Nepal’s Fake Ayodhya: Explained
-written by Uday Mittal
Prime Minister of Nepal K. P. Sharma Oli tweeted on 13 July 2020 midnight that India is portraying a fake Ayodhya. The true Ayodhya is in Nepal. Lord Ram was a Nepali, not an Indian, and he married the Nepali girl Lord Sita of Mithila. According to KP Oli, Lord Ram was born in Thori in Southern Nepal.
The above statement came after many days of Oli’s claim on three districts of India, namely, Kalapani, Lipulekh, and Limpiyadhura. It is known that Nepal is continuously under the influence of China, due to which Nepal has shown aggressive and unfriendly nature towards India. Nepal also claims that the primary reason for coronavirus in Nepal is India, which is false. India is the only nation that gave Nepal HydroxyChloroquine tablets for free. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had video conferencing with Nepal and other countries of Southern Asia in late February to decide on how to stop the spread of CoronaVirus in Southern Asia, and how to prevent the movement of the virus along the borders of the two nations.
Nepal’s statement on Ayodhya could be interpreted as a measure to prove the 2019 Ayodhya verdict of the Supreme Court of India wrong. On 9 November 2019, the Supreme Court gave a judgment accepting Ayodhya as the birthplace of Lord Ram and solved the dispute of the disputed land for Babri Masjid and Ram Janmabhoomi. The Court granted the orders of building a temple over the disputed area and allocated another five acres of land for building Babri Masjid.
On 21 May 2020, seven pillars of black touchstone, six pillars of red sandstone, a five-foot shiva lingam, and the idols of Hindu gods and goddess were found in the Ram Janmabhoomi, which stands as a proof for the verdict given by the Court. Amongst all these prove, KP Oli’s statement seems to be childish and illogical.
There are some significant facts and pieces of evidence, which stand against Oli’s statement. They are:-
- Ayodhya was a city located on the banks of Saryu River, as per Valmiki Ramayana. On the other hand, Oli’s Ayodhya, Thori, is a village and located in Parasa, and no major river flows through or near to Thori.
- Nepal, as a country, did not exist in the times of Ramayana. A separate country Nepal was established by Britishers. In earlier times, Nepal was a part of Bharat (India) and had no independent existence. So, if Thori would be true Ayodhya, then also Lord Ram and Sita would not be called as Nepali. They would still be Bharatiya (Indians). So, Oli’s statement about Nepali Ram and Sita could not be even defined.
- When Lord Ram went to exile for fourteen years, along with Sita and Laxman, the first river they crossed in the boat of Kevat was Ganga, near Prayagraj. If Thori would be the Ayodhya, then the first river they would have come across would be Gandak. Before reaching Ganga in Prayagraj, they would have to cross Gandak and Ghagra rivers, and there is no mention of these two rivers during the journey of Ram in Valmiki Ramayana.
- All the evidence regarding Lord Ram has been obtained from Ayodhya rather than Thori.
- In Mahabharata, the grandmothers of Dhritrashtra and Pandu were from Kashi, present-day Varanasi, and were Kosala princess. Varanasi is very much close to Ayodhya as compared to Thori.
- When Ram went to the forest for 14 years, he met all the Rishis whose Asharama fell in his journey. According to Valmiki Ramayana, the first stop of Lord Ram’s journey was Rishi Bharadwaj’s Ashrama, near River Ganga. If Ram would have started his journey from Thori, then the most probable first stop would not be Prayagraj, but Gorakhpur, which was very famous for the great Rishis at that time.
The statement of Prime Minister Oli seems to be intended to raise the political instability in the nation and a measure to resurface again the 100-year-old issue of Ram Janbhoomi and Babri Masjid, which was solved by The Supreme Court of India in 2019.
The former UPA government, headed by the Indian National Congress, stated in the Court that there is no evidence which could prove that Ramayana was History not a piece of Mythology or Literature, and questioned on the existence of Lord Ram. The statement intends to verify that the significant ideology and the major issue which BJP is focusing upon for years to get the vote of the people for years and has been able to make the government at the centre and the major Indian states is wrong. The statement also stands as proof for the UPA government’s report.
Oli’s statement also questions the law and order of India and raises questions against the Judiciary and tries to prove that the verdict given by the Supreme Court was false and that it was based on Religion and faith instead of facts and evidence.
But on the other hand, in India, the Youth Wing of the Indian National Congress has strongly condemned Oli’s statement. The beauty of India is that even after so many ideological differences between BJP and Congress, both stand against Oli’s decision and are supporting the verdict given by the Supreme Court of India. The unity gave a message to the World that the judgment of Indian Courts is based on facts instead of faith, Religion, corruption, politics, etc. The unity of the two political parties gave a strong message to the Nepali Prime Minister for propagandizing wrong agendas against India and trying to disturb the internal peace of the nation.
