Skip to main content
Sabrang
Sabrang

There may have been Buddhist stupa at Babri site during Gupta period: Archeologist

Rajiv Shah 14 Nov 2019

Buddhist stupa

ASI excavations: Pix by Prof Supriya Varma

A top-notch archeologist, Prof Supriya Varma, who served as an observer during the excavation of the Babri Masjid site in early 2000s along with another archeologist, Jaya Menon, has controversially stated that not only was there "no temple under the Babri Masjid”, if one goes “beyond” the 12th century to 4th to 6th century, i.e. the Gupta period, “there seems to be a Buddhist stupa.”

Noting that “there was Buddhist occupation” in Ayodhya then, Prof Varma, in an interview recently  “updated” in Huffington Post following the Supreme Court’s verdict handing over the Babri site to build a Ram Lalla temple, said, this is what even Alexander Cunningham, the first director general of the Archeological Survey of India (ASI), also said after he carried out “some kind of survey” around the Ayodhya region in 1861-62.

Belonging to the Jawaharlal Nehru University, and inserted as observers in the ASI team excavating the site following a Sunni Waqf Board plea in the Babri case, Prof Varma says, Cunningham mentioned three mounds, two of whom had some kind of Buddhist Stupa and one had a Vihara. Varma was recommended to the Sunni Waqf Board, along with Jaya Menon of the history department of the Shiv Nadar University.

According to Prof Varma, whose name was recommended to the Sunni Waqf Board by Prof Irfan Habib, one of the top-most Indian historians, currently professor-emeritus, Aligarh Muslim University, “Outside the Babri Masjid, there are several other archeological mounds which seem to be sites of Buddhist stupas as well as monasteries. There was clearly a Buddhist community here, in the period, roughly from the 2nd century BC to 6th century AD.”

She adds, “To us, it looks like this was then abandoned and reoccupied sometime around the 11th-12th century and possibly because there was a Muslim settlement that came up. And they had a small mosque, which was expanded as the community increased, in size and finally a much larger mosque was built by Babar in 1528.”

Insisting that “there is no evidence” of of the narrative that “Babar's general Mir Baqi knocked down a temple to build a mosque”, as suggested by ASI, Prof Varma says, there is only “oral tradition that starts coming up in the late 19th century and it is recorded in a colonial period gazetteer.” She adds, even when Alexander Cunningham recorded these oral traditions during his travel to Ayodhya around 1861-62.

How do you explain finding animal bones in a Vaishnav temple? ASI did not want that recorded. Bones were not dated. Labour they had hired were just throwing the bones away

According to Prof Varma, Cunningham “does not mention a temple being underneath the Babri Masjid”, adding, “He talks about three temples, there is oral tradition of three temples being destroyed, but these are not underneath the Babri Masjid. They are some other temples in Ayodhya.”

Taking up issue with those who claim that “this is the site of Ram Temple, which is a Vaishnav temple”, Prof Varma says, here, “generally, you would not expect to find any bones because of this vegetarianism etc., but when they started excavating, they started finding a lot of bones, animal bones.”

Wondering how “do you explain finding animal bones in a Vaishnav temple”, she says ASI, strangely “did not want that recorded”, adding, “We noticed that the labour they had hired were just throwing the bones away.”

She adds, “The other thing they were also doing, there is a certain pottery, ceramic type, which is known as glazed ware, which is generally associated with Muslim communities. They were finding a lot of this glazed ware. Those again were being thrown.”

In fact, according to her, there is an entire chapter on the trenches in the ASI report and a chapter of chronology, a chapter on different structures, on pottery, yet “what is missing is a chapter on bones and human skeletal remains. That is what they also found but they never published it.

Calling it procedural “violation of an ethical code”, Prof Varma says, worse, ASI “did not date” the bones. Pointing out that they did complain about this, she adds, also, “you would not expect glazed ware in a Vaishnav temple.”

According to her, the issue acquired so much of a political character, “As far as foreign archeologists are concerned, they would not want to get entangled in it. If they wish to do any other archeological work in India, they would not want that to be jeopardised.”

As for the ASI and its archeologists Prof Varma opines, “They really are now no longer considered to have any kind of expertise. They haven't kept up to date with the latest methods, the recent theoretical developments, and they really just see it as more as an administrative job than as an academic discipline.”

Courtesy: counterview.net

There may have been Buddhist stupa at Babri site during Gupta period: Archeologist

Buddhist stupa

ASI excavations: Pix by Prof Supriya Varma

A top-notch archeologist, Prof Supriya Varma, who served as an observer during the excavation of the Babri Masjid site in early 2000s along with another archeologist, Jaya Menon, has controversially stated that not only was there "no temple under the Babri Masjid”, if one goes “beyond” the 12th century to 4th to 6th century, i.e. the Gupta period, “there seems to be a Buddhist stupa.”

Noting that “there was Buddhist occupation” in Ayodhya then, Prof Varma, in an interview recently  “updated” in Huffington Post following the Supreme Court’s verdict handing over the Babri site to build a Ram Lalla temple, said, this is what even Alexander Cunningham, the first director general of the Archeological Survey of India (ASI), also said after he carried out “some kind of survey” around the Ayodhya region in 1861-62.

Belonging to the Jawaharlal Nehru University, and inserted as observers in the ASI team excavating the site following a Sunni Waqf Board plea in the Babri case, Prof Varma says, Cunningham mentioned three mounds, two of whom had some kind of Buddhist Stupa and one had a Vihara. Varma was recommended to the Sunni Waqf Board, along with Jaya Menon of the history department of the Shiv Nadar University.

According to Prof Varma, whose name was recommended to the Sunni Waqf Board by Prof Irfan Habib, one of the top-most Indian historians, currently professor-emeritus, Aligarh Muslim University, “Outside the Babri Masjid, there are several other archeological mounds which seem to be sites of Buddhist stupas as well as monasteries. There was clearly a Buddhist community here, in the period, roughly from the 2nd century BC to 6th century AD.”

She adds, “To us, it looks like this was then abandoned and reoccupied sometime around the 11th-12th century and possibly because there was a Muslim settlement that came up. And they had a small mosque, which was expanded as the community increased, in size and finally a much larger mosque was built by Babar in 1528.”

Insisting that “there is no evidence” of of the narrative that “Babar's general Mir Baqi knocked down a temple to build a mosque”, as suggested by ASI, Prof Varma says, there is only “oral tradition that starts coming up in the late 19th century and it is recorded in a colonial period gazetteer.” She adds, even when Alexander Cunningham recorded these oral traditions during his travel to Ayodhya around 1861-62.

How do you explain finding animal bones in a Vaishnav temple? ASI did not want that recorded. Bones were not dated. Labour they had hired were just throwing the bones away

According to Prof Varma, Cunningham “does not mention a temple being underneath the Babri Masjid”, adding, “He talks about three temples, there is oral tradition of three temples being destroyed, but these are not underneath the Babri Masjid. They are some other temples in Ayodhya.”

Taking up issue with those who claim that “this is the site of Ram Temple, which is a Vaishnav temple”, Prof Varma says, here, “generally, you would not expect to find any bones because of this vegetarianism etc., but when they started excavating, they started finding a lot of bones, animal bones.”

Wondering how “do you explain finding animal bones in a Vaishnav temple”, she says ASI, strangely “did not want that recorded”, adding, “We noticed that the labour they had hired were just throwing the bones away.”

She adds, “The other thing they were also doing, there is a certain pottery, ceramic type, which is known as glazed ware, which is generally associated with Muslim communities. They were finding a lot of this glazed ware. Those again were being thrown.”

In fact, according to her, there is an entire chapter on the trenches in the ASI report and a chapter of chronology, a chapter on different structures, on pottery, yet “what is missing is a chapter on bones and human skeletal remains. That is what they also found but they never published it.

Calling it procedural “violation of an ethical code”, Prof Varma says, worse, ASI “did not date” the bones. Pointing out that they did complain about this, she adds, also, “you would not expect glazed ware in a Vaishnav temple.”

According to her, the issue acquired so much of a political character, “As far as foreign archeologists are concerned, they would not want to get entangled in it. If they wish to do any other archeological work in India, they would not want that to be jeopardised.”

As for the ASI and its archeologists Prof Varma opines, “They really are now no longer considered to have any kind of expertise. They haven't kept up to date with the latest methods, the recent theoretical developments, and they really just see it as more as an administrative job than as an academic discipline.”

Courtesy: counterview.net

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Sabrang

Modi-Shah strike at critique, GOI to revoke Aatish Taseer’s Overseas Citizen of India card

MHA claims Aatish Taseer attempted to “conceal information” that his father was of Pakistani origin

Sabrangindia 08 Nov 2019

Aatish

Image Courtesy: Hindustan Times

If there is one word that this Regime will be remembered for is its vindictive style of functioning. Be it the PMO or other key ministries, dissenters and critiques of the prime minister or home minister are not spared. In keeping with this well-established trend evident since 2014 but which has become sharper come May 2019, the Home Ministry claims AatishTaseer attempted to “conceal information” that his father was of Pakistani origin.

In a controversial move, the government announced that it will revoke the Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) card given to well known journalist and author AatishTaseer over what it claimed was his attempt to “conceal information” that his father, Salman Taseer, was of Pakistani origin. In an official statement, which Aatish Taseer vehemently denied, the Ministry of Home Affairs said that he had “failed to dispute the notice” it had sent asking him to explain the lapse.

In May 2019, AatishTaseer, had authored the cover story for TIME magazine that featured Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister as the “Divider of India”

Time

“Mr.Taseer was given the opportunity to submit his reply/objections regarding his PIO/OCI cards, but he failed to dispute the notice,” the Home Ministry said in its statement on November 7 night. “Thus, Aatish Ali Taseer becomes ineligible to hold an OCI card as per the Citizenship Act, 1955. He has clearly not complied with very basic requirements and hidden information,” it added.

MHA

 

Taseer

The August 13, 2019 notice from the MHA to Aatish Taseer was accessed by The Hindu. The notice stated that Aatish Taseer had committed the error of not disclosing that his father, the former Governor of Punjab was of Pakistani origin and had only provided details of his mother, senior journalist, Tavleen Singh.

In his reply dated September 6 to the August 13 notice, and a subsequent notice dated September 3, Aatish Taseer had explained in detail that his parents had never been legally married, and his mother was his sole legal guardian. They had a relationship, Aatish Taseer said  when they were both resident in the United Kingdom and Salman Taseer was a UK citizen and passport holder. This has been stated accurately, Aatish Taseer replied when sent a response to the Indian Consulate in New York, which was acknowledged by Deputy Consul-General Shatrughna Sinha.

It was in the year 2000 that Aatish Taseer has first received the Person of Indian Origin (PIO) card which was later converted into an OCI Card. The NDA I government under Atal Behari Vajpayee was in power at the time! Aatish Taseer who grew up in Delhi and studied at the Kodaikanal International school in Tamil Nadu now lives in New York.

In his application, Aatish had referred to his mother as an Indian national and his father, Salman Taseer, as a “British national” to the best of my knowledge. His father, Salman Taseer was assassinated in Pakistan in 2011. Aatish Taseer and his father had been mostly estranged as was documented in Aatish Taseer’s autobiographical work Stranger to History: A son’s journey that was published in 2007.

Modi-Shah strike at critique, GOI to revoke Aatish Taseer’s Overseas Citizen of India card

MHA claims Aatish Taseer attempted to “conceal information” that his father was of Pakistani origin

Aatish

Image Courtesy: Hindustan Times

If there is one word that this Regime will be remembered for is its vindictive style of functioning. Be it the PMO or other key ministries, dissenters and critiques of the prime minister or home minister are not spared. In keeping with this well-established trend evident since 2014 but which has become sharper come May 2019, the Home Ministry claims AatishTaseer attempted to “conceal information” that his father was of Pakistani origin.

In a controversial move, the government announced that it will revoke the Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) card given to well known journalist and author AatishTaseer over what it claimed was his attempt to “conceal information” that his father, Salman Taseer, was of Pakistani origin. In an official statement, which Aatish Taseer vehemently denied, the Ministry of Home Affairs said that he had “failed to dispute the notice” it had sent asking him to explain the lapse.

In May 2019, AatishTaseer, had authored the cover story for TIME magazine that featured Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister as the “Divider of India”

Time

“Mr.Taseer was given the opportunity to submit his reply/objections regarding his PIO/OCI cards, but he failed to dispute the notice,” the Home Ministry said in its statement on November 7 night. “Thus, Aatish Ali Taseer becomes ineligible to hold an OCI card as per the Citizenship Act, 1955. He has clearly not complied with very basic requirements and hidden information,” it added.

MHA

 

Taseer

The August 13, 2019 notice from the MHA to Aatish Taseer was accessed by The Hindu. The notice stated that Aatish Taseer had committed the error of not disclosing that his father, the former Governor of Punjab was of Pakistani origin and had only provided details of his mother, senior journalist, Tavleen Singh.

In his reply dated September 6 to the August 13 notice, and a subsequent notice dated September 3, Aatish Taseer had explained in detail that his parents had never been legally married, and his mother was his sole legal guardian. They had a relationship, Aatish Taseer said  when they were both resident in the United Kingdom and Salman Taseer was a UK citizen and passport holder. This has been stated accurately, Aatish Taseer replied when sent a response to the Indian Consulate in New York, which was acknowledged by Deputy Consul-General Shatrughna Sinha.

It was in the year 2000 that Aatish Taseer has first received the Person of Indian Origin (PIO) card which was later converted into an OCI Card. The NDA I government under Atal Behari Vajpayee was in power at the time! Aatish Taseer who grew up in Delhi and studied at the Kodaikanal International school in Tamil Nadu now lives in New York.

In his application, Aatish had referred to his mother as an Indian national and his father, Salman Taseer, as a “British national” to the best of my knowledge. His father, Salman Taseer was assassinated in Pakistan in 2011. Aatish Taseer and his father had been mostly estranged as was documented in Aatish Taseer’s autobiographical work Stranger to History: A son’s journey that was published in 2007.

Related Articles


Theme

Campaigns

Videos

Archives

IN FACT

Podcasts

Podcasts

Podcasts

Analysis

Archives

Podcasts

Subscribe to Religion