Let us not redicule ourselves by saying "denying Ram is denying India".Even if he existed, he was just a king who fought whole of his life to bring his wife back from captivity.India had many great kings.
Please don't sound silly by reducing India's stature to Ram.
RE:Common don't be silly
by SANJAY on Sep 15, 2007 08:43 PM Permalink
Yes first place why he came to earth, what message he gave, build bridges with the heip of monkeys, wasting 14 years in Jungle, Supecting wife and sending her away in jungle, and in last the poor sita has to give her life. what is the message.
RE:Common don't be silly
by SANJAY on Sep 15, 2007 08:43 PM Permalink
Yes first place why he came to earth, what message he gave, build bridges with the heip of monkeys, wasting 14 years in Jungle, Supecting wife and sending her away in jungle, and in last the poor sita has to give her life. what is the message.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Common don\\\\\\\'t be silly
by SANJAY on Sep 15, 2007 08:43 PM Permalink
Yes first place why he came to earth, what message he gave, build bridges with the heip of monkeys, wasting 14 years in Jungle, Supecting wife and sending her away in jungle, and in last the poor sita has to give her life. what is the message.
RE:Common don't be silly
by SANJAY on Sep 15, 2007 08:46 PM Permalink
Yes first place why he came to earth, what message he gave, build bridges with the heip of monkeys, wasting 14 years in Jungle, Supecting wife and sending her away in jungle, and in last the poor sita has to give her life. what is the message.
RE:Common don't be silly
by Marco Polo on Sep 15, 2007 08:53 PM Permalink
If you are an eternal learner you learn form even monkeys.And the Vanaras mentioned in Ramayana is not apes,but a group of primitive people who lived in Kishkinda,like there were people named Nagas(not the reptile snake.It is symbolic.
RE:Common don't be silly
by Sreenivasa Vanavasam on Sep 15, 2007 09:05 PM Permalink
Sanjay, for every thing there will not be logic. I don't know if god exists are not. But I don't oppose who believe in it. I know that there are many answered questions by science. In all over the world every area there is belief in god by most of the people.
If you apply the logic and want to use people from USA or Europe to find the reason for it, I have one question for you. Do you think that scientists in USA and Europe found the reason how Virgin Mary gave birth to Christ? I don't oppose or blame their belief. Humankind is existing because of each person having some unknown belief in addition to the logic and analytic thinking. First of all when this is a very old bridge, it should be historical place and should be preserved as other historical places (I am not saying it is linked to any thing). There are no such natural wonder in the world with 48 km length of nature formation. When all over the world when there are efforts preserve the natural wonders why should we destroy?
If politicians are so interested, they can not even remove the temples, durgas etc coming up every on the public roads in many place in India. Those are affecting the people every day. Some of them I know did not exist few years back and constructed in recent years. No is ready to demolish and widen the roads. Here whatever the religion it is and whatever the government it is, they have the right to it in those places. But no politician is ready to it and no person like you also acted on it.
RE:RE:Common don\'t be silly
by Anurag Shrivastava on Sep 15, 2007 08:53 PM Permalink
Don't reduce him to the level of Jai fighting gabbar to get Basanti. Ram is an ideal and article of faith for individuals and must not be questioned from importance angle.
RE:RE:Common don\'t be silly
by CG NAIR on Sep 15, 2007 09:00 PM Permalink
Sanjay,
I quote the Gospel according to St. Matthew, Chapter 1, Verse 18.
18. Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
The inference here is too plain for even a dullard not to understand. A young girl is betrothed to a young man. Mind you, not to a "holy ghost"; not to something intangible and unseen, but to a young man, virile and in possession of all his faculties. Before they came together, which needs no elucidation, the girl was found to be "with child. Now the writer of this narrative was fully aware of the fact that before a child is born it is necessary for a man and a woman to come together.
Laying aside the pertinency of a child asking an explanation of what is meant by coming together, we see the necessary male adjunct of this union by the introduction of the Holy Ghost. In claiming that it was the Holy Ghost who cohabited with Mary and was the father of Jesus, Elbert Hubbard thought it was the greatest compliment ever paid to man.
