Wednesday 5 August 2020

Unsung Heroes of Sri Ram Janmabhumi Movement: KK Nayyar , an ICS officer from Kerala

KK Nayyar aka Kandangalathil Karunakaran Nayyar was born in on September 11, 1907, KK Nayyar began his life from Kuttanad, a small village in Alappuzha, Kerala. After completing his education in Kerala (Sanatana Dharma Vidyashala, Alleppey, Shri Mula Vilasam High School, Trivandrum, Science College, Trivandrum, Madras University,), he went to England for higher studies and won ICS at the age of 21. He joined Indian Civil Service in 1930 and served in various positions in Uttar Pradesh including Gonda (1946), Faizabad (1 June 1949 - 14 March 1950).


India's top court hands bitterly disputed Ayodhya site to Hindus ...


Kripal Singh, the then Superintendent of Police at Faizabad addressed a letter to K K Nayyar , the Deputy Commissioner dated 29 November 1949: "My dear Nayar, I visited the premises of Babri Mosque and the Janm Asthan in Ajodhya this evening. I noticed that several ‘Hawan Kunds’ have been constructed all around the mosque. Some of them have been built on old constructions already existing there”..............."I found bricks and lime also lying near the Janm Asthan. They have a proposal to construct a very big Havan Kund where Kirtan and Yagna on Puranmashi will be performed on a very large scale. Several thousand Hindus, Bairagis and Sadhus from outside will also participate. They also intend to continue the present Kirtan till Puranmashi. The plan appears to be to surround the mosque in such a way that entry for the Muslims will be very difficult and ultimately they might be forced to abandon the mosque. There is a strong rumour, that on puranmashi the Hindus will try to force entry into the mosque with the object of installing a deity".



 Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant.jpg

On 16 December 1949, K K Nayyar addressed a communication to Govind Narayan who was Home Secretary to the Government of Uttar Pradesh, stating that there was a ―magnificent temple‖ at the site which had been constructed by Vikramaditya, which was demolished by Babur for the construction of a mosque, known as Babri Masjid. The letter stated that building material of the temple was used in the construction of the mosque and that a long time had elapsed before Hindus were again restored to the possession of a site therein, at the corner of two walls. The letter recorded a reference to recent happenings and stated: ―"Some time this year probably in October or November some grave-mounds were partially destroyed apparently by Bairagis who very keenly resent Muslim associations with this shrine. On 12.11.49 a police picket was posted at this place. The picket still continues in augmented strength. There were since other attempts to destroy grave-mounds. Four persons were caught and cases are proceeding against them but for quite some time now there have been no attempts. Muslims, mostly of Faizabad have been exaggerating these happenings and giving currency to the report that graves are being demolished systematically on a large scale. This is an entirely false canard inspired apparently by a desire to prevent Hindus from securing in this area possession or rights of a larger character than have so far been enjoyed. Muslim anxiety on this score was heightened by the recent Navami Ramayan Path, a devotional reading of Ramayan by thousands of Hindus for nine days at a stretch. This period covered a Friday on which Muslims who went to say their prayers at the mosque were escorted to and from safely by the Police. As far as I have been able to understand the situation the Muslims of Ayodhya proper are far from agitated over this issue with the exception of one Anisur Rahman who frequently sends frantic messages giving the impression that the Babri Masjid and graves are in imminent danger of demolition."

 Ayodhya's Ram Lalla scoops 40 TIMES more donations over seven ...



On the night between 22-23 December 1949, Hindu idols appeared inside Babri Masjid .An FIR was lodged, complaining of the installation of idols inside the inner courtyard of the disputed site. The FIR, complaining of offences under Sections 147, 295, 448 of the Indian Penal Code was lodged at 7:00 pm on 23 December 1949 by Ram Deo Dubey, Sub-Inspector in charge. The FIR recorded that on information received from Mata Prasad, Constable No. 7, the complainant had arrived at the disputed site at 7:00 am and learned that a crowd of 50 or 60 persons had broken the locks placed on the compound of the mosque and had placed the idols inside, besides inscribing the names of Hindu deities on the walls. Thereafter, 5000 people had gathered to perform Kirtan. It was alleged that Abhay Ram Das, Ram Shukul Das, Sheo Darshan Dass and about 50 or 60 persons had committed an act of trespass by entering the mosque and installing idols, thereby desecrating the mosque.





K K Nayyar opposed the direction of the state government to remove the idols, fearing a loss of life. On 25 December 1949, K K Nayar recorded that puja and bhog was offered as usual. In spite of the directions to remove the idols, K K Nayar declined to do so stating that ―"if Government still insisted that removal should be carried out in the face of these facts, I would request to replace me by another officer"



Three days after the appearance of the idols(on December 26), then PM Nehru shot off a telegram to GB Pant on Ayodhya dispute saying, “I am disturbed at the developments in Ayodhya. Earnestly hope you will personally interest yourself in this matter. Dangerous example being set there, which will have bad consequences.” Also there are reports, which suggest that Nehru wrote a note directing state government to shift the idols of Ram Lalla and Sita out of Babri Masjid premises.

Nehru reiterated his concern in his letter to C Rajagopalachari, then Governor-General of India. “I wrote to Pantji last night, about Ayodhya and sent this letter with a person, who was going to Lucknow. Pantji telephoned me later. He said he was very worried and he was personally looking into this matter,” read Nehru’s letter, dated January 7, 1950.Another letter of Pandit Nehru (dated March 5, 1950) suggests that a directive to the Faizabad district administration, which apparently refused to comply with the directive. This letter was a reply to the one he received from celebrated Gandhian KG Mashruwala. Nehru wrote, “You refer to the Ayodhya mosque. This event occurred two or three months ago and I have been very gravely perturbed over it. The UP Government put up a brave show, but actually did little. Their District Officer in Faizabad [KK Nayar, ICS] rather misbehaved and took no steps to prevent this happening.”Nayar was the district magistrate of Faizabad then. Ayodhya falls in the Faizabad district (incidentally, UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath has recently announced to rename Faizabad district as Ayodhya). Nayar defended his decision of not acting on a directive of the country’s Prime Minister, which was routed through the state government. Nayar wrote a letter to the UP chief secretary saying, “I would, if the government decides to remove the idols at any cost, request that I be relieved and replaced by an officer, who may be able to see in the solution a merit which I cannot discern.”

On February 5, 1950, Nehru,  wrote to Pant saying that the Ayodhya dispute might have a bearing on the rest of India, including Kashmir issue.
“I shall be glad, if you will keep me informed of the Ayodhya situation. As you know, I attached great importance to it and to its repercussions on all-India affairs and more especially Kashmir.”
“I suggested to you when you were here last that, if necessary, I would go to Ayodhya. If you think this should be done. I shall try to find the date, although I am terribly busy,” Nehru wrote. This visit never materialised and the gates of the Babari Masjid were locked to pacify the escalating communal tension in Ayodhya.


KK Nayyar took voluntary retirement in 1952 and practised law at the Allahabad High Court.Taking the fight for Ram Mandir forward, KK Nayyar and his family joined the Jana Sangh. In 1952, his wife Sakunatala Nayyar  contested on the Jana Sangh ticket and became a member of Uttar Pradesh assembly. Later, in 1962, both KK Nayyar  and his wife became members of the 4th Lok Sabha, winning Bahraich and Kaiserganj constituencies respectively. Interestingly, their driver was also elected as a member of the UP legislative assembly from Faizabad assembly constituency. The couple was later arrested and jailed during the Emergency for protesting against the fascist regime of Indira Gandhi.

KK Nayyar remained as a Jana Sangh worker till his death, September 7, 1977.













Tuesday 4 August 2020

Devotion of Orcha rulers towards Ayodhya

 In 1780, the ruler of Orchha Vikramajit (1776–1817) shifted his capital from Orchha to Tehri and renamed it Tikamgarh (Tikam is one of the names of Krishna).Vrishbhanu Kunwari, the Queen of Tikamgarh is said to have rebuilt or renovated Kanak Bhawan temple in Ayodhya .  The temple is dedicated to Lord Rama and Goddess Sita and is located north-east of Ram Janma Bhoomi. It is said that this palatial building was gifted to the newly weds by King Dasharatha’s youngest queen, Kaikeyi. According to legend King Vikramaditya renovated it during the Gupta period around the 4-5th BCE.
Ayodhya Kanak Bhavan Was Gifted By Kaikeyi To Sita In Muh Dikhai ...

The idols of Sri Rama and Sita Devi are seated instead of the usual standing stance, the reason being that they were relaxed in their homes. There is no idol of Lakshmana too for the same reason as the younger brother-in-law is not allowed in the sister-in-law’s abode.

Kanak Bhavan Temple, Ayodhya | Ticket Price | Timings | Address ...

Janaki Mandir  in Janakpur in the Mithila region of Nepal, popularly known as the Nau Lakha Mandir was also built by  Queen Vrishabhanu of  in 1910 .Rani Mahal of Orchha is known well for the astounding architecture it has to boast about.The mahal also means the queen quarters. It was the royal chamber for the wife of Raja Madhukar Singh. He was greatly dedicated to Lord Rama and thus he decorated the rooms of the queen’s chamber with murals that depicted scenes from the great epics like Ramayana. The ceilings as well as walls both are festooned with beautiful paintings all over them.
Janki Mandir.JPG


In the reign of Jehangir, in 1618, Raja Veer Singh Deva Bundela of Orchha had built Keshavdeva temple at the cost of thirty-three lakhs in Mathura. A French traveller Tavernier visited Mathura in 1650 and had described the octagonal temple built in red sandstone. Italian traveller Niccolao Manucci who worked in Mughal court has also described the temple. Mughal prince Dara Shikoh had patronised the temple and donated a railing to the temple. The railing was removed Mathura governor Abdun Nabi Khan on the order of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and he built Jama mosque on the ruins of the Hindu temples. During the Jat rebellion in Mathura, Abdul Nabi Khan was killed in 1669. Aurangzeb attacked Mathura and destroyed that Keshavdeva temple in 1670 and built Shahi Eidgah in its place. 

Monday 3 August 2020

Suriratna, a Princess of Ayodhya, became the Queen of the first Korean King

Ayodhya, which is best known as the birthplace of the Hindu god Ram, also however, holds special significance for some South Koreans - many believe they can trace their ancestry to the city. This belief comes from several historical Korean stories, which tell the story of an Indian princess - Suriratna - who married a South Korean king and started a dynasty.

According to the legend, Princess Suriratna, also known as Heo Hwang-ok, went to Korea in 48 AD, some 2000 years ago, and started the Karak dynasty by marrying a local king. Some Chinese-language texts claim that the then King of Ayodhya had a dream where God ordered him to send his 16-year-old daughter to South Korea to marry King Kim Suro.

A popular South Korean book comprising fables and historical stories, Samguk Yusa (Memorabilia of the Three Kingdoms), mentions that Queen Hwang-ok was the princess of "Ayuta" kingdom. The royal couple prospered. They had 10 sons and both lived to be over a 150 years old.

An anthropologist named Kim Byung-mo Ayuta appeared to confirm the widely held belief that Ayuta was actually Ayodhya, as the two names are phonetically similar. But there is no clear evidence to show that the princess even actually existed

"There have been several fictional renditions of the story as there is plenty of room for imagination."
The Karak dynasty

Kim is a common surname in Korea and King Kim Suro is considered to be the father of the Kim clan which is based in Gimhae. While traditionally children in Korea take their father's surname, the queen is said to have been sad that her children could not bear her surname.

"The legend says that therefore King Suro allowed two of their sons to take her name (Heo), which is used to this day." Today, historians say, descendants of the couple number more than six million, which is roughly about 10% of the South Korean population.

People from the Karak dynasty have also preserved the rocks that are said to have been used by the princess during her sea voyage to Korea to keep her boat stable.

Former South Korean president Kim Dae-jung and former prime minister Kim Jong-pil claim their ancestry to the Karak dynasty.