In an affidavit, the Centre stated that the contents of the Valmiki Ramayana, Tuslidas's Ramcharitmanas and other mythological texts cannot be a historical record to prove the existence of the characters mentioned in the book.

According to the Centre the "Ramr Setu", Adam's bridge is not a man-made structure, "but rather a natural formation made up of shoals/sand bars, which are possessed of their particular shape and form due to several millennia of wave action and sedimentation."

The Centre filed the affidavit in response to two writ petitions filed by former Union Minister Subramaniam swamy and one Ram Gopalan who had sought an assurance from the Government that there would be no destruction of the mythical barrier "Ram Setu" during the construction of Sethusamudram project.

The project aims at providing a shorter sea route between the country's eastern and western coast without ships having to travel around Sri Lanka.

Referring to the Ramayana, the affidavit said there is no "historical record" to incontrovertibly prove the existence of the character, or the occurrences of the events, depicted therein.

The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) which filed the affidavit said it "duly respected the deep religious imports bestowed upon these texts by the Hindu community across the globe," but said that such claims cannot be vouched by it without "tangible material evidence".

According to the ASI, the existence of human remains, whether in the nature of bones or in other forms of artefacts, is primary (essential) to prove archaeologically, the existence and veracity of a historical fact.

"It is submitted that no such human remains have been discovered at the site of the formation known as Adams'Bridge, (Ramr Setu)," the affidavit stated.

It asserted that the Ram Setu bridge cannot be treated as a "protected monument" under the Ancient Monuments & Archaeological Sites & Remains Act, 1958 since it does not satisfy the requirements necessary for being qualified under the Act.

It said that till date the bridge has neither been declared as a "protected area", nor "protected monument" or for that matter as an "ancient monument." Quoting Article 51A(f), the Centre said the Constitution encourages each and every citizen to develop a scientific culture.

"Therefore, in a country as rich in cultural and historical diversity as India which has an established history ranging over nearly 9000 years, the line between myth and reality is often obliterated," the Centre submitted before the apex Court.

The affidavit said the Adams Bridge formation can be classified "as a series of shoals or a series of barrier islands, both of which are naturally occuring formations caused by tidal action and sedimentation." In the light of the various scientific studies conducted on the formation, it cannot therefore said to be a man-made structure, it said.

"The same is merely a sand and coral formation which cannot be said to be of historical, archaeological or artistic interest of importance," the Centre observed.

Quoting an article in the journal published by Indian Society of Remote Sensing, the Centre said nothing has been observed at Adam's bridge except coral and sand formations.

"At the best, this is a case of disputed mythology and not a matter of historical importance. This does not therefore, come under the purview of ancient monument," the affidavit added. (Agencies)

Comments

Comments*
Name*
Place
Email
Security Code

Enter security code
 

* Do not use semicolon(;)