India & World UpdatesHappeningsBreaking News

New controversy: Lord Ram is Nepali, not Indian; Real Ayodhya is in Nepal, says PM of Nepal

July 13: Igniting a new controversy, Prime Minister of Nepal, K P Sharma Oli claimed that the “real” Ayodhya lies in Nepal, not in India and that Lord Ram was born in Thori in southern Nepal. Speaking at a cultural programme at his residence, Mr Oli then accused India of cultural oppression and encroachment.

“The place called Thori, near Birgunj is the real Ayodhya, where Lord Ram was born. In India there is great dispute on Ayodhya. But, there is no dispute in our Ayodhya. Although the real Ayodhya lies at Thori in the west of Birgunj, India has claimed the Indian site as the birthplace of Lord Ram. We also believe that deity Sita got married to Prince Ram of India. Actually, Ayodhya is a village lying west of Birgunj,” Prime Minister Oli said on Monday.

Prime Minister Oli further claimed that “Valmiki Ashram is also in Nepal and the holy place where King Dasharath had executed the rites to get the son is in Ridi, which is in Nepal. As Dasharath was the ruler of Nepal, it is natural that his son Ram was also born in Nepal, Oli argued. Therefore, real Ayodhya lies in Nepal.”

The contentious remarks of Prime Minister Oli come amid a row between the two countries over a revised political map that sees Nepal claim Indian territory – the Lipulekh Pass in Uttarakhand and the Limpiyadhura and Kalapani areas. Back in May Prime Minister Oli also blamed India for the spread of the novel coronavirus in his country.

Condemning Oli for his remarks, BJP national spokesperson Bizay Sonkar Shastri said, “Lord Ram is a matter of faith for us, and people will not allow anybody, be it prime minister of Nepal or anyone, to play with this.” Even within his own country, Prime Minister Oli’s allegations have been criticised by senior NCP leaders, including former Prime Minister ‘Prachanda’, who demanded PM Oli’s resignation, saying his recent anti-India remarks were “neither politically correct nor diplomatically appropriate.”

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Content is protected !!
Close
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker