Are Ramayan and Mahabharata real?

[Purnimageetha]

It could be possible it's Fake,I strongly believe earth was found some CRORE  years ago,so no one ever know what is what, everyone just Guess but no one has Solid proof 

 

Probably after 1000 years later human kind might believes Amitabh or Bill Gates were God in 21st century.Vetal and Tarzan only Imiginary Concept by 

Writer

 

 

[someone]

 

Probably after 1000 years later human kind might believes Amitabh or Bill Gates were God in 21st century.Vetal and Tarzan only Imiginary Concept by Writer

Interesting. With cartoons being made of various Indian gods, surely with time, new generations will be taught and see them as only plain simple fictional characters instead of them being actual gods.

 

Also, on Hinduism, it's perhaps the only major religion which mentions correctly about cosmos. Thus, scientific evidence may be out there, but perhaps we aren't advanced enough to figure it out yet.

[Garuda]

All major religious people seem to almost do nothing in science but want to claim that it is told so in their religious texts after 100 years of the date of discovery

[Nikhil_cric]

Not a scholar but from What i've read, they cannot possibly have a lot of factual evidence as these texts seem to have been written, rewritten over time just like most ancient texts - The old testament being as close a comparison as i can make. Usually to get some sort of religious legitimacy, they would make references to a glorious age( Satya Yuga etc. in Indian mythology, Age of Pharaohs in OT) but you would not find corroborative evidence that these writers even existed at these times. Thus, for example, while the OT's stories of the great patriarchs like Abraham etc. were considered to be historical persons at one point it is now agreed by scholarly consensus that even Moses could not have existed. Similarly, in our epics, from an academic perspective, it is interesting to read how certain writers understood 'history' and how they used certain ideas to maintain a particiular social order and their sense of history(time is non-linear) but you will find little that is actual historical fact.  

[MechEng]

5 hours ago, Nikhil_cric said:

Not a scholar but from What i've read, they cannot possibly have a lot of factual evidence as these texts seem to have been written, rewritten over time just like most ancient texts - The old testament being as close a comparison as i can make. Usually to get some sort of religious legitimacy, they would make references to a glorious age( Satya Yuga etc. in Indian mythology, Age of Pharaohs in OT) but you would not find corroborative evidence that these writers even existed at these times. Thus, for example, while the OT's stories of the great patriarchs like Abraham etc. were considered to be historical persons at one point it is now agreed by scholarly consensus that even Moses could not have existed. Similarly, in our epics, from an academic perspective, it is interesting to read how certain writers understood 'history' and how they used certain ideas to maintain a particiular social order and their sense of history(time is non-linear) but you will find little that is actual historical fact.  

In that case we must doubt all documented history, since bias is natural to everyone.  Most people believe that Mahavir (the Jain personality) existed and he was around 11 feet tall (refer to wikipedia), also the previous Jain personalities/tirthankaras were some 8 miles in height , the oldest Buddhist literature stated that Buddha posessed all psychic powers, made regular astral travels to different dimensions to preach buddhahood and could remember all his previous lives. The western indologists who were highly influenced by rationalism absorbed the rationalistic aspect of Buddhism and rejected his supernatural abilities by refering them as mere metaphors, whereas in traditional Buddhist societies these are facts.

Edited May 4, 2018 by MechEng

[sarcastic]

2 hours ago, MechEng said:

In that case we must doubt all documented history, since bias is natural to everyone.  Most people believe that Mahavir (the Jain personality) existed and he was around 11 feet tall (refer to wikipedia), also the previous Jain personalities/tirthankaras were some 8 miles in height , the oldest Buddhist literature stated that Buddha posessed all psychic powers, made regular astral travels to different dimensions to preach buddhahood and could remember all his previous lives. The western indologists who were highly influenced by rationalism absorbed the rationalistic aspect of Buddhism and rejected his supernatural abilities by refering them as mere metaphors, whereas in traditional Buddhist societies these are facts.

Whatever you said about the supernatural things are only beliefs that the followers or Sanghas or other giants in the chain (like Nagarjuna) added to market Jainism/Buddhism to common people then (who are very believing) and got more recruits. 

 

All the metaphorical things added does not negate the fact that Mahavir or Buddha have actually existed. It only means that their physique, life events, powers etc. were exaggerated for other purposes. Their existence is more or less conclusive given the evidence and just the beliefs about them by the respective religions are not. 

 

Same thing can be said about the Jesus or Muhammd too. It is more or less obvious they existed but a lot of beliefs held by the followers such as Jesus walking on water, raising a dead person or eventually resurrecting himself could all be added embelishments to market, Jesus the messiah or the son of God. We can still study today about historical Jesus without those magical additions and have a rough idea about what could have happened as opposed to how Jesus Christ is projected in the bible or church. Please look at this page for the attempts to reconstruct the historical Jesus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus).

 

So, in summary for the question "Did Ramayan/Mahabharat really happen?". So far, the critical historical methods have not resulted in any conclusive evidence that they did take place. However, my answer will be Maybe/May be not since we may discover new evidence in the future that provides clues for their historicity. So, so far "probably no, but you never know" will be my answer. 

[MechEng]

3 hours ago, sarcastic said:

Whatever you said about the supernatural things are only beliefs that the followers or Sanghas or other giants in the chain (like Nagarjuna) added to market Jainism/Buddhism to common people then (who are very believing) and got more recruits. 

 

All the metaphorical things added does not negate the fact that Mahavir or Buddha have actually existed. It only means that their physique, life events, powers etc. were exaggerated for other purposes. Their existence is more or less conclusive given the evidence and just the beliefs about them by the respective religions are not. 

 

Same thing can be said about the Jesus or Muhammd too. It is more or less obvious they existed but a lot of beliefs held by the followers such as Jesus walking on water, raising a dead person or eventually resurrecting himself could all be added embelishments to market, Jesus the messiah or the son of God. We can still study today about historical Jesus without those magical additions and have a rough idea about what could have happened as opposed to how Jesus Christ is projected in the bible or church. Please look at this page for the attempts to reconstruct the historical Jesus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus).

 

So, in summary for the question "Did Ramayan/Mahabharat really happen?". So far, the critical historical methods have not resulted in any conclusive evidence that they did take place. However, my answer will be Maybe/May be not since we may discover new evidence in the future that provides clues for their historicity. So, so far "probably no, but you never know" will be my answer. 

Now you are being selective here, you don't have the evidence either to disprove their supernatural abilities. Except if we have the ability to time travel to that era, nobody knows the truth.

 

Also regarding Buddha, different schools have different beliefs about him, Theravada, Mahayana and Tantrik Buddhism, all three are very different with only Buddha being the common thing. 

[Stradlater]

7 hours ago, MechEng said:

In that case we must doubt all documented history, since bias is natural to everyone.  Most people believe that Mahavir (the Jain personality) existed and he was around 11 feet tall (refer to wikipedia), also the previous Jain personalities/tirthankaras were some 8 miles in height , the oldest Buddhist literature stated that Buddha posessed all psychic powers, made regular astral travels to different dimensions to preach buddhahood and could remember all his previous lives. The western indologists who were highly influenced by rationalism absorbed the rationalistic aspect of Buddhism and rejected his supernatural abilities by refering them as mere metaphors, whereas in traditional Buddhist societies these are facts.

There's a difference between different historical perspectives found among various writers and totally ludicrous claims such as the 11 ft one made by few ganjedis. It's usually the latter ones which have been proven false by the academicians and rightly so.

 

For instance you can doubt the interpretations made by various historians of Ashoka's Dhamma citing biasness but can't go around questioning his existence in itself which is a documented fact.

 

 

[Stradlater]

1 hour ago, MechEng said:

Now you are being selective here, you don't have the evidence either to disprove their supernatural abilities. Except if we have the ability to time travel to that era, nobody knows the truth.

 

Also regarding Buddha, different schools have different beliefs about him, Theravada, Mahayana and Tantrik Buddhism, all three are very different with only Buddha being the common thing. 

The burden of proof lies on the ones who made claims in the first place and not on the ones doubting them. You can't just simply declare that aviation technology existed in the ancient times without providing an acceptable proof.

 

If that's the case then there's no way of actually confirming anything. I can claim that Hogwarts exists in real life. Now go on and disapprove me. 

[surajmal]

Since interbreeding theory appears to be winning the human evolution battle vis a vis replacement theory, Ramayana isnt a just a figment of someone's imagination - embellished yes, but that is how all cultural stories are. And it truly pushes the civilizational story of bharat way back, even beyond last ice age (which jives with the interbreeding of different human species and ram setu). 

Relish in the fact that you belong to the longest running narrative of humankind; I've nothing but scorn for the doubters. 

[Stradlater]

8 minutes ago, surajmal said:

Since interbreeding theory appears to be winning the human evolution battle vis a vis replacement theory, Ramayana isnt a just a figment of someone's imagination - embellished yes, but that is how all cultural stories are. And it truly pushes the civilizational story of bharat way back, even beyond last ice age (which jives with the interbreeding of different human species and ram setu). 

Relish in the fact that you belong to the longest running narrative of humankind; I've nothing but scorn for the doubters. 

Instead of forming your own skewed opinions using bits of science as propaganda to give it legitimacy, how about you provide some actual evidences which proves your God and his army of Apes actually existed and then we can move ahead with our debate afterwards.

 

Till then I have nothing but pity for you.

[surajmal]

2 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

Instead of forming your own skewed opinions using bits of science as propaganda to give it legitimacy, how about you provide some actual evidences which proves your God and his army of Apes actually existed and then we can move ahead with our debate afterwards.

 

Till then I have nothing but pity for you.

I aint got to prove squat. Evolutionary biologists are doing the job for me. Besides, My Itihaas is strong enough to defend itself. It has withstood, Desert cultists. Who the * are marxists then? 

[Stradlater]

3 minutes ago, surajmal said:

I aint got to prove squat. Evolutionary biologists are doing the job for me. Besides, My Itihaas is strong enough to defend itself. It has withstood, Desert cultists. Who the * are marxists then? 

I am far from being a Marxist and my hate for them is only matched by my dislike for the desert cultists. But that doesn't mean you expect me to believe in the every sort of BS written thousands of years ago.

Ramayana is a part of our rich shared cultural heritage which should be cherished, appreciated and preserved. But that doesn't mean we start looking for scientific facts in it to give it a sort of legitimacy among non Hindu rational crowd like the Muzlims do with Quran (embryology stuff).

 

I love our culture and usually am the first one to defend it whenever I feel necessary but that's about it.

Believe in Jadoo mantar all you want but don't expect others the follow the suit as well.

[surajmal]

11 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

I am far from being a Marxist and my hate for them is only matched by my dislike for the desert cultists. But that doesn't mean you expect me to believe in the every sort of BS written thousands of years ago.

Ramayana is a part of our rich shared cultural heritage which should be cherished, appreciated and preserved. But that doesn't mean we start looking for scientific facts in it to give it a sort of legitimacy among non Hindu rational crowd like the Muzlims do with Quran (embryology stuff).

 

I love our culture and usually am the first one to defend it whenever I feel necessary but that's about it.

Believe in Jadoo mantar all you want but don't expect others the follow the suit as well.

WTF are you talking about? Which part of my post you got a problem with? 

The fact that during the last ice age, one could practically walk to lanka because he coastline was farther out or the fact that modern day homo sapiens have genetic markers of several other homo species?  or are you conflating itihaas with history? Hanuman represents a monkey god because modern humans (that arent well read) don't have a concept of other homo species. It doesn't mean, in the literal sense, there was an actual talking monkey/human hybrid walking bharat varsha 10000 yrs ago. 

 

Edited May 5, 2018 by surajmal

[Stradlater]

3 minutes ago, surajmal said:

WTF are you talking about? Which part of my post you got a problem with? 

The fact that during the last ice age, one could practically walk to lanka because he coastline was farther out or the fact that modern day homo sapiens have genetic markers of several other homo species?  or are you conflating itihaas with history? Hanuman represents a monkey god because modern humans don't have a concept of other homo species. It doesn't mean, in the literal sense, there was an actual talking monkey/human hybrid walking bharat varsha 10000 yrs ago. 

 

Well if that's the case then I agree with you. Yes the stories should be taken metaphorically. My last post was for more towards those who are hell bent on taking every little thing in a literal manner.

 

But then how do you explain the virtual absence of Urban settlements around Ayodhya before 6-7 century BC? Surely if the city was so grandiose then we should have  found at least some remains corroborating this fact?

[surajmal]

4 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

But then how do you explain the virtual absence of Urban settlements around Ayodhya before 6-7 century BC? Surely if the city was so grandiose then we should have  found at least some remains corroborating this fact?

"real" story of ramayana is from early stone age. There must have been numerous settlements post that "event". They came into/went out of existence. Ayodhya is on the ganga floodplains. Any remnants of grand buildings from antiquity are probably buried more than a couple of metres under. Just because it hasn't been discovered by the mouthbreathers at ASI, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. 

[Muloghonto]

3 minutes ago, surajmal said:

"real" story of ramayana is from early stone age. There must have been numerous settlements post that "event". They came into/went out of existence. Ayodhya is on the ganga floodplains. Any remnants of grand buildings from antiquity are probably buried more than a couple of metres under. Just because it hasn't been discovered by the mouthbreathers at ASI, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. 

Till it is actually found, the scale weighs heavily in favour of BULL$H!T story. 

Plenty of flood-plains exist worldwide. Yellow river valley has just as much flooding, if not more, than Ganges and we've found settlements there from 4,000 years ago or more.

Euphrates deposits so much silt and is on such a shallow gradient that until modern dams, it used to literally pull a Kosi and break its banks every few years. Yet, we have found settlements there from 5,000 or more years ago.

 

Your whole ' buried under the Ganges' is wishful thinking. Because its not like Ayodhya isn't found - there are NO urban settlements east of Agra practically, till you get to Pandu Raja's Dhibi in WB, prior to 600-700 BC. Not one. Nada, zip, zilch. 
Therefore, BS story.

[Muloghonto]

45 minutes ago, surajmal said:

I aint got to prove squat. Evolutionary biologists are doing the job for me. Besides, My Itihaas is strong enough to defend itself. It has withstood, Desert cultists. Who the * are marxists then? 

Your itihaas has survived only because the population of the land has literacy rate of less than 50%. And as soon as it climbed above that, your BS story getting questioned is also increasing. Your itihaas is seen as nothing more than a BS story wrapped in a fairytale - the big daddy of Cinderella type stories by the educated ones. And in 100 years, that will be most Indians. 

The illiterates who wrote those stories are not fit enough to challenge a 12 year old today in knowledge. And the world, as well as our homeland, is waking up to that reality over all the BS itihaas stories from the world over. 

 

[surajmal]

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Till it is actually found, the scale weighs heavily in favour of BULL$H!T story. 

Plenty of flood-plains exist worldwide. Yellow river valley has just as much flooding, if not more, than Ganges and we've found settlements there from 4,000 years ago or more.

Euphrates deposits so much silt and is on such a shallow gradient that until modern dams, it used to literally pull a Kosi and break its banks every few years. Yet, we have found settlements there from 5,000 or more years ago.

 

Your whole ' buried under the Ganges' is wishful thinking. Because its not like Ayodhya isn't found - there are NO urban settlements east of Agra practically, till you get to Pandu Raja's Dhibi in WB, prior to 600-700 BC. Not one. Nada, zip, zilch. 
Therefore, BS story.

Whats that got to do with Bharat? Euphrates floods, mesopotamians have no option but to reconstruct once water recedes because there is desert all around. Where are they going to go? Whereas bharatvasis could shift their settlement as there is plenty of good land available all over. 

[surajmal]

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Your itihaas has survived only because the population of the land has literacy rate of less than 50%. And as soon as it climbed above that, your BS story getting questioned is also increasing. Your itihaas is seen as nothing more than a BS story wrapped in a fairytale - the big daddy of Cinderella type stories by the educated ones. And in 100 years, that will be most Indians. 

The illiterates who wrote those stories are not fit enough to challenge a 12 year old today in knowledge. And the world, as well as our homeland, is waking up to that reality over all the BS itihaas stories from the world over. 

 

boohoo. suck my balls uberbongi. I'll raise a glass once, ROPers demand statewide sharia in west bangladesh.