Highlights

Modern Satellite imaging shows what could be the causeway/bridge said to have been built by the ancient Engineer- Architect Nala to allow Lord Rama’s army to cross over into Lanka and fight the battle with Ravana there, which according to the astrological and textual references in the Ramayana Epic, as interpreted by Nilesh Nilakant Oak, occurred in 12209 BCE. If so, it is too important an archeological find and needs serious investigation. To undertake excavation or dredging for a canal across what may be a very ancient construction without verification would be disastrous and wrong.

The Controversy

This controversy arose over the decision of the Government of India to dredge a passage through the Palk Straits, so as to avoid the necessity of ships having to go around the Island of Sri Lanka on their journey from the West coast of India to its East coast and vice versa – an economic decision. However, the major objection raised was religious, that such dredging would cut into the land bridge, (Rama-Sethu) said to have been built by Lord Rama on his way to Lanka. This matter is pending in Court and hopefully the Court will insist on all stakeholders be accorded adequate opportunity to present their side of the case and also, for the Archeological Society of India to investigate and present it’s report

Key Concepts

Let us now consider rational the validity of such objection based on religious sentiments.

1. Given that it was Lord Rama who got the Rama-Sethu constructed, providing a 48 kms long land link from Dhanushkodi in India to Talaimannar in Sri Lanka.
2. Given also, that this link is said to have been passable on foot till 1480 AD when a cyclone is reported to have submerged the Bridge, obviously as willed by Lord Rama. There is also, a version of the Ramayana story which says that Lord Rama himself drew the edge of his bow at Dhanushkodi (Bows end) to sever the Land Bridge as it had served its purpose. Thus in either case it was the Lord’s decision because of which there is no bridge now, as it is all under water.
3. Again it was obviously only the Lord who allowed Mankind to develop into intelligent beings capable of building machines to dredge the sea-bottom and using them where they recognized a valid need.
4. Since the Sethu-Samudram Project does not interfere with Lord Rama’s intention to let the sea cover the original land bridge as he has already allowed it to be submerged, to now claim in his name that the Project is objectionable would not be a valid or rightful claim. But, still a claim to protect the foundations of the said Land Bridge as an Archaeological Monument can be made, as not only faith but history must also, be respected.
5. Also, the display of some coral or volcano stones, that float on water due to the air pockets sealed within, and claiming them as miraculous stones used by Lord Rama to build the Rama-Sethu, is false and misleading. Nowhere has it been written in the Ramayana that the Rama-Sethu was a floating bridge and in any case such a bridge would have not remained with its foundation from the sea bed. Also, the existing evidence on the ground does not support any such interpretation.
6. If the Lanka battle is said to have occurred around 12, 209 BC, then can the age of the Rama-Sethu be 1.7 million years old as is also, now being claimed? It could be a natural formation but archaeological evidence seems to indicate some ancient construction activity and hence, needs further investigation. Perhaps faith has a foundation and hence also needs to be respected.

Objections, if any, should thus only be on an economic or technical basis, or with regard to the compensation to those adversely affected by the Project. Ofcourse, even so, if a way can be found to execute the project without at all affecting the ‘Rama-Sethu’, it should be preferred, if only in acceptance of a sentiment, and as protection of an Archaeological and Historic Monument.

However, semi – technical sounding reasons such as given below should be exposed for the fraud they are and discarded.

That the dredging of the Channel will:

1. Allow a free passage to Cyclones – Cyclones are affected only by the surface water and its temperature and the channel has nothing to do with this. Records show that more than 60 cyclones have hit this region in the past 25 years even without any channel having been dredged.
2. Cause an increase in sea levels – The channel is under water and the present sea levels are the same on either side of the Rama-Sethu which has been under water since at least 1480 AD, and will continue to be so after the dredging and hence, there can be no increase in sea levels except at certain times when the tides and monsoon winds may cause a small height difference. Ofcourse, gravitational anomalies may result in height variations of surface see levels.
3. Ocean currents will show drastic changes and remove the thorium deposits from the beaches or act to channel a future Tsunami – The Sethu- Samudram channel is too small to allow for such effects.

Pages: 1 2 3