RE:I Respect Ramayan!! BUT.....
by Bipin Musale on Sep 18, 2007 08:51 PM Permalink
Don't say Ramayan is a myth, Only it cannot be proved as history because ancient Hindus had a poor sense of history(no systematic recording methods existed here like westerners). Therefore, it is wrong to dismiss it as myth.
RE:RE:I Respect Ramayan!! BUT.....
by Rakesh Saigal on Sep 18, 2007 09:12 PM Permalink
Doesn't that beg the question? A myth is a myth because there is no "record" to prove it to be historical. But how can you say that the whole of Ramayana is historical? There is evidence to show that the were many extrapolations (inssertions at a later date) over the millena. I hold no brief for fundamentalism wheher homegrown or as areaction to another set of fundamentalism.However, I would like us ll to have a debate on our rich cultural heritage. Throogh discussions and discourse the culture is expanded and remains relevant to the people who live in different times. Remember, an example of discourse is the Bhagwat Gita itself.
If a healthy discouse were to take place thru this blog then my first question would be: how come there are o amny Ramyanas? Are all the Ramyanas th same? If yes, why write so many instead of translating the original into various languages and dialects? And what of the Ramayanas of Indonesia? Of Thailand? These other ciilizations regard Ram and Ramayana as part of their cultural legay and are proud of it. Consider: Indonesia is th largest muslim nation in the world (we are the second largest) and yet thir naional airline is called GARUDA!!
As can be seen, Ramayana is a symbol, of cross civilizations across centuries. Also consider that the peninsula that has Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and Thailand is known as Indochine. This is so because the merchants and traders were largely chinese but the soft power of religion, epics, philosophy etc were of In
