals worship Eklingnath (Lord Shiva).

Lakshyaraj’s uncle, Mahendra Singh Mewar echoed his claim and said the history of 76 generations is listed with the family. The former Jaipur royal family gave the genealogy to the court 25 years back.

according to Kalidas, Ram appointed Luv as the ruler of Sharavati and Kush as ruler of Kushavati. Sharavati is today known as Shravasti whereas Kush’s kingdom was Dakshin Kaushal and his capital was Kushavati which is now in Chhattisgarh. It is believed that Raghav Rajputs are descendents of Luv while Kachhwaha or Kushwaha Rajputs are descendents of Kush.

Proofs of descendents of Sri Rama have been submitted to the court. One more interesting document has turned up this week. Which clearly shows thatbtherecwas no babri masjid at the time of Babar to be clear before 18th century.

Senior advocate CS Vaidyanathan, appearing for the Lord Ram before the five-judge Constitution Bench, presented many books and travelogues recorded by Western writers and historians to make his point that Ayodhya was sacred to Hindus as the birthplace of Lord Ram and was worshipped for this very reason.

Vaidyanathan read from a book, Early Travels In India, which records the travel account of William Finch to Ayodhya during 1608-11. It makes no mention of a mosque at the disputed site. “As per the claim of the Muslim side, if the mosque was built in 1528, surely that should have found mention in the book. Its absence is significant,” he said.

Acc. To. The proofs brought forth by Vaidyanathan the first evidence of the masjid on record is from 1838 by British surveyor Robin Montgomery Martin, who refers to the mosque at Ayodhya built by Babar.

Other British gazetteers suggest it was built by Babar or Aurangzeb between 1659 and 1707. But Babarnama, a record of Babar’s diary entries, is silent on this aspect.

Now the court has agreed to consider these documents in further discussions on the dispute.

It make take time but the truth shall prevail eventually. we all Indians believe in this-

“Sathyameva Jayate”.

Dr Sindhu Prashanth