I worship most of Ram's deeds. However, in matters of science
we should not be prejudiced. I mean, the scientific evidence
should be placed above mythology. No sensible man believes that
whatever written in Ramayana are true historical facts. However,
we cannot rule out that everything in Ramyana is mythology.
There should have lived a good king like Rama. However, all
the virtues assigned to him (as seen in Ramayana) was not
entirely of that king. It might have been imagination of the
poet(or poets) who wrote Ramayana based on his vision of how
an ideal human should be. There have been interpolation in the text especially to make Rama an avatar of Vishnu a brahmanical god. Above all where can anybody find an
evidence that there exists a human at all in entire Indian
subcontinent at the time the Adam's bridge started existing.
The human inhabitation in Indian subcontinent started somewhere
between 200,000 to 500,000 years ago. That human being should pass many thousands of years to create a civilisation like the one depicted in Ramayana.
RE:Rama history
by biz Narayan on Sep 12, 2007 11:33 PM Permalink
Only bigots believe that the world was created in 4000 BCE and there was an aryan dravidian fighting as sickularism burrows from european prejudice.
RE:Rama history
by amrit on Sep 12, 2007 11:38 PM Permalink
There are assumptions you are making here. The biggest assumption is that "human inhabitation in Indian subcontinent started somewhere between 200,000 to 500,000 years ago"... Who said? That we are missing all the evidence to prove that a much more developed civilization existed years before that does not mean one did not exist. If you are "scientific" as you claim to be then you will know that it took centuries before Eistein refined Newton's theory. Does it mean that Einstein's theory was not valid before he published it?
