व्रतिनो रामचद्रस्य जन्मभूमे प्रदर्शनात्।।34.18।।
पापमुक्ताश्च ते सर्वे बभूवु पञ्चपापिनः।
In the following two ślokas there is a mention of Janma-bhūmi as well as the idol of Lord Rāma.
नवमी चैत्रमासस्य शुक्ला चाद्य प्रवर्तते।
तस्या व्रतप्रभावेन शरयूस्नानतः पुनः।।
दर्शनाद् रामदेवस्य जन्मभूमेर्विलोकनात्।
नाम्ना सान्तानको लोको विमानैस्तत्र ते गताः।।35.6-7।।
All went to the Sāntānaka Loka in a plane by virtue of visit to Janma-bhūmi, the darśana of the idol of Lord Rāma, bathing in the Sarayū river and the impact of the festival of the Rāmanavamī.
Similarly, in the following verses also the Janma-bhūmi is mentioned:
दर्शनं जन्मभूमेस्तु देवै सार्द्धं कृं मया।।35.22।।
जन्मभूमेरयोध्यायाः नवम्याश्च मुनीश्वर।।35.48।।
Even Brahmā is not competent to describe the importance of the Janma-bhūmi. On the bright ninth day of the Chaitra month, by the darśana of Janma-bhūmi, one gets liberated from millions (crores) of sins and goes to the supreme ‘loka’ (world) where he is never in distress:
जन्मभूमेस्तु माहात्म्यं वक्तुं शक्तो न पद्मजः।
पापकोटिसमायुक्तं चैत्रे नावमिके तिथौ।। 35.15।।
पापकोटिं नरस्त्यक्त्वा जन्मभूमे प्रदर्शनात्।
प्राप्नोति परमं लोकं यत्र गत्वा न शोचति।। 35.16।।
Thus, the Satyopākhyāna highlights the merits of the visit to Rāma-janma-bhūmi in many verses and in one śloka it specifically mentions the idol of Rāma. Thus, this is a clear proof of the existence of a Rāma temple with the deity inside it at the Rāma-janma-bhūmi.
Satyopākhyāna gives a very good interpretation of Ayodhyā:
पापैर्न योध्यते यस्याः तेनायोध्येति कथ्यते।। (पूर्वार्द्ध 34.7।।)
That which cannot be attacked by sinful acts is Ayodhyā.
(5) Vishnu-hari inscription
It is an important evidence which establishes that it was the birthplace of Lord Rāma and there was a massive temple built by Anayachandra, the Sāmanta of Gahadavāla King Govindachandra in the 12th century. In addition, Āyushyachandra built many temples, inns, ponds etc. at Ayodhyā. The following three verses from the Vishnu-hari inscription, recovered from the debris of the disputed shrine on the day of the demolition, are quoted here with English translation:
वंश्यन्तदेव कुलमाकुलतानिवृत्तिनिर्व्यूढमप्रतिम[विक्रम]जन्मभूमिः।
यत्रातिसाहससहस्रसमिद्धधामा मा नो जनिष्ट जगदिष्टतमोत्तमश्री ।। Verse 5.
It is the abode of the dynasty which had succeeded in ending all anxieties (over Bhārgava’s war) and is the birthplace of a man with unmatched valour, i.e. Rāma. Herein resides the person who is illuminated with the power of thousands of valorous deeds, i.e. Rāma. He may not generate greed in us even for most exciting wealth hankered after by the world.
टंकोत्खातविशालशैलशिखरश्रेणीशिलासंहति-
व्यूहैर्विष्णुहरेर्हिरण्यकलशश्रीसुन्दरं मन्दिरम्।
पूर्व्वैरप्यकृं नृपतिभिर्येनेदमित्यद्भुं
संसारार्णवशीघंघनलघूपायान्धिया ध्यायता।। Verse 21.
He, contemplating a shortcut to cross over the ocean of the world, made this beautiful Vishnu-hari temple, adorned with a gold Kalaśa, on a scale never done before by any preceding king. It was constructed with the blocks of rocks sculpted out with chisels from the mountain peaks.
उद्दामसौधविबुधालयनीमयोध्यामध्यास्य तेन नयनिन्हुत वैशसेन।
साकेतमण्डलमखण्डमकारि कूपवापीप्रतिश्रय तडागसहस्रमिश्रम्।। Verse 24.
By residing at Ayodhyā which was full of towering abodes and temples he, who was the embodiment of righteous conduct, constructed thousands of wells, tanks, rest-houses and ponds throughout the Sāketa-mandala.
(6) Avadha-vilāsa of Lal Das
There is another evidence of the Rāma-janma site and temples at Ayodhyā. Lal Das, the author of Avadha-vilāsa, also called ‘Lal Das Rāmāyana’ has given a detailed discription of the birthplace of Rāma at Ayodhyā. Lal Das composed this epic at Ayodhyā during the period from 1668 to 1675 A.D. This epic is published from Chandā Dāsa Sāhitya Shodha Sansthāna, Bāndā and was edited by Dr. Chandrika Prasad Dikshita ‘Lalit’.The excerpt from the 11th chapter (Viśrāma) is given below:
अब सुन राम जन्म अस्थाना। जन्म भयो जेहि ठौर ठिकाना।।
जाको दरस करै नर कोई। माता गरभ बास नहिं होई।।
देव सिद्ध रिषि मुनि जन जेते। बंदत हैं ता ठौरहिं तेते।।
विघ्नेश्वर के पूरब ओरा। आठ हजार धनुष वह ठौरा।।
लोमस्थल के पश्चिम देसा। धनुष पचास और कछु ऐसा।।
है उन्मत्त की दक्षिण घाहीं। धनुष एक सय अधिक नाहीं।।
मुनि बशिष्ठ के उत्तरभागा। राम जन्म जहुँ मध्य विभागा।।
नोमी चैत मास उजियारी। व्रत्त करै दरसन नर नारी।।
जो बालक परसै जन्मासन। रोग दोष गृह व्याधि बिनासन।।
जन्म स्थान के उत्तर सुंदर। धनुष बीस पर कैकेई मंदिर।।
भरत जन्म रघुंश उजागर। भक्ति ज्ञान गुण शील के सागर।।
महल सुमित्रा कहौ वषानी। तीस धनुष दक्षिण कौं जानी।।
जहां जनत भई दोइ सुमित्रा। लक्षिमन और शत्रुघन पुत्रा।।
धनुष प्रमान कहत सब कोई। साढ़े तीनि हाथ कर होई।।
It is very remarkable that Lal Das, who was at Ayodhyā from 1668 to 1675 A.D., wrote this Avadha-vilāsa at Ayodhyā and therefore his testimony is an eyewitness account. He himself claims to have written this book in 1675 A.D. He appeared so authentic to Bakker that he writes,
“Whether the Tirtha described in O.A. was subsequently claim
ed by Lal das or conversely, whether the Mãhãtmya describes the spot after its ‘discovery’ by Laldas; is difficult to determine.”
But there could be a third situation, i.e. Lal Das’s account could be quite independent of the Ayodhyā Māhātmya. He was a native of Ayodhyā and composed his work in Hindi. Therefore, what he saw on the spot, he described. Thus, his description carries far more evidentiary value.
(7) Testimony of Joseph Tieffenthaler
The lucid testimony of Joseph Tieffenthaler is the unimpeachable evidence that there existed a temple at the birthplace of Lord Rāma and it was converted into a mosque by Aurangzeb or, according to some, by Babur. Joseph Tieffenthaler is the first person who mentions the so-called Baburi mosque in his Latin book ‘Descriptio Indiae’, i.e. Description of India. Since he knew Persian and Sanskrit and wrote the aforesaid book after staying for more than two decades in this country, his accounts obviate the need for any other evidence. But there is no cure, if some persons choose to remain deliberately obtuse forever. Tieffenthaler visited Fyzabad and travelled the whole of Oudh during 1766-71.
Tieffenthaler’s account of Ayodhyā has been quoted earlier in Chapter VIII from the book ‘Modern Travellers’ published in English from London in 1828 A.D. The English translation of Tieffenthaler’s account produced by the Goverment of India before the Allahabad High Court after considering the suggestions made by Mohammad Hashim and Ved Prakash is now produced below:
“Avad, called as Adjudea, by the educated Hindus, is a city of very olden times. Its houses are (mostly) made up of mud only; covered with straw or tiles. Many (however) are made of bricks. The main street goes from South to North and it has a length of about a mile long. The width (of the city) is a little lesser. Its western and that of North as well, are situated on a mud hill. The North-East is situated on knolls. Towards Bangla it is united.
Today, this city has been hardly populated since the foundation of Bangla or Fesabad- a new city where the Governor established his residence and in which a great number (of inhabitants of Oude) settled in.
On the South bank (of Deva) are found various buildings constructed by the nobles in memory of Ram, extending from East to West.
The most remarkable place is the one which is called Sorgadaori, which means: the celestial temple. Because they say that Rama took away all the inhabitants of the city from there to heaven: This has some resemblance/similarity to the Ascent of the Lord. The city, thus deserted, was repopulated and was brought back to its earlier status by Bikarmadjit- the famous king of Oudjen.
There was a temple in this place constructed on the elevated bank of the river. But Aurengzeb, always keen to propagate the creed of Mohammed and abhorring the noble people, got it demolished and replaced with a mosque and two obelisks with a view to obliterate even the very memory of the Hindu superstition. Another mosque built by the Moors is adjacent to the one towards the East.
Close to Sorgadoari is a building constructed lengthways by Nabalray- a Hindu, a formerly lieutenant of the Governor (propraetor) of this region.
But a place especially famous is the one called Sitha Rassoi, i.e. the table of Sita, wife of Rama, adjoining to the city in the South, situated on a mud hill.
Emperor Aurengzeb got the fortress called Ramcot demolished and got a Muslim temple, with triple domes, constructed at the same place. Others say that it was constructed by ‘Babor’. Fourteen black stone pillars of 5 span high, which had existed at the site of the fortress, are seen there. Twelve of these pillars now support the interior arcades of the mosque. Two (of these 12) are placed at the entrance of the cloister. The two others are part of the tomb of some ‘Moor’. It is narrated that these pillars, or rather this debris of the pillars skillfully made, were brought from the island of Lanca or Selendip (called Ceylon by the Europeans) by Hanuman, King of Monkeys.
On the left is seen a square box, raised five inches from the ground, with borders made of lime, with a length of more than 5 ells and a maximum width of about 4. The Hindus call it Bedi, i.e. ‘the cradle’. The reason for this is that once upon a time, here was a house where Beschan was born in the form of Ram. It is said that his three brothers too were born here. Aurengzeb or Babor, according to others, got this place razed in order to deny them the noble people, opportunity of practising their superstitions. However, there still exists some superstitious cult in some place or other. For example, in the place where native house of Rama existed, they go around 3 times and prostrate on the floor. The two spots are surrounded by a low wall constructed with battlements. One enters the front hall through a low semi-circular door.
Not far from there is a place where one digs out grains of black rice, turned into small stones, which are said to have been hidden under the earth since the time of Ram.
On the 24th of the Tschet month, a big gathering of people is taken here to celebrate the birthday of Rama, so famous in entire India.” (pp. 252-54)
Thus, it is evident that Aurangzeb demolished the Svargadvāri temple situated on the elevated bank of the Sarayū river and constructed a mosque on the same site. He demolished the Ram Kot and built a mosque in the same place. Since Ram Kot is a vast area, the constructed mosque could not cover the whole area. Therefore, the expression that it was built in the same place means that it was erected in the same Ram Kot area. Inside this Ram Kot lay the Rāma-janma-bhumi temple which was converted into a mosque, commonly called Baburi Masjid. Tieffenthaler gives details of the mosque wherein he saw fourteen blackstone pillars, twelve of which were standing in support of the interior arcades of the mosque and two of them were placed at entrance of the cloister.
A map of Ram Kot prepared by P. Carnegy, who was Settlement Officer and Divisional Commissioner at Faizabad, is placed below from his book ‘Historical Sketch of Tahsil Faizabad...’:
Map of Ram Kot as shown in Carnegy’s
book published in 1870 A.D.
Tieffenthaler is a very impartial witness. He was a Jesuit Austrian priest. His account is a clinching evidence to prove that the mosque was built on the ‘Janma-sthāna’ of Rāma after demolishing the entire Ram Kot and Rāmālaya. However, some persons doubted the veracity of his finding which was originally written in the Latin language and later translated into the German and French. The fact that Johann Bernoulli translated Tieffenthaler’s Latin work into German also is known to few scholars only. The German caption of the book is ‘Historisch-geographische Beschreibung von Hindustan’, i.e. Historical and Geographical Description of India (3 vols., quarto, Berlin-Gotha, 1785–87). However, Tieffenthaler’s work could not be translated into English. The present writer is perhaps the first person to discover the English version of Tieffenthaler’s account on Ayodhyā which had been published in the 4th volume of the book ‘The Modern Traveller: A Popular Description, Geographical, Historical, and Topographical, of the Globe’ by Josiah Conder published in 1828. It is shocking to see that not a single historian did ever refer to it in any book on Ayodhyā written earlier.
(8) Exact birthplace of Rāma
Tieffenthaler informs that Aurangzeb (according to some, Babur) demolished the Ram Kot and built a Muslim temple with triple domes. He further informs that Aurangzeb or Babur, according to others, razed the house, wherein Rāma was born, to the ground. But he does not state that here, too, he built a mosque. Thus, there was only one mosque in the Ram Kot area. As stated earlier, Aurangzeb could not construct a shrine on the entire Ram Kot area because it was too vast. Therefore, the question arises as to which was the exact location where the mosque was constructed in the Ram Kot area. The answer is that it was the natal home of Rāma, for the French translation of Tieffenthaler’s original Latin account is ‘maison natale de Ram’, which means ‘the natal home of Ram’ in English. Tieffenthaler has called it Bedi and made its meaning crystal clear by explaining that the reason for calling it Bedi is that once upon a time here was a house where Rāma was born. Now, the further question arises as to where this Bedi was located.
He talks of black stone columns and then depicts the location by stating that ‘on the left is seen a square box’, i.e. the Bedi and ‘one enters the front hall through a low semi-circular door’. And in between he narrates how devotees circumambulate the birthplace of Rāma and prostrate before it. The birthplace of Rāma was marked and indicated by the ‘Bedi’ which was raised 5 inches above the ground measuring 5 ell in length and 4 ell in width. Ell is a measurement unit equal to 45 inches. Thus, the length of the Bedi was 18ft. 9 inches and the width 15ft. Tieffenthaler writes that despite Aurangzeb’s attempt to deny the Hindus their right to practise their rituals, devotees circumambulate the birthplace of Rāma three times and, in addition, they prostrate before it as a ritual. Many persons mix up the Chabutra with the Bedi, despite the fact that the Bedi was in existence since time immemorial; whereas Chabutrara was constructed after the Britishers arbitrarily deprived the Hindus of prostrating before and making pradakshina of the Bedi in 1858 A.D. The Bedi was located between the low wall and the liwan (prayer-hall); whereas the chabutara came up between outer wall and the low wall. When I gave the description of the Bedi to Satyendra Das, Chief Priest of the Rāma janma bhūmi temple, he informed me that there existed a Bedi-like site near the southern portion of the mosque.
A map, prepared on the basis of the writings of Tieffenthaler, Lal Das and Ayodhyā-māhātmya preserved in Bodleian Library, Oxford, is placed below:
A sketch of the disputed shrine showing
the exactbirthplace of Rāma.
A mere view of the disputed shrine shows that the Bedi which was the birthplace of Rāma was inside the inner portion of the mosque. There was a low wall with battlements between the liwan (prayer-hall) and the outer wall. The existence of a low wall with battlements is corroborated by the observation of District Judge Chamier who wrote in his judgment of 1885 A.D. that ‘a wall pierced here and there with railings divides the platform of the Masjid from the enclosure’. It was seen by everyone until the demolition of the mosque in 1992.
Ayodhya Revisited Page 49