Ayodhya Revisited
Page 14
“The Kalpataru has size (though it is not as extensive as the Viramitrodaya), has great range, but in quality it is very inferior not only to Mitãkshara but also to some other digests. Lengthy discussions in the Kalpatru are few and far between. It is more in the nature of a collection from all smritis.”
Established historians like Prof. R.S. Sharma and Prof. D.N. Jha have highlighted Kalpataru to show that Ayodhyā was not a pilgrim place until its composition in the 11th century. In the booklet “Communal History and Rama’s Ayodhyā” the author Prof. R.S. Sharma makes the following comments:
“Bhatta Lakshmidhara, the Gahadavala minister, who wrote Tirthavivechanakanda as a part of his book Krityakalpataru in the eleventh century and was evidently well acquainted with eastern Uttar Pradesh, surveys the well known brahmanical tirthas of his time, but significantly enough he neither mentions Ayodhya nor the birthplace of Rama; this absence of reference is particularly noted by Bakker (op.cit., pt. I, p.45). It is therefore clear that Ayodhya has not been a tirtha of a very long standing.”
In the Brahmachārī-kānda of the Kalpataru Lakshmīdhara has introduced himself as Mantrīśvara of King Govindachandra and at other places as a Sandhi-vigrāhika, i.e. Minister for war and peace. Though there is no mention in the Kalpataru that this Govindachandra was the famous King of Gahadavāla dynasty and the name of Lakshmīdhara is not found in any Gahadavāla inscription, yet he is identified with this King Govindachandra who ruled from 1114 to 1154.
Before pronouncing judgment that ‘Ayodhyā has not been a tīrtha of a very long standing Prof. Sharma should have referred to the Chandrawati copper plate which mentions that Govinda-chandra’s grand-father Chandradeva had visited Ayodhyā on Samvat 1150 Āśvina vadi 15, i.e. 23rd October, 1093 on the occasion of a solar eclipse.
Hans Bakker makes a sweeping statement at one place and contradicts himself at another. But by that time he does the damage which he intends. On page 45 of the 1st part of ‘Ayodhyā’ he writes:
“Curiously enough, Lakshmīdhara, who gave a survey of the well known Hindu Tīrthas of the eleventh century, mentions neither Ayodhyā nor the birthplace of Rāma.”
However, in the foot-note at the same page he gives a list of secret names (guhya-nāmāni) and fields (Ks+etrāni gulmāni) of Vishnu from Kalpataru which is a quotation from Narasimha-Purāna (TVK 251-256) where Ayodhyā is mentioned as the residence of Lokanātha.
On page 51 of the same part of the book ‘Ayodhyā’ he again contradicts himself by writing thus-
“Lakshmīdhara, who compiled the enormous Krityakalpataru, was unable to find Smriti texts which extolled the merits of Ayodhyā as a holy place, and so restricted himself to mentioning only Gopratār in a quotation of the Tīrtha-yātrāparvan of the Mahābhārata.” (Ayodhyā Part-I, p. 51)
First, he writes that Ayodhyā is not mentioned in Kalpataru at all and then adds that it is mentioned at the end of the book. Then he doubts its existence on earth. He further writes that Lakshmīdhara restricted himself to mentioning only Gopratāra which is a part of Ayodhyā.
Lakshmīdhara has quoted 4 ślokas in the 23rd chapter of Kritya-kalpa-taru from the Mahābhārata on the Gopratāra tīrtha which are quoted above in sub-head (4). During the Mahābhārata time Gopratāra Ghāt was the most sacred place in Ayodhyā and it was a part of the holy city. Lakshmīdhara has hardly added any comment on his part to the quoted verses. It is, by and large, a compendenium of the verses from the Mahābhārata, Purānas and Smriti texts.
Prof. Sharma’s writing is based on Bakker’s research which is not thorough. In the Vrata-Kānda of the Kritya-kalpataru, tithi-vratas are mentioned. There is a chapter called Rāghava-dvādaśī-vratam. This vrata is taken from the Varāha-Purāna (Chapter 45, verses 1-10).
In this Vratam Rāma is called the supreme god (परम देव) and Madhusūdana Vishnu is said to have been born as Daśaratha’s son in the name of Rāma. (तस्य पुत्रः स्वय जज्ञे रामाख्यो मधुसूदनः) Rituals are there for the worship of important limbs of Rāma. At the end ‘Phalaśruti’ is given. The gist is that those who perform this ritual enjoy the pleasure in the heaven for the a period spreading the reign of 14 Indras and thereafter on return to the earth become emperors. All sins of such persons vanish and all wishes are fulfilled. If he performs it without any desire, he gets the perpetual nirvāna. Thus, the vrata of Rāghava-dvādaśī was very important in ancient times and it was included in the Kritya-kalpataru. But historians have not read it and even then pronounced ‘judgment’.
Rāghava-dvādaśī Vrata is included mutatis mutandis in Hemādri’s work “Chaturvarga-chintāmani”(vol.1)and in Chandeśvara Thākura’s Kritya-ratnākara. Here some verses from Lakshmīdhara’s Krityākalpataru (vol. VI) are quoted:
अर्चयेत् परम देव पुष्पैर्नानाविधै शुभै।
ओ नमो राघवायेति पादौ पूर्वं समर्चयेत्।।
One should worship the supreme God with different types of auspicious flowers. Obeisance to Rāghava whose feet should be worshipped first.
तस्य पुत्रः स्वय जज्ञे रामाख्यो मधुसूदनः।
चतुर्धासावभूद् विष्णु परितोषान् महामुने।
Madhusūdan (Vishnu) himself was born as his (Daśarath’s) son. O sage, Vishnu, having been pleased, became four brothers from his four parts.
At the end, the phalaśruti is narrated and the last verse is as follows:
नश्यन्ति पापानि च तस्य पुसः
कामानवाप्नोति यथेप्सिताँश्च।
निष्काम एतद् व्रतमेव चीर्त्वा
प्राप्नोति निर्वाणपद स्थिर तत्।।
All sins of that person (who performs the Rāghava-dvādaśī) vanish and he obtains all the desired objects. He who performs it without any desire gets the permanent ‘nirvāna-pada’.
Thus, Kritya-kalpataru of Lakshmīdhara is full of references to Ayodhyā and deification of Rāma. But our modern historians don’t read the text and decide on the basis of secondary sources written by other scholars.
(30) Lal Darwaza Masjid inscription of Jaunpur
From the pillar inscription of the Lal Darwaza Masjid at Jaunpur, which was engraved in the year 1296 A.D., it is learnt that at Ayodhyā, there lived Sadhe Sādhu in the past. His son was Sādhunidhi, who had a son by the name Padmasādhu, who built a temple of Padmeśvara (Vishnu) at the north side of the entrance to the Viśvesvara Temple at Kāśī. This pillar has been shifted to Jaunpur from Kāśī and the inscription thereon reads as follows:
1. ओ नमो गणपतये।। अयोध्याया
2. पुरा वृत्तः सत्यवाक्सुजनप्रियः[।] स
3. ढेसाधुरितिख्यातः सर्व्वसत्वहितेरतः[।।2।।]
4. तस्य पुत्रे बभूवाथ साधुनिधेति विश्रु-
5. तः[1] तस्यात्मजः शुचिवीरः पद्मसाधुरय
6. भुवि।। [2।।] काश्या विश्वेश्वरद्वारि हिमादिशि-
7. ष (ख)रोपमम्। पद्मेश्वरस्य देवस्य प्रासाद-
8. मकरोत्सुधी।। [3।।] ज्येष्ठे मासि सिते पक्षे
9. द्वादश्याम्बुधवासरे। लिखितेय सदा
10. याति प्रशस्तिः प्लववत्सरे।। [4।।] स�
�त् 1353 [।।]
Om! Glory be to Ganapati (Ganesa)! In Ayodhyā lived formerly Sadhesādhu, the speaker of truth, the beloved of good men whose delight consisted in the welfare of all beings. His son was the famous Sādhunidhi, whose son, Padmasādhu, of steadfast virtue, built a solid and lofty temple of god Padmeśvara (Vishnu) on the north side of the entrance to the Visveśvara temple at Kāśi, on Wednesday, the twelfth day of the waning moon of the month of Jyeshtha, in the year Plava Samvat 1353, on which day this eulogy was written.
Padma Sādhu had built this temple in 1296 A.D. His grandfather Sadhe Sādhu, who was the native of Ayodhyā, would have lived there in the first half of the 13th century.
(31) Vividha-tīrtha-kalpa of Jinaprabha Sūri
Vividha-tīrtha-kalpa of Jinaprabha Sūri is an important treatise on Jain pilgrimage. It is called Kalpa-pradīpa also. It was first edited by Munishri Jinavijayji and published in 1934 A.D. Recently an erudite scholar of Jain texts Dr. Shriranjan Surideo has translated it into Hindi with perfection. It was composed between 1364 and 1389 V.S. i.e. 1307 and 1332 A.D. In this book there is a chapter called Ayodhyā-nagarī-kalpa. It enumerates all Jain pilgrim places of Ayodhyā and casually mentions Sanātana centres also; e.g. it says: घरहुसुब्भवाण दसरह-राम-भरहाईण च रज्जट्ठाणच i.e. It is the royal place of Daśaratha, Rāma, Bharata, etc. born in Raghu dynasty.” Again it says घभजत्थ य महासईए सीयाए अप्पाण सोहतीए निअसीलबलेण अग्गी जलपूरीकओ। सो अ जलपूरो नयरि बोलिंतो निअमाहप्पेण तीए चेव रक्खिओ।च
Where Mahāsatī Sītā, while testing her purification, turned fire into water-fall by her conduct and when that water-fall started deluging the town, she rescued it by her moral strength.
It shows the utmost regard of the Jain authors for Sītā.
(32) Rasika-rañjana of Kavi Rāmchadra:
In 1524 the poet Rāmachandra, son of Lakshmana-Bhatta, composed Rasika-rañjanam with his own commentary at Ayodhyā. The poet mentions in the colophon:-
शृगारवैराग्यशत सपञ्चविंशत्ययोध्यानगरे व्यधत्त।
अब्दे वियद्वारणबाणचद्रे श्रीरामचद्रोऽनु च तस्य टीकाम्।।
Rāmchadra has composed the poetry of one hundred and twenty five ślokas of romance and renunciation with commentary in Vikrama Samvat 1580 i.e. 1524 A.D. at Ayodhyā.
It is published in the fourth bunch of Kāvyamālā series of Nirnay Sāgar Press, and edited by Pandita Durgā Prasād.
(33) Yātrā-prabandha of Samarapungava Dīkshita
Yātrā-prabandha of South Indian Pandit Samarapungava Dīkshita, who was born in 1574 A.D., is an important treatise on pilgrimage in the Champū style, i.e. the mixture of prose and verses. It includes Ayodhyā as a very important pilgrim centre. After eulogising Sarayū river, it depicts Ayodhyā city in the following verse.
परिसर-सयूप-सकण्ठमलघूत्तरवेदि-तटी
परिसरयूपकण्ठ-परिबद्ध-चषालशता।
प्रदिशति यत्र कौतुकमशीतकराभिजन-
प्रभव-जनाधिनाथ-हयमेध-वितान-मही।।105।।
On the bank of the Sarayū river (at Ayodhyā), the corner of the vast northern altar is situated near the Yūpa (the column for sacrifice) and there are hundreds of ‘chashala, i.e. big umbrellas to provide shade for pilgrims, and the spot of the Asvamedha sacrifice of the kings of the solar race creates impressions of wonder amongst pilgrims.
From this verse it is clear that Ayodhyā was a large pilgrim centre because on its bank hundreds of big umbrellas were fixed (by Tīrtha-purohitas) for providing shade from sun, light and rain.
Again the poet informs:
तत्र स रामभद्र प्रणिपत्य नुतिमित्यतानीत्।।
There he, after having prostrated before (the idol of) Ramachandra, rendered prayers.
Here, there is a clear mention that there was an idol of Lord Rāma at Ayodhyā and devotees used to prostrate before it and pray. But in the absence of the exact location, this reference is not conclusive.
(34) An external evidence about Ramkot
“Asiatic researches; or, Transactions of the Society, instituted in Bengal for Inquiring Into the History and Antiquities, The Arts, Sciences, and Literature of Asia” vol. XV, Serampore, printed at the Mission Press, 1825.
This is an interesting reference. It relates to the discovery of seven copper inscriptions from Benares under the title ‘Sanscrit Inscriptions’ written by Captain E. Fell, with observations by H.H. Wilson. The article contains the English translation of the inscriptions.
The translator of the inscriptions makes the following observation:
“30. The whole of this verse, as also the whole of the 8th verse are literatim the same as two verses on a plate or brass found at Chitradurg, containing a grant of land by a king (Dewul Roy) of Vidyanagar conferred Anno Domini 1395. Many of the Pandits at Benares have also assured me that the same verses are to be found on an ancient copper plate, being a grant of land by the famous Rama Chandra, King of Ayodhya. The plate was found at Ramkota in the very center of the modern city of Fyzabad, some centuries ago, and by which, as they relate, Mohammedan Emperor restored which his generals had seized.” (p. 458)
The land grant given by Rāma Chandra might have been in existence or not but the tradition that it was found from Ram Kot at Ayodhyā centuries ago is important. Equally important is the fact that it was not disbelieved by an English translator in the beginning of the 19th century. More important is the fact that the Muslim Emperor restored the land which had been seized by his generals on the basis of the copper inscription issued by King Rāma Chandra.
(35) Ayodhyā in Thailand
The impact of Ayodhyā was so wide and varied that in the distant Śyāmadesa (Siam) i.e. modern Thailand a Buddhist king U-Thong (Skt. Uttunga) decided to establish his capital at Nong Sans and name it Ayutthaya or Ayudhya after Ayodhyā in 1350 A.D.
On accession to the throne of Ayutthaya this Buddhist king even changed his name from U-Thong to Ramathibodhi (Skt. Ramatibodhi which means Rāma, the intellectual par excellence.) For 417 years this strong kingdom with Ayutthaya as the capital dominated the South East Asia politically, culturally and religiously. According to Willian Warren, Ayutthaya in the 17th century was the largest and most magnificent city in the region, with a population greater than that of London at that time and had about 400 temples in the capital.
Similarly, Java’s capital at ‘Jogya karta’ for centuries has been named after Ayodhyā. ‘(A)Jogya’ is named after Ajodhya and karta means city. The main river in Java is called Serayu, which is apparently named after the Indian Sarayū on the bank of which Ayodhyā is situated. A cave in its proximity is called Kiskanda of the Rāmāyana. Similarly, a town Situbenda after the Setubandha is located in the extreme east of the principality.
In 1767 A.D. the capital Ayutthaya capitulated before the onslaught of Burma because the King Ektatat (1758-67 A.D.) could not succeed in preventing its capitulation. Thereafter, the capital was shifted to Bangkok in 1782 by King Phra Buddha Yod FA who changed his name to Rāma I. After King Rāma I ascended the Chakri throne, all his successors bore Rāma’s name. Rāma I composed the Thai Rāmāyana, called Ramakien which contains 50, 286 verses. King Rāma II (1809 A.D.) recomposed and reduced it to 14,300 verses. Subsequently, King Rāma IV further reduced it to 1,664 verses only. King Rāma VI rewrote it in dialogue form. Thus, these Rāma Kings made the Rāmāyana and Ayodhyā extensively popular in Thailand, Laos and other S.E. Asian c
ountries. The tradition of retaining the epithet Rāma still continues and the modern King Bhumibol Adulyadej is known as Rāma IX.
But the loss of Ayutthaya as the capital of the Kingdom and its irreparable ruins did always grieve all subsequent Kings. It is best illustrated in a heart-rending poem of Prince Maha Surasinghant, the brother of King Rāma I. The English translation of this poem is produced below:
“The whole city enjoyed happiness throughout all seasons.
Now it weighs heavily on my breast to see Ayutthaya disappear.
Where can I find its equal?
It is as if a crystal has lost its shine,
Each day brings new destruction
How can its glory ever be restored?”
This song of the Prince, full of pathos, fits in the present Ayodhyā situated in India. For every devotee of the original Ayodhyā it is peerless; there is no equal to it. The crystal of the present Ayodhyā has really lost its shine and every right thinking person is worried about the Yaksha-praśna, i.e.a million-dollar question as to how and when its glory will be restored.
Chapter Two
Janmabhūmi-māhātmya in the Skanda Purāna, Rudra-yāmala, Satyopākhyāna and Avadha-vilāsa of Lal Das
[(1) Ayodhyã-mãhãtmya of the Skanda Purãna (2) Rãmajanma-sthãna-mãhãtmya in the Rudra-yãmala (3) Satyopãkhyãna (4) Avadha-vilãsa of Lãl Das (5) P. Carnegy’s Ajudhyia-mãhatum (6) Ram Narayan’s translation of Ayodhyã-mãhãtmya (7) Minor Hindi texts]
In the Ramjanmabhumi Babri Masjid : A Historians’ Report to the Nation’ the four historians Prof. R.S. Sharma, Athar Ali, D.N. Jha and Suraj Bhan have observed:
“People will be surprised to find that the V.H.P. has been unable to cite any ancient Sanskrit text in support of its claim that there has been an ancient Hindu belief in Ram Janma-sthãna at Ayodhya. Surely, if there were such a strong belief there would have been numerous Vaishnavite texts exhorting worshippers to visit the spot. The absence of any such reference makes it very dubious that the belief in Ram Janma-sthãna is of such respectable antiquity as is being made out. It is even doubtful if it is earlier than the late eighteenth century, as we shall see.”