Bihar: Sri Sri Ravishankar weaves implausible story for 2029 elections
The implausible declare by Sri Sri Ravi Shankar is being contested by sceptics, although. The reconstructed Somnath temple, they recall, was formally inaugurated on 11 Could 1951, following a two-month delay brought on by the passing of Sardar Vallabhbai Patel. It was attended, amongst others, by President Dr Rajendra Prasad. Why did the south Indian priest not assume it match to reinstall the jyotirlinga on the temple then? Sri Sri Ravi Shankar has the reply, in fact. Keep in mind the priest was requested by the Shankaracharya to maintain the key till 2024?
Is it authorized, nevertheless, for Sri Sri Ravi Shankar to own something of such antiquity and archaeological worth? In response to the Historical Monuments and Archaeological Websites and Stays Act, any artefact that’s a minimum of 100 years previous should be registered with the Archaeological Survey of India after its authenticity is established. Antiquity can also be examined by carbon courting strategies, and there are restrictions on their possession, exhibition and motion.
What’s much more controversial is the declare that the jyotirlinga was tinkered with in 2007 to carry it again to form. This successfully would rule out the opportunity of carbon courting to evaluate its authenticity. Tinkering with archaeological stays and artefacts is a legal offence beneath the Act. It additionally appears clear that no permission was acquired and no course of adopted earlier than knocking it again to form. The offence can entice imprisonment for a minimal interval of six months, going as much as three years.
This isn’t the primary time Sri Sri Ravi Shankar has courted controversy and defied the legislation. In 2016, he had ignored a Nationwide Inexperienced Tribunal directive in opposition to holding a ‘cultural extravaganza’ on the floodplains of the Yamuna in Delhi. Directed to pay a fantastic of Rs 5 crore, he initially refused to deposit the cash however was persuaded to relent.
The political motivation — some are already calling it mischief — of the non secular guru is apparent to some. It stays to be seen if questions are requested in Parliament, what reply the federal government provides, and if it decides to take the jyotirlinga into its possession and forestall its political use.
