The name Rama's Bridge originates in Hindu belief.
Rama's Bridge (also called the Adams Bridge) or Ram Setu (Devanagari) is a chain of limestone shoals, between the islands of Mannar, near northwestern Sri Lanka, and Rameswaram, off the southeastern coast of India.
The name Rama's Bridge originates in Hindu belief. According to the Hindu epic Ramayana, the bridge was constructed at Rama's request by his allies. The bridge was supported on floating sand rocks but the gods were said to have later anchored the rocks to the sea bed, thus creating the present chain of rocky shoals. It was said to have helped Rama to reach Sri Lanka to rescue his wife Sita from the demon (Asura) king called Ravana, who was then the ruler of Lanka.
Recently the Government of India has approved a multi-million dollar Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project that aims to create a ship channel across the Palk Strait. The plan is to dredge the shallow ocean floor near the Dhanushkodi end of Rama's Bridge to create enough leeway allowing ships to pass through the channel instead of having to go around the island of Sri Lanka. It is expected to save nearly 30 hours' shipping time by cutting over 400 km off the voyage
The determined moves made by the Central Government to build the Sethusamudaram canal by cutting across Rama's Bridge (also called the Adams Bridge) has far-reaching implications and detrimental effects for all Hindus:
- The priceless heritage in the form of Rama's Bridge (also called Adams Bridge) is to be removed altogether.
- Rameshwaram, which is one of the holiest locations for Hindus, will get submerged like Dhanushkodi, which got submerged in the 1960s and like Poompuhar, which got submerged in the Sangam period.
According to the Hindu epic Ramayana, the bridge was constructed at Rama's request by his allies.
The bridge was supported on floating sand rocks but the gods were said to have later anchored the rocks to the sea bed, thus creating the present chain of rocky shoals. It was said to have helped Rama to reach Sri Lanka to rescue his wife Sita from the demon (Asura) king called Ravana, who was then the ruler of Lanka.
Recently the Government of India has approved a multi-million dollar Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project that aims to create a ship channel across the Palk Strait. The plan is to dredge the shallow ocean floor near the Dhanushkodi end of Rama's Bridge to create enough leeway allowing ships to pass through the channel instead of having to go around the island of Sri Lanka. It is expected to save nearly 30 hours' shipping time by cutting over 400 km off the voyage
The determined moves made by the Central Government to build the Sethusamudaram canal by cutting across Rama's Bridge (also called the Adams Bridge) has far-reaching implications and detrimental effects for all Hindus:
- The priceless heritage in the form of Rama's Bridge (also called Adams Bridge) is to be removed altogether.
- Rameshwaram, which is one of the holiest locations for Hindus, will get submerged like Dhanushkodi, which got submerged in the 1960s and like Poompuhar, which got submerged in the Sangam period.
The petitioners, while seeking relief, have primarily relied upon the contents of the Valmiki Ramayana, the Ramcharitmanas by Tulsidas and other mythological texts, which admittedly form an important part of ancient Indian literature, but which cannot be said to be historical record to incontrovertibly prove the existence of the characters or the or the occurrence of the events therein.”
By itself, the paragraph in the affidavit filed by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to the Supreme Court in reply to a writ petition calling for the stoppage of the Sethusamudram Project may not have caused the uproar it subsequently did.
After all, for a scientific organisation like ASI, it was stating what it believed to be a matter of fact—that ancient texts cannot “incontrovertibly” prove the existence of Lord Ram and the events that occurred during his lifetime.
For, as ASI then went on to pompously state in its affidavit, “the study of human history, which is the primary object of ASI, like other sciences and fields of study, must be carried out in a scientific manner, using available technological aids, and its findings must be based on tangible material evidence”.
By submitting such an affidavit, ASI committed a series of major gaffes that deeply embarrassed the UPA Government and gave BJP another potent Ram issue on a platter to politically capitalise on.
The Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project was meant to provide a continuous navigation channel between the east and the west coast of India.
Currently the presence of shallow seas in the area of Adam’s Bridge near Rameswaram prevents ships from using the passage, forcing them to sail around Sri Lanka to reach their destination.
By dredging parts of the 167-km-long channel at a cost of Rs 2,427 crore, the project hopes to reduce the steaming distance between the two coasts by 780 km and achieve a saving in sailing time of about 30 hours. While the project has been on the anvil for over a century, it gathered momentum only in the past decade and was finally inaugurated in July 2005.
ASI’s affidavit, which it subsequently withdrew after the public outcry, was inreply to a writ petition claiming that Adam’s Bridge was the fabled sea bridge that Ram and his supporters built to rescue Sita after Ravana had abducted her to his kingdom in Sri Lanka.
The sentiment was bolstered by recent NASA satellite pictures that showed a shoal of rocks seemingly linking Rameswaram with the Sri Lankan coast. In its affidavit, ASI inexplicably failed to recognise that ancient Indian literature about Ram and his epic battle with Ravana was sacred to millions of believers and that it had, over the centuries, deeply influenced generations of Indians.
Any reference to the veracity of the texts should have been made with far greater circumspection.
Hadn’t the country witnessed enough bloodletting over the Babri Masjid dispute in Ayodhya, Ram’s place of birth?
More importantly, as B.B. Lal, former director-general of archaeology, an authority on archaeological evidence about Ram, says, ASI was going against professional grain when it made such a statement.
He says: “If we insist on accepting only contemporary documents, whether these be in the form of an inscription or a written historical record, we must give up altogether the historicity of Buddha or Mahavira.” His reason: all the related inscriptions and sculptures of the two great religious leaders are of much later origin and not contemporary to their lives.
Lal points to how Ashoka’s Lumbini inscription, which is cited to proclaim the veracity of Buddha’s birthplace, is ascribable to the 3rd century B.C., while the messiah was born 350 years earlier, in the 6th century B.C. Lal, though, does acknowledge that literary texts and oral tradition describing historical events must be used largely as supplementary evidence in the quest for truth.
hit counter
