Mehtab Singh Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 http://www.khaleejtimes.com/Displayarticle...ent_july455.xml Did Rama exist? asks textbook PATNA — The saying is history can’t be rewritten. Probably that’s why historians and governments go after rewriting history textbooks, triggering controversy each time. The latest fracas is over the updated Class XI text — Ancient India — written by noted historian R.S. Sharma, who says there is no scientific evidence to prove the existence of “Rama†and “Krishnaâ€. Yesterday, pro-BJP activists burnt effigies of five Leftist historians — R S Sharma, Irfan Habib, Romila Thapar, Satish Chandra and Arjun Dev — here to protest an attempt to distort facts by negating the existence of “Rama†and “Krishna†and terming Prithviraj Chauhan as a “traitorâ€. Sharma defended his take on India’s past. He told TOI on Tuesday that Ancient India was written on the basis of scientific application of history with the strong support of original sources. http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle...tinent&col= Sharma reiterates stand regarding Ram, Krishna KOLKATA — A leading historian has said that there is no historical evidence whatsoever that Ram or Krishna, two deities worshipped by millions of Hindus in India and elsewhere, ever existed. "Faith is one thing. But hard evidence is another", R.S. Sharma, 82, said after BJP and Sangh Parivar cadres burnt his effigies in Patna, accusing him of insulting Hinduism. BJP and other extremist Hindu groups are angry with Sharma because his observations shatter their political line that Ram was born in Ayodhya. Now, they have dubbed Sharma a communist not fit to live in India, let alone propagate his views to misguide ordinary people. According to Sharma, the projection of Ram as one born in Ayodhya and who later ruled it is factually incorrect and inconsistent with facts. "A king needs an army, taxation system and legions of officials to govern his kingdom. There is not even a hint of evidence to show that a king called Ram or an administrative infrastructure ever existed. So where is the question of his birth in Ayodhya?" According to Sharma, archaeological evidence is far more important than the so-called family tree cited in the Puranas scriptures. "So what if Puranic content is being used to date Ram of Ayodhya around 2000 BC. It is not borne out by scientific digging and excavation in Ayodhya by experts", he said. Making light of the virulent protests by BJP members, he remarked: "They have burnt me when I am still alive. Now there is no need to cremate me if I die tomorrow." Sharma said that the Hindi version of his book on ancient India, Prarambhik Bharat Ka Parichay, was viciously attacked last year by BJP leaders who accused him of taking liberty with facts. "But they had not even read my book. Some politicians are so busy instigating trouble and dividing societies that they have no time to read or write. All they do is shoot their mouths off", he said. His book was withdrawn from the NCERT syllabus when the NDA was in power on the grounds that it was the handiwork of a Marxist historian. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inder Singh Posted October 30, 2005 Report Share Posted October 30, 2005 Why do they have to have existed in history? Isn't what they stood for more important then if they actually existed. If the deeds and life of Krishna or Rama help a Hindu spiritually what does it matter if they existed historically or not. The discussion is moot, it has no effect on a persons life if they existed or not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mloco Posted October 30, 2005 Report Share Posted October 30, 2005 thats besides the point of the question though... Do I believe they existed? yes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niranjana Posted October 31, 2005 Report Share Posted October 31, 2005 The problem with people today is that they find it difficult to understand that Indian "History" has been recorded by Poets and with that items move into Alankars etc (hence why over time they become recognised as Mythology, or "mitias" and not "itihas"). Even Sikh history is the same, when we look at the works of Kavi Sainapait or Bhai Santokh Singh - of course, today's rationalists regard this instead as Brahmin conspiracy rather than understanding what it means to be poetic. As a Sikh, the very fact that Raam Chander and Krishna etc are mentioned in Gurbani, means that they existed - Guru Sahib does not lie, regardless of petty and folly arguments the likes of the IOSS, Sikh Sundesh (Mr Bal etc ) and others cook up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vijaydeep Singh Posted November 1, 2005 Report Share Posted November 1, 2005 Gurfateh ijn the eye of the scinttific person adem bridge could be proof of engeeenering wonder as it between Sri Lanka and Rameshwar. There are some animals like hog deer found in Himalyas base and Sri Lank but not in south India. So that animal could hvae come with hill being transported by Hanumana Ji. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.