A bridge for Ravana

This fear of taking on religionists head on costs us much more than we allow. If Rama was real it is high time the Ramayana underwent some rewriting. Both logic and political correctness demand it

Mohan Guruswamy Delhi

Former Russian leader Nikita Khrushchev once described politicians as people who will promise to build a bridge even where no river exists! Our politicians have gone one better. They are claiming the existence of a bridge where none exists. The bridge of course is the Ramar Setu, supposedly built by Rama, the exiled prince of Ayodhya, in his quest to defeat Ravana the king of Lanka. The scientific evidence available does not support this. The Geological Survey of India, after an in-depth study, concluded that far from being a manmade structure, the Ramar Setu is a natural formation that is over 175,000 years old. Ironically, the 2002 study was commissioned by Uma Bharati, then Union minister for coal and mines in the BJP-led NDA regime.

Now not even Murli Manohar Joshi, the sometime physics professor and the BJP's in-house expert on all science matters — be it Ganesha sipping milk or the original thermonuclear weapon, the Brahmastra — would claim that Rama existed well before the advent of the ice age which in turn preceded the migration of homosapiens from Africa. Realising that scientific evidence and reason do not support them, politicians seem to be saying that while that may be the reality, and the truth is what we believe. This is as irrational and steeped in unreason as 'Immaculate Conception' or walking on water. From the drift of the government's panicky and knee-jerk reaction, it seems that believers have won the day.

Actually, there are two kinds of believers. One is the true believer suckered by faith. The world is full of them and their tribe keeps increasing. The showman PT Barnum famously opined that there is one born every minute — meaning suckers. The second kind of believers and this is the more dangerous of the species, are the rational ones who believe that the masses are stupid and gullible and can be swayed by emotion into voting for them. LK Advani leads this pack in the BJP and considering the alacrity with which the government disowned its affidavit in the court, Manmohan Singh heads the pack in the Congress. Singh's contribution to this theological debate was the comment that since the Guru Granth Sahib also referred to Rama, everything else attributed to him must also be true. Good God!

The real question at the hub of this matter is whether the Ramar Setu or Adams Bridge, be it the 175,000 plus years old natural geological formation or a bridge built by Rama, can be cut through to facilitate a project that has immense economic promise. The Ramar Setu is over 30 km long and the Sethusamudram canal only envisages a cut 300m wide. Ironically, the BJP seems to be saying that since it is manmade it must be respected as archeologically significant and hence not to be altered in any way. This is rich coming from a bunch of fellows who had few qualms over bringing down the ASI protected Babri Masjid.

The UPA government's original affidavit stated it to be what it actually is, a natural formation and not a creation of blind belief. Now the government has retracted that and has joined the 'it-is-god-created' bandwagon. One can be sure that its articulate minister for science and technology will come up with a suitable explanation for what is so clearly based on unscientific belief. This is just a repeat of Rajiv Gandhi laying the shilanyas for a Ram janmabhoomi temple at Ayodhya in 1989 on the advice of the likes of Buta Singh. Now this government is acting on the advice of the likes of HD Bhardwaj.