Ok, I agree that there may be some evidence to the existence of Ram and it may actually be futile to search for living proof after so many years.
However, there are fallacies in your arguments.
The sun is approximately 5 bilion years old - so, life for 4.3 billiion years is quite possible. But man for 4.3 years - improbable. Unless - you mean that maanaw (from manu) was always the most advanced creature existing. So, in the times of chimpanzees, they would be man.
There is more proof for rather than against Darwin's theory. This theory has also made us realise the relations between several species. By disproving darwin's theory, you are guilty of the same crime you are accusing foreign historians of.
The scientists who are against darwin are inspired by false christian stories (many of which are copied from hindu folklore of KrsNa) and 'beliefs'. Please ask the same scientists what they think of hinduism and its greatness and whether ram existed.
RE:A bit overdone
by Kaushik Das on Apr 15, 2008 06:37 AM
evolution is happening even today - observe your next generation - you'll know. So, man's ancestors were surely apes, monkeys and chimpanzees. This does not make RaamaayaNa unreal. On the contrary, it proves that man could live with intelligent animals. There can be many other explanations. It may also be an inspiring piece of writing that makes common men revere other species and not hunt them down for food. Through RaamaayaNa, Waalmeeki might have tried to foster respect for other animals, esp vultures (often seen as evil in folklore), monkeys (seen as a nuisance), bears (seen as vicious). It talks about mutual harmony among species - so the RaamaayaNa is much more important than you think.
The jury is still out on Adam's bridge but it is indeed interesting to note that the bridge exists where the RaamaayaNa describes it and it exists in much the same way. It might have been a natural one that Waalmeeki tried to explain in his book. Or he might have been witness to or heard of its creation by living beings.
The very fact that folklore does not live for a billion years proves that Raama could not have existed so long ago. In your own descriptions, the pointers to the time are all different. Thus, it is very possible that Raama might have existed just 5000 years ago.
RE:RE:REDIFF dont mark the fact as abuse!!!
by JamesBond on Apr 15, 2008 06:17 AM
* If Hanuman could fly carrying big mountains, he should have in the first instance carried and flown 'god' Rama to Sri Lanka, which would have resulted in early rescue of Sita.
* Who knows what Ravan might have done to Sita during this period of twelve years? Definitely a devil would have done only "devilish" things!
Before helping 'god' Rama, Hanuman made Rama shoot his own twin brother in the back and only then did Hanuman help 'god' Rama. How can a "god" indulge in such a criminal act for personal gain? MEAT-EATING RAMA When 'God' Rama was told to go to the forest, he mournfully revealed to his mother: It has been ordained that I have to lose the kingdom, forego the princely comforts and the tasty MEAT-DISHES. (Ayothia Kandam, 20, 26, 94th Chapters). RAMA'S MANY WIVES In Mr. C.R. Sreenivasalyengar's translation of Valmiki Ramayana, it says: 'Though Rama had married Sita to be the queen, he married many other wives for sex**l pleasure in accordance with the royal customs. (Ayodhya Kandam 8th Chapter, Page 28). (The term "Rama's wives" has been used in many places in Ramayana). RAMA'S CONTEMPT FOR WOMEN & LOW CASTES Rama disfigured and mutilated many women by cutting off their noses, br**sts, ears, etc. and tortured them (Soorpanagai, Ayomuki). Rama said, "Women should not be trusted" and that "Secret should not be confided to the wife". (Ayodhya Kandam, Chapter 100). Sambuka was slain (by Rama) because he was making penance which was
RE:RE:RE:REDIFF dont mark the fact as abuse!!!
by MP Raju on Apr 16, 2008 04:06 PM
You mean, if jesus was son of god, God might have come down to earth to rescue him.., right??
RE:RE:RE:RE:REDIFF dont mark the fact as abuse!!!
by Kris iyer on Apr 16, 2008 05:48 PM
Yap, MP Raju, Right On. our James Bond must read, Bertrand Russell, "Why I am Not a Christian". Many young white boys and girls are now joining the International Society of Krishna Consciousness. Our James Bond should meet them for some enlightenment. I listened to a white Frenchman explaining the Vishnu Purana. It was fantastic. He recited the Sanskrit slokas by heart. He was wearning Pancha Katcha, had sikha and tilak. He can teach James Bond how to appreciate the religion of James' ancestors.
RE:RE:RE:REDIFF dont mark the fact as abuse!!!
by Eternal Sunshine on Apr 17, 2008 09:43 AM
1) * If Hanuman could fly carrying ......... Answer already given below by MP Raju. For the same reason God didn't come down and save his son (???????) from being tortured and crucified. 2)Who knows what Ravan might have done to Sita during this period of twelve years? Definitely a devil would have done only "devilish" things! - Again a very dirty remark which proves nothing other than your twisted mind. If goons attack and rape your wife, would you leave her? It might have been scandalous in those days but we are in a reformed society now. 3) a.Before helping 'god' Rama, Hanuman made Rama shoot his own twin brother in the back and only then did Hanuman help 'god' Rama. - Who is the twin brother of Rama? b.How can a "god" indulge in such a criminal act for personal gain? -What personal gain are we talking about? And BTW it is said to be a fight of good against evil. Also if you could kindly narrate the whole incident. It's only fair that we ask, since we are also subject to idiotic questions which take a lot of time in answering. 4) MEAT-EATING RAMA When 'God' Rama was told to go to the forest, he mournfully revealed to his mother: It has been ordained that I have to lose the kingdom, forego the princely comforts and the tasty MEAT-DISHES. -Totally useless remark- the diet of Lord Rama is not an issue of debate here.
Your posts show all the characteristics of copy paste from some anti-Hindu site.
RE:RE:RE:REDIFF dont mark the fact as abuse!!!
by JamesBond on Apr 15, 2008 06:18 AM
penance which was forbidden to him by Vedas as he was a "Shudra". (Uttara Kandam, Chapter 76). Looking at his hand Rama said the Sanskrit slogan "Oh right hand, you kill this Asche Shudra unhesitatingly as killing this Shudra is the only way to get back the life of the deceased Brahmin boy. Are you not one of the limbs of Rama?" (Valmiki Ramayanam)
Note: This Rama, who mercilessly took away the life of Sambuka for no other fault than that of making penance is held as the Avatar (incarnation) of Vishnu! If there were kings like Rama alive now alas! What would be the plight of those who are called "Shudras?" But then we have Big Brahmins like Nehru and Vajpayee to take the place of Rama !
RAMA'S DEATH Rama, like an ordinary man, fell down into the river and DROWNED (Uttara Kandam, Chapter 106). How can a "god" die? Who will then look after the affairs of the world? LUSTFUL SITA VS THE "IMPOTENT" RAMA The negationist television serials depict Sita as supposedly denying Ravan's advances. However, the oldest versions of Ramayana (read - those not yet manipulated by the Brahmins) belie these falsehoods, and amply demonstrate that Sita willingly eloped with Ravana, the Black Tamil King. Thus Sita told Rama "You are no better than a womanmonger who lets his wife for hire and makes his livelihood. You want to be profited by my prostitution". Sita also told Rama "You lack in POTENCE, manners and charm" and she called her husband a simpleton.
RE:RE:RE:RE:REDIFF dont mark the fact as abuse!!!
by JamesBond on Apr 15, 2008 06:18 AM
As soon as Sita stepped into Ravan's palace, her love towards Ravan grew more. (Aranya Kandam, Chapter 54).
When at length Rama asked Sita to swear about her chastity, she declined and died. (Uttar Kandam, Chapter 97)
Kukuvavathy, sister-in-law of Rama, said to him - "Oh Elder! How you love Sita more than you love yourself! Come with me and see what really is in your lovely wife's heart. Still she could not forget that fellow Ravan. Drawing a picture of Ravan on a hand-fan and pressing it closely to her bosom. She is lying on your bed with eyes closed thinking on and rejoicing at Ravan's glories. Rama sighed and went out to Sita's house. There she was found sleeping pressing to her breast the hand-fan on which Ravan's picture was drawn." (This is found in pages 199, 200 of the Bengali Ramayana written by Mrs. Chandravathi).
WHAT LEADERS SAY ABOUT GOD RAMA? When such dastardly acts are proven to have been perpetrated by Rama, the Brahmin leaders declare : "My Rama (god Rama) is not the Rama of Ramayana". So each Brahmin has his own Aryan god Rama, which does not exist in any text !
SOME QUOTATIONS ON RAMAYANA MAHATHMA GHANDI : "The Ramayana and Mahabaratha are nothing but another Arabian Nights story". JAWAHERLAL NEHRU : "Rama is not a god; but he is a hero" C. RAJAGOPALACHARI, First Governor General of India & Ex Chief Minister, Tamil Nadu). : "Ramayana is not a divine story; it is only a literature."
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:REDIFF dont mark the fact as abuse!!!
by Eternal Sunshine on Apr 17, 2008 10:33 AM
9) WHAT LEADERS SAY ABOUT GOD RAMA? When such dastardly acts are proven to have been perpetrated by Rama, the Brahmin leaders declare : "My Rama (god Rama) is not the Rama of Ramayana". And why did the Brahmin leaders declare that? Cos they didn't identify with the atrocites committed by their brethren? Now wait a minute, aren't you the same guy who was tongue-lashing the same brahmins? Isn't it time for you to admit that you cannot generalise any caste/creed/religion, and that the modern world is trying to do it's best to remove casteism? Now you call them "big Brahmins like Nehru", then you cite the same Nehru's sayings. Are you even looking at what you are posting, man? Your thoughts are filled with holes and that gives us enough proof of the amount of holes your theories would have. 10) Regarding lustful Sita,impotent Rama,Aranya Kandam, Kukuvavathy etc, o learned one, since they were directly extracted from the original Ramayana, could you please send us the same in the original Sanskrit?
11) Bengali Ramayana written by Mrs. Chandravathi?? Oh my God!! How many other versions are we supposed to answer for? There are 100s of deductions made by 100s of writers everyday. Do you know that even in the modern regional magazines, there are different articles written on sections of Ramayana - IN THE WAY THE WRITER SEES THEM. But we don't impose Fatwa on them, because we know that these kind of writings can only influence already-perverted minds like yours.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:REDIFF dont mark the fact as abuse!!!
by Eternal Sunshine on Apr 17, 2008 07:43 AM
Ok, firstly, your language and attitude are way out of control. But I suppose your upbringing is to be blamed for that, so you are forgiven.
You are saying,
MAHATHMA GHANDI : "The Ramayana and Mahabaratha are nothing but another Arabian Nights story".
Didn't someone associate this saying to Nehru just a while back? Oh, I remember, that 'someone' was YOU actually. Now it has passed on to Gandhi. Who else next? Netaji said that too? Or better still, Jinnah. Even the Pope of Vatican. With due respect to each of these leaders, they all have made certain mistakes at some point of their lives. You are just copying and pasting like a person under an evil spell.
JAWAHERLAL NEHRU : "Rama is not a god; but he is a hero"
- All right Nehru said that (maybe). But he also said that he was a British by education, Hindu by birth and Muslim by his way of life. So for a person whose education and style of living doesn't follow Hinduism, it's natural to utter those words. He was actually proud of 'not following his religion'. Atheists would always disbelieve in God.
Also, it's not even a decade since Nehru/Gandhi passed away, and already we are in such confusion over the pearls that dropped from their mouths. And then we claim to have learnt everything that was said centuries ago, and start sniffing for anything nasty that we might dig out, like scavengers.
And I will attempt to answer all your queries to the best of my knowledge, in the following posts.
RE:RE:RE:REDIFF dont mark the fact as abuse!!!
by Eternal Sunshine on Apr 17, 2008 10:08 AM
5) Though Rama had married Sita to be the queen, he married many other wives for sex**l pleasure in accordance with the royal customs.
- All throughout history innumerable men and gods have had more than one wife. Even in present days in 'certain religions/communities" this happens and vice versa. Regarding sex**l pleasure of Rama, yes you would probably know better. Just let us know of the source of your valuable information. 6) Rama disfigured and mutilated many women by cutting off their noses, br**sts, ears, etc. and tortured them . - Which 'women' and when? What kind of a torture? Gee, you must have read the Ramayana really well. 7) Rama said, "Women should not be trusted" and that "Secret should not be confided to the wife". See in earlier days women had nothing better to do than cook clean and gossip, so it might have been applicable in those days. Rama's exile and the follwing events were also a result of the queen and the maid's gossip. Had it been a different society where women took control, different sayings would have been said. 8) Drowning of Rama - Had to happen since he came in a human form, took birth from a human body, and had to leave the earth in a way human beings would. In easier words, the same reason for whom the supposed son of God was crucified and died somewhere in this earth, instead of flying away to heaven with his dad-gifted wings.
Can any body know their Their Great Grand Father's Great grand father Name??.., just becuase you don't know his name doesn't make sense that you existence is worng...,
