I have read Ramayan with great interest and think it is one of the most arresting story about the tribulations that a person can face in life. The enchantment that it weaves around the reader is unparalleled and no other story has survived the test of time as this one has. But it is a story.
- Though Ramayan was written by Valmiki, he admits in his story that it was actually dictated by Lord Vishnu much before Vishnu took birth as Ram. This means that all that happened was divinely ordained. Only those who have blind faith (all faith is blind because it has no evidence to back it up) will therefore believe that Ramayan actually happened. If it is indeed a historical fact, why is it not taught to us in "history" classes in India - a Hindu country. No department of "Ancient history" in any university has been able to collect enough evidence which would stand the test of academic scrutiny. My view therefore is that until some evidence is found, we need to treat it as a story.
- Authors, when they write stories, liberally make use of the geographical environment surrounding them. For example if I were to write a novel, you may find Ramdaspeth, Dadar, Sitaburdi or even Connaught Place mentioned in the story. When many years later, people find that these places actually existed, this in no way proves that the characters of my story were real. Sholay, as a movie had an extremely riveting storyline and was shot on location near Bangalore. Many years later if we do locate a "Ramgarh" which resembles the location of the shooting, should we start believing that Gabbar Singh actually existed and maybe declare a national holiday on the day on which he was killed because that signified the triumph of good over evil?
- The same argument holds good for the various dates and तिथी mentioned in Ramayan. It is claimed that Valmiki has outlined astronomical details which could not have been done by a layman. If this is indeed true, it does indicate that Valmiki was probably an expert in astronomy. But this is extremely surprising because even Galileo (born much after Christ and who is hence definitely less than 2000 years old) was persecuted because he correctly postulated that the earth went around the sun which was exactly the opposite of what the bible said. How the human race did not know about earth going around the sun as late as about 500 AC (After Christ) and still make correct estimates of planetary positions 5000 years BC (before Christ) , is intriguing.
- I also find a disturbing trend amongst believers to brush aside information from the same source book (Ramayan in this case) when it does not suit them. Valmikis Ramayan mentions that Ravana's age was about 20000 years (converted to Roman years from units prevalent in those days) when he was killed by Ram. How could this be possible?
- In mythological texts (not necessarily Ramayan) many sages ate beef - but find me a believer who will accept this.
- Coming to the NASA photograph, the bridge like structure has been "carbon dated" and found to be over 3 lac years old. NASA has categorically denied that it is made of stones that once floated on water (for this to theoretically happen, the stones will have to be filled with gas lighter than water) and there is no indication that this technology existed then. But faith will make the stones float on water - you don't require Physics for it. Maybe we can find some evidence of a very superior scientific race that populated the earth at that time but until we find that evidence, can we not keep our judgement in abeyance?
- The recent Ayodhya judgement while suggesting a seemingly acceptable tripartite division has been found fatally faulty on two counts: [a] How can a deity be a litigant in a case? - the repercussions of this line of thought are un imaginably frightful; [b] On what basis can the learned judges say that Lord Ram was born at this place? Imagine what would happen if each religion starts insisting that their faith be given legal sanction.
8 comments:
Religion and belief in existence of god (Note the small "g"!, not capital "G") has caused more pain, suffering, death and destruction than all the wars ever faught on the face of this earth.
And it irritates me no end when believers, whether relatives, friends or colleagues insist on telling me that deep down, I am also religious.
Religion and the concept of god has been created by interested parties, specifically people in power, to exercise control over the general populace, so that they can be denied their basic rights of food, shelter, security and right to a livelyhood.
This has helped brahmins, priests & mullahs to exercise control over the other castes by appropriating to themselves the right to determine what is "allowed" and what is not. e.g beef eating among hindus, abortions among christians, cutting hair among sikhs, wearing "hijab", eating "halaal" for muslims.
The so-called penalty for people flouting these "rules" is being thrown into hell, the irony being that to avoid this happening in some distant future, they make their own life hell on earth, but will never admit as much.
Will leave you with one thought, which you can expand upon, since you have the inclination for research and an aptitude for writing clearly:
Just think about people of various religions, who have, or at least felt that they have, been persecuted. The jews faced the holocaust at the hands of the nazis, the sikhs felt that they were denied their "rights" and wanted independence during the 80s, the muslims are facing worl-wide censure and suspicion currently, the brahmins faced this during the period of rise of buddhism and jainism. What is common to all these people who faced persecution was that they proudly exhibited their religion through accessories such as yarmulkes, long black dresses and beards of the jews, pagdi-kada-kesh etc of the sikhs, hijab and chador, long beards and skull caps etc of the muslims and choti & caste marks (vertical for vaishnavites and horizontal of the shaivites) of the brahmins. Obviously, this kind of "in your face" exhibition of your religion, which should strictly be a personal and private matter practiced in your own home, does not sit well with the rest of the "junta" who then can easily identify and target such religious groups.
A long comment, but here is wishing you more power to your pen and more followers for you.
Cheerio
As far as I understand the recent Ayodhya judgment, the Hon'ble High Court never said that Lord Ram was born there. It accepted the fact that a Hindu deity was worshiped 'there' before the Masjid was built.
As you mention yourself, if you have to write a novel even a fictional one, you will take references from real life and real places. So is it not possible that Valmiki also took reference from real living character. You must be knowing Sanskrit is a poetic language whatever is written in it is in the form of poems. So poets usually draw the picture larger than life. I think as Sanskrit is not in use today we are not able to interpret it write. You can argue that Rama is not god but he does not exist not acceptable. Because why do you agree that Christ or Galalio were ever born. Just because you had written material and the places mention in them still exist. same way why can't you believe another written material Ramayana, which said Rama was born. The places mentioned still exist like ayodhya, lanka. when in india we can restore some 200 year old forts how do expect to find any evidence of thousand years old. There is lot more to argue
Valmiki could have taken geogaphical locations from his memory but then he should have had travelled the world over . For example Sugriv mentions the phosphorescent mines in today's Peru and many other world references are there in Ramayan . Thin about it .
Ramayan is internally consistent . For example if you read PG Wodehouse anthology , there are internal contradictions. Aunt Dahlia for example was she a maternal aunt or paternal aunt ? No such contradictions exist in Ramayan - think about it .
Many places described in Ramayan can be so described only if seen from an aeroplane - Read Bhave - Locations in Ramayan .
In India even Charvak who gavecompletely atheistic viewpoint was not persecuted in his days .
How does believing or eating beef prove ramayan not to be historic beats me .
The original ramayan does not talk about floating stones . It says Nala was an engineer who built up the bridge - extensive description of the building process itself is given . Floating stones is a folklore .
Dear friend , you are talking about Valmiki ramayan but your references seem to be coming out of TV serials . Do read the original Valmiki Ramayan .
For example just one question for you , what was the caste of Valmiki ?
Anand Ghurye
Ramayana, Mahabharata all these ancient Hindu text were written to show human being a way of life. Ramayana tell importance of integrity and dharam to be followed. where as Mahabharata tell rules can be broken to achieve dharam. plz dont go in to wrong aspect of proving them.
Dear Anshul
If Ramayan and Mahabharat were written only to give us good examples of how we should live life (or how we should not), then why do we celebrate birthdays and death anniversaries of characters in these stories. How would you feel for example if we started celebrating the death anniversary of Gabbar Singh since on that day (in a story called SHOLAY)an evil person was killed.
Dear Prakash ,
Did you have time to ponder on the points I mentioned ? If you have , I will provide with further pointers .
Let me tell something Ram is not God. Because God is the creator of this universe. Now let me tell you that 1. Who is God?
Ans: God is the creator of mankind and He loves you.
You were created by Him and He knows everything about you and I believe that Jesus Christ is the real God. Who came to this earth and gave his life for us and made us pure in his holy blood.
Post a Comment