Hrithik says he was not offered Ram in Ramayan - Page 13

Originally posted by: MithiBani

If everything is an interpretation, I'd like to see Bollywood make movies on lives of Mohammed, Jesus and other x, y,z Gods too. We'll see who is 'intolerant' then. ;)

Do you wanna see Mohammed or Allah ?

Allah is not god though , it's just stories like others.

Originally posted by: Shailesh_Rathi

OMG 😆how we distort each other's views. Of course Raavan was wrong and no one is talking about him. It is also true that if Raavan had not abducted Sita, he would have been regarded to be glorious as Rama because he was a good, righteous kind who had a major lapse in judgment.

The whole post is about is Rama completely all good or grey? And are people willing to see that or prefer the sugar-coated version as depicted in most serials?

Also just like Raavan abducting Sita is unforgivable so is Rama's attitude in banishing her from the kingdom without proof based on a whim...this at a time when she was pregnant. He did accept his sons Luv Kush but would he have accepted his mistake had she given birth to a girl, who knows?

Some people believe that entire exile of Sita as an extrapolation of the epic. And even if he did, he never stayed happy without Sita. He was asked to marry once again.But he didn't. He made a golden statue of Sita and sat with that statue in order to perform the puja. It's not sugar coated version. These are facts. How you interpret them, is upto you. What he did was wrong. But he loved her. If he really doubted her for her purity, he would never have made so many attempts to bring her back. He would have left her the moment he knew that she was abducted by some other man. In fact some other versions of Ramayana say that Sita was cursed as she separated a pregnant parrot from her husband and that's when the parrot cursed her. That is why she had to go to that exile. See there are different versions. Now you want to believe that Ram wasn't good, then believe so. I'm least interested. I'm already so immune to all these. 👍🏼

If hr talked r article interpreted it lol , whatever he talk n shows his dareness n interpretations n grey etc...shades of other Stone age faiths , y bias n neglect d intolerants, make intolerants tolerants lol

Originally posted by: AllThatCritique

Fringe groups targeted Haider too. They were protests then too 😆 And are you saying Modi Wave now is not stronger than in 2014? 2014 mein lynchings bhi nahi start ki. Hindutva ka drama toh baad mein aaya after getting elected. What did the government do about Fringe groups tho? Some of them are BJP members 😆 Intolerance toh hain bhai. Dikhta nahi that's your problem.

And again, why should I wait for other religions doing their shit or not doing anything. Humhe usse kya?

Protests vrotests are fine as long as there is no violence. I don't recall the makers or the audience of the movie being threatened at the time of the release. Maybe I am wrong.

And if you these times are intolerant I shudder to think how you would have coped in the tolerant era of Emergency, Nasbandi, 1984 and it's aftermath, the ethnic cleansing of 89, the early 90s riots and so on. Compared to those monstrosities these are very tolerant times. It's just that the hysteria in the media especially when the victim suits their agenda has gone to a different level altogether. I laugh at people who think pre-2014 India was some sort of secular la la land 😆.

As for other religions are concerned, they will of course be brought up because we don't live in a vacuum. You have to be utterly deluded to think you can keep having different standards for different groups without things blowing up.

Originally posted by: MithiBani

If everything is an interpretation, I'd like to see Bollywood make movies on lives of Mohammed, Jesus and other x, y,z Gods too. We'll see who is 'intolerant' then. ;)

I wish you had expressed the similar desire when Ramayan and Mahabharat were coming on national tv in positive light and everyone used to watch them even now there are many hindu religious programmes on tv .

We have already seen so many stories on ramayan in south movies. None tried to insult and/or instigate people’s faiths. ab toh sab kuch controversies pe depended hain

Originally posted by: KootyPai

Some people believe that entire exile of Sita as an extrapolation of the epic. And even if he did, he never stayed happy without Sita. He was asked to marry once again.But he didn't. He made a golden statue of Sita and sat with that statue in order to perform the puja. It's not sugar coated version. These are facts. How you interpret them, is upto you. What he did was wrong. But he loved her. If he really doubted her for her purity, he would never have made so many attempts to bring her back. He would have left her the moment he knew that she was abducted by some other man. In fact some other versions of Ramayana say that Sita was cursed as she separated a pregnant parrot from her husband and that's when the parrot cursed her. That is why she had to go to that exile. See there are different versions. Now you want to believe that Ram wasn't good, then believe so. I'm least interested. I'm already so immune to all these. 👍🏼

This is speculation on top of speculation, but yes you just proved my point in my now edited post on page 15.

Originally posted by: MithiBani

If everything is an interpretation, I'd like to see Bollywood make movies on lives of Mohammed, Jesus and other x, y,z Gods too. We'll see who is 'intolerant' then. ;)

ya hr n bolly has to dare to talk n show grey shades ...etc..of other faiths n make intolerants as tolerants , y bias to tolerants n neglect intolerants , they must make intolerants as tolerants

Originally posted by: Cpt.DudleySmith

Protests vrotests are fine as long as there is no violence. I don't recall the makers or the audience of the movie being threatened at the time of the release. Maybe I am wrong.

And if you these times are intolerant I shudder to think how you would have coped in the tolerant era of Emergency, Nasbandi, 1984 and it's aftermath, the ethnic cleansing of 89, the early 90s riots and so on. Compared to those monstrosities these are very tolerant times. It's just that the hysteria in the media especially when the victim suits their agenda has gone to a different level altogether. I laugh at people who think pre-2014 India was some sort of secular la la land 😆.

As for other religions are concerned, they will of course be brought up because we don't live in a vacuum. You have to be utterly deluded to think you can keep having different standards for different groups without things blowing up.

It was. Pre 2014 was indeed much secular and more than that,tolerant. There were always riots in this country now and then but this Hindu supremacy ka attitude wasn't there. Period. Ultra performative nationalism based on your Hindu identity wasn't there at all. And India has come out of all those thing you mentioned so ofcourse I'll want better? Should I feel good about lynchings of Muslims because oh my my I have it so much better than other dark periods in history. That's laughable. Intolerance of any kind in any form however little,much is still intolerance.

By your analogy, Jews should accept the growing antisemitism because oh my ancestors had the holocaust. I feel so much better now.

As if someone can't complain of and point out intolerance because darker periods have existed in history.

Yeah. Mass lynchings indeed cause mass hysteria. And it should.

And you're right we don't live in a vacuum. We can see what others are doing in the name of religion and learn from it. Rather than adopting their exact frame of mind. You want same standards of what? Being intolerant?

Lol Bolly, whitewash criminals, terrorists n want to show grey in God ram , one side ppl crying glorifying of toxic masculinity in movies n hr twisted want to see grey in God ram lol , hr beg vanga n do tat dark fictional character than show ur ugly twisted no comments lol , bolly ka time agaya lol