Do you think Ramayana is true

  •  
  • Page of 1 Go
  •  
Posted: 3 years ago

Please answer this question objectively without the personal biases which all of us have..


Now that it's nearly clear that the supposed Ramsetu isn't a manmade thing but a natural accumulation of rocks, what do you feel could be a substantial proof of Ramayana

Posted: 3 years ago

Originally posted by FlauntPessimism


Please answer this question objectively without the personal biases which all of us have..


Now that it's nearly clear that the supposed Ramsetu isn't a manmade thing but a natural accumulation of rocks, what do you feel could be a substantial proof of Ramayana

I think the best reason is that in both mahabharat and ramayan certain people make appearances like vishwamitra,durvasa etc and both the epics are written by different people who are no where related so if its fiction then why these people make appearances in both.Secondly,if people still has doubt regarding the reality as they hadn't seen the people but just have read about them so they should apply this logic to ancient,medieval and early modern history also as they hadn't seen those people and kings.

Now coming to all those miracles happening in both the epics then lets take one incident as an example.Whenever we hear about dyut sabha from mahabharat we become shock and think how draupadi's saree became unending and start thinking why these miracles don't happen now.The reason for this is because we don't have faith in god.Draupadi was completely engrossed in praying and was not holding her cloth from one hand as a safety measure so for this reason god came to help her.And even now if we have faith in God, he comes to help through a medium.

Edited by Horizon566 - 3 years ago
Posted: 3 years ago

Ramayana is a real story and did happen in the past. There are numerous proofs of it being true, including the Rama Setu, Pushpa Vatika and Himalayan herbs growing in Sri Lanka.

Years of colonisation and destruction of our culture has sadly lead to people thinking that it was mythology.

Posted: 3 years ago

Ramayan is true as it has many evidences(except some of the changes taken from RCM version which clearly looks made up) but Valmiki one but have doubt on Uttar Ramayan. The latter looks so mismatched with former. I wonder if Sita really said that if women used weapons where will be sweetness which was so chauvinistic that also when Maa Durga and Maa Kaali used weapons. Also in medieval history the person behind driving Mughal completely out of India was a woman only that is Tarabai. Also Mohd Ghori did not dared to attack India for 12-13 years due to a woman Naikidevi before Prithviraj Chauhan did stupidity. And Sita's mom saying ladkiwaale line was so filmy when in those era women family had proper rights. And main thing Sita herself going to exile when it was Ram who sent her via Laxman. Ye fact main saalon se padh rahi hu. Also it was shown in Siya Ke Ram and 90s show Jai Hanuman. I don't buy stories of Ram being cursed so he was denied as a ruler and then wife's support. On top of that Dashrath knowing everything. Also which father asks so much about future that also such personal questions?

Edited by angel_juhi04 - 3 years ago
Posted: 3 years ago

I think the Valmiki version is true - and it's treated as such by historians like Dr RC Majumdar.  Obviously, when you insert it as history, any supernatural events that are described - like say, the Devas going to Vishnu and him being in the payasa that's distributed to the 3 queens, or Hanuman lifting the mountain - those wouldn't make it there.  But things like the travels of Rama that take him to Lanka, killing Ravan, exiling Sita after he becomes king, Shatrughan becoming the king of Madhupura, Bharat defeating the Gandharvas and installing his sons as the rulers of Takshashila and Pushkalavati, Lakshman and Rama conquering Karupadhadesh and installing Lakshman's sons there, Kush moving to a new capital Kushavati and Luv becoming the ruler of Kaushalya's Kosala - all that is a part of history.


Note that when something from the epics is put down as history, it cannot include anything supernatural or anything about the gods - that is faith, and can't be rationally accepted in those records.

Posted: 3 years ago

Years of colonial rule by invaders have forced us to think they were figment of imagination ..I believe Ramayan truly happened ..though  certain parts Which canโ€™t be explained might have been added later .  

Posted: 3 years ago

Originally posted by Ashley.Tisdale


Ramayana is a real story and did happen in the past. There are numerous proofs of it being true, including the Rama Setu, Pushpa Vatika and Himalayan herbs growing in Sri Lanka.

Years of colonisation and destruction of our culture has sadly lead to people thinking that it was mythology.

I second you ๐Ÿ‘๐Ÿผ

Posted: 3 years ago

There is no rule that believing Ramayana to be true means the divinity aspect has to be ruled out. Nobody is declaring it to be a part of World history like World War 1 or anything. But for us to believe it as part of our rich Vedic history, all is required is faith and belief. We may not be able to "prove" it to anyone, but if we believe it's true, there's no need to prove to anyone. Those who believe will believe and those who don't won't, no matter how many "proofs" they're offered. Besides, those who truly believe will be offered the ultimate proof by God, but it requires utmost faith and surrender at God's feet, and that's something not many have these days. 


Many saints and sadhus in Kali yuga receive proof that Ramayana and Mahabharata are true, and that's all due to their surrender to God. If we want that proof also, we too should have faith, instead of trying to explain away the divinity from the epics because it "doesn't make sense" to our rational minds.

  1  


Related Topics

No Related topics found

Topic Info

7 Participants 7 Replies 779Views

Topic started by FlauntPessimism

Last replied by RamKiSeeta

loader
loader
up-open TOP