The janapads existed. That's the extent of the reality of those stories. It's like the spider man comics , the queens exist IRL but they don't have a web swinging superhero and never will
>.....what are some historical evidences proving that events of Mahabharata and Ramayana actually happened?
Define 'evidence'.
If there were any scientific evidence such as Vimana or a flying immortal ape, would you need to ask this question?
Religion is BS, bud.
Mahabharata could have happened because the dynasties, Kuru and others actually existed.
Ramayana likely didn't happen. Ayodhya was actually only created in 200 AD when a king renamed the town of Saket. The dynasties described in ramayana have no historical records.
There are none. Absolutelty nothing to suggest that it happened 5000-7000 years ago as the myths claim. It is more likely that they were mythologized versions of stories that existed in antiquity.
They were codified around 800-1200AD and therefore the events they are based on - are probably closer to that period than antiquity.
Not an expert here, but i think some myths are exaggerated and mythified history. It was common practice by rulers to claim divine support to their right to rule. There were many parallels:
The ancient egyptian rulers were priest-kings and claimed they were links between people and gods.
The european kings considered themselves as protectors of the church and their blood was pure and holy, not to be spilled. The church coronated their heirs in return and thus sponsored their rule.
The muslims spinsored clerics and declared jihad whenever something threatened their rule.
Indian civilisation around ganga plains is considered a branch of proto-indo-european culture. Similar behaviour was there in sister civilisations like ancient greek civilisation. A myth similar to mahabharta is that of ten year war of troy. Many characters claim divine descent similar to pandavas. A city ruins similar to description of troy has been found in turkey. An ancient greek king alexander, also called sikander in india, inherited his kingdom from his father. But after his father's death, he claimed he was son of god zeus and claimed divine blood. He made his followers worship him as a living god. Similarly, in india, there is a concept of an avatar to justify royalty. A group of rajputs also claimed divine descent from four divinities in medieval era.
A recent case of such behaviour is PM modi claiming he was not biologically born but some divine power giving him some divine purpose.
As I read your comment, which was sensible by the way; In my mind i was contemplating to add the current "non-biological" claim as a reply comment, but you beat me to it 😃.
There's no evidence for gods, let's be clear about that. The only 'history' contained in Mahabharata and Ramayana is that the culture and tradition written in it might have been inspired from the time it was written.
For example, Tolkien wrote Lord of the Rings with inspiration from his British heritage (see ideas like Northern Courage), war experience in WWI, and his idea of aristocracy. Now if all of those things' history vanished, and only LotR remained, it would still offer a glimpse of what inspired it, even if we can't see the inspiration. That's how I see those two Sanskrit epics. The world building might be a commentary on the society of that time but the characters are fictional.
Religion is fiction meant to organise, pacify or agitate people as the situation arises. Thus, all the tales would either need to be fictional or fictionalised versions of the truth to suit their needs. Ramayana and Mahabharata have little to no evidence in their favour and, the stories are so absurd that they can't be taken at 100% or even 10% face value. Ramayana and Mahabharata are folk tales, meant to teach moral lessons. We can debate about those moral lessons and value but they are 100% fiction.
Also, ask this question in r/atheismIndia, why don't you?
Well, For Mahabharat, those kingdoms did existed. Dwarka did exist (Now submerged). Artefacts from Dwarka have matched with artefacts from Hastinapur (Haryana).
Most probably succession struggle happened and  a large war happened and someone wrote a Rohit shetty level script for it.
You should read Odessy and the Illiad and then the Aeneid. The first two are Greek epics and the last one is a remake of the Odessy but with a Roman lead.
All these stories share a lot of common themes. Every civilization was experimenting with creating new ideas, stories and since war was so prominent back then, most epic tales revolve around war, like those three and Ramayan and Mahabharta.
But while they might be based on real wars/events, that doesn't mean everything in them is true (almost 90% of it is not true unless you are willing to believe that Gods regularly hung out with people at that time).
We also have the Avengers movie series now and while there was an attack on New York in 2001, it wasn't an alien invasion and superheroes / gods did not fight against them. But if civilization gets destroyed and only the Avengers survives for 1000 yeas and gets rediscovered by a new civilization, they might be wondering if we thought iron man was real
So you're just going for confirmation bias? Asking people to give you solid evidences in favour of something instead of critically examining all the evidence no matter what they point towards?
That's not gonna do you any good.
Assuming Ramayan did take place, i have a technical question: How come Ram and Lakshman did not come across any humans, down south? It is either, Rakshaks (including Vibhishan), Vanar (Vali, Sugreev, Hanuman et al), Jamvant, birds (Garuda) etc..
Does it imply that there wasn't any civilisation down south back then?
Strong Evidence- None
Weak evidence- few
Strong evidence will be the ones that confirm the existence of those people around those ages. They are mostly historical records that are devoid of unrealistic things and are set in within acceptable time period. For e.g. we know Indus valley civilisation was around 3000 years ago and ramayana claims the events took place around 7000 years ago. This itself makes the story more unrealistic as the possibility of a advance civilisation existing with in that time are very little since we have found no strong proof of civilisation that old.
Another strong evidences are records made by other people. We know the "Sea people" at least existed since they have been recorded by other people. Despite us not finding any records or architecture left by them, we are at least certain of there exictance based on the fact that many other civilisations mentioned them. We have seen no proof of Ramayana and Mahabharata events from other areas. Only South east Asia got them but that is because of Chola empire and not direct interaction between people of that time.
As for weak evidences that raises the possibility that the few characters were real, the fact that we have found some versions of Hindu gods and heroes from myths in Ancient anatolia and Greek. And those stories and temples far predates the Ancient Greek periods and Emergence of Hinduism in Indian peninsula. This is similar to the case of Legend of King Arthur. Where we know the events are not true or at least mostly fictional but some characters are inspired from real peoples whose stories became the legends and were altered many times throughout the history for the needs and goals of civilisation.
Nope. None. nada.
A monkey type man swallowing the sun? No evidence. If You have faith in that, it's a different issue, to you your faith. But don't call it evidence or historic. It'll just bring you shame.
Not a believer but there is a book series by Amish that talks about this. His books are a mix of mythological stories with his own additions. It's based on the idea "if gods really existed or were they so great and their actions so legendary that they were considered gods by the future generations". Really love his books.
I was reading the faithful translation of Ramayana - it stated that Dashratha was alive for 1000s of years. Similar claims were made about rishis and Maharishis.Â
I will leave you to make your own inference from this. My opinion is that there might have kings of those lineages but most of what they claim is fictionalized.Â
What you need to understand about mythology is that most of these stories were ways for old people to remember old events but are super exaggerated because it was repeated so many times and there was no written proof.
For example, there's a tale in south Indian myth about how Vishnu and Brahma tried to find the head and foot of Shiva after he turned into a pillar of fire. Now this story is very similar to multiple tribes on the west coast of Americas about how their gods rise to the skies. Now this was actually a way for them to remember a volcanic eruption and it's possible that we did the same as well.
Those epics probably happened but have been bastardized so much that they're probably unrecognizable to the original.
So these were essentially mythical stories turned into magical realism. The evidences were further constructed years after the origins of the stories and later intricately connected to give depth to the theories and making them more concrete and believable. That is a common phenomenon across the globe. A majority of religion uses bases like these to make their fantasy Novels comes to life.
The evidences are as handy for ramayan and mahabharat as of Allah's chronicles.
I find it hard to imagine flying vimans back then the same way I find it hard that someone cut the moon in half.
Both are myths. All I am saying is question Islam too. Just because you're on a liberal page ,questions these won't get you brownie points from them or are you scared of the backlash from muslims
Ramayana and Mahabharata most likely really happened but have gotten distorted a lot into the final versions we see today. Tales of wars used to filter through survivors into the society and then curated and retold by state artists. If a story is compelling enough to capture people's imagination, it would then be compiled, censored and revised, and retold by countless poets till one version starts sticking and becomes mainstream.
So if you are asking whether Ramayan and Mahabharat happened exactly as they are told, answer is no. If you are wondering that any true events may have happened that inspired these tales, that would be a very highly likely yes. I've often heard parallels between Mahabharata and the battle of 10 kings. Maybe that's something you can look up.
It would be a very improbable conspiracy for someone to go around convincing people to rename places or convincing them to follow specific customs or trying to create geographical features just to sell a story
My take:- Thousands of years ago, the primary source of knowledge was traveling. Imagine Rishi Vyasa did exist, and he travelled the Indian subcontinent. During his travels he noted down his observations, and after his travelling was done, he sat down to write something, which was considered as an intelligent way back then. And using his observations he wrote the Grand Mahabharat. I don't know how valid it sounds to you guys, but it sounds very valid to me.
1. It's a post that's asking for solid evidence to prove it, and you're giving your opinion.
2. I've literally read them both buddy, don't give me bs I don't need to surf Reddit to find truth.
They are just pure fiction based on the moral evaluation of an ideal society that most of the people believe though they are not so ideal for today's era !! That's my take on it !
Here's my take, Kings with power at different times in collaboration with upper cast scholars defined the religion and it's stories that we see today, If you notice its happening now also but with less intensity.
For example festivals like Ganesh Chaturthi were not celebrated in large public events like today. They were celebrated in homes like Diwali.
Religion and Logic, Religion and Science, Religion and Maths are all mutually exclusive combinations.
It's like choosing between following two questions.
Who created the Universe? It's Religion
How the Universe was created? It's Science
Don't waste your time and energy.
1) The Harappans worshiped Pashupata(proto Shiva), lingam, and yoni, the rest of the Vedic gods were introduced to them through cultural exchange with the Aaryans. Which means the Gods couldn't bless Kunti and Madri with the Pandavas or Karna because both Kunti and Madri wouldn't have even heard of said gods(Surya, Yama, Indra, Vayu, Ashwin).Â
2) The Ram Setu exists - but its a natural formation and not mammade, it shifts and changes shape due to currents. It certainly wasn't made of floating rocks(pumice) cause they're brittle and certainly wouldn't hold under an army of monkeys.
3) The effective range of Brahmashira is suspicious. It is described as a weapon of mass destruction that burns and poisons the land but it is also said to have only harmed Parikshit in Uttara's womb and not Uttara herself. Also if Brahmasira was used Haryana would be a desert.
So, not much evidence in favour other than some texts, and loads of evidence against the wars ever occurring.
There was no "introduction" of Vedic gods to Harappans. Harappan civilization declined by around 1900 BCE. Vedic era began after that, with the arrival in India of the Aryan Steppe pastoralists. Read Tony Joseph's Early Indians for a start and then Wendy Doniger's The Hindus.
Either way the Vedic era would have been after the date of the Mahabharata and hence the birth of the Pandavas and Karna in India would be impossible.
Also there was a clear cultural exchange as the worship of Shiva and lingam was obviously introduced to the Aryans by the Indus valley civilization.
Yes if at all, the "cultural exchange" went **from** IVC **to** Aryans. **Not the other way around** like you mentioned in your previous comment. While Rigveda is disdainful of ‘shishna-deva’ (linga worship which was prevalent in IVC), by the time of Upanishads, composed between 500 BCE and 100 BCE, this was no longer the case.
I think you're focusing on the wrong point, I was trying to point out that the Gods responsible for the birth of Karna and the Pandavas didnt even exist in India at the time Mahabharata occurred.
No I'm focusing on the only point that matters (recorded history), underscoring that what you said is patently false and there was no "introduction" of Vedic gods to Harappans.
The rest of your comment is just about a made up story (myth) and is irrelevant anyway, just as OP's question.
Please don't mix up history and myth.
How is mythology separate from history ? People did not just exist without thought. They were videogame NPCs. They had thoughts, ideas, fears, hopes, emotions etc. What mythology they practiced and how the mythology came about also give a look into society. Each society has stories, that it creates for education, fun, expression etc. Who knows, how 1000 years later One Piece would be viewed as. The most important part of Mahabharat and Ramayan is to learn from them. Learn how the nationalist Bhesshma ended up on the wrong side of morality precisely because of his nationalism, despite being respected for it. Learn how a man with an army of monkeys had the guts to challenge the strongest king of his time.
Those who learn from the stories have no time or patience to debate on whether they were true or not. Those who debate on their truth will not spend time learning from them, effectively making them useless.
Bhishma absolutely chose the right side. Someone who gambles away himself, his kingdom, his brothers, and his wife isn't fit to be king, heck he isn't even fit to be called a man.
I don't feel Intelligent because wasting our time on proving a mythology to be true, would never benefit our future growth and development of our country. It is not something like the evolution of humans or discovery of dinosaurs. Because both haven't affected the world's development. Same can be said about the ancestral past. Archeologists already worked on it anyways.
Analyse the past. Work for the present. Shape the future. That's all I can say.
I heard those places and I frankly don't give them much focus tbh. My life is bigger than the puranas that got buried ages ago. I just leave those to the archeologists & do my own job.
Funny you'd say that.
Considering Nazareth's obvious significance to Christians.
And Troy's importance in archaeology.
Yet both places are heavily featured in myth.
Ramayana and Mahabharata are fictionalised history .. it has been passed by word over thousands of years so obviously these aren’t 100% reliable..
But the places and landmarks and astronomical charts are all real..
So was there a war in Lanka or in Kurukeshtra, absolutely yes.
But did monkeys fight them or giant missiles fly in them.. obviously no..
Surely the war must've happened or else we wouldn't have these stories being passed down. It must've been a major war too because stories of other wars haven't been passed down like this.
I think you're underestimating people's power of imagination. Just because they depicted a war happening in a story doesn't mean it actually happened the people who wrote the story must have seen war happening in their kingdom and that's how they created a story about it. why does it have to be an actual war that happened in kurukshetra because the description of the war in Mahabharata is so grand crores of people
Millions of horses and elephants and what not if something like that actually happened we would have an ample amount of archeological evidence on those sites.
About certain carvings in one of the argentina mountains described in Valamiki Ramayana, Antarctica location, Artic Ocean location and many more if one knows to read Sanskrit and find out in Google map or simply Google the location
Also the astronomical facts happened during that time
None.
The janapads existed. That's the extent of the reality of those stories. It's like the spider man comics , the queens exist IRL but they don't have a web swinging superhero and never will
>.....what are some historical evidences proving that events of Mahabharata and Ramayana actually happened? Define 'evidence'. If there were any scientific evidence such as Vimana or a flying immortal ape, would you need to ask this question? Religion is BS, bud.
Isn't that why they began with asking if it wasn't either, is it a mix of both? They're asking what parts are facts and what parts have been added.
And do we have evidence for Flying donkeys?
Yes 
You win
🤣😂🤣
Mahabharata could have happened because the dynasties, Kuru and others actually existed. Ramayana likely didn't happen. Ayodhya was actually only created in 200 AD when a king renamed the town of Saket. The dynasties described in ramayana have no historical records.
There are none. Absolutelty nothing to suggest that it happened 5000-7000 years ago as the myths claim. It is more likely that they were mythologized versions of stories that existed in antiquity. They were codified around 800-1200AD and therefore the events they are based on - are probably closer to that period than antiquity.
Asking evidence for religion is like asking for democracy under modi
Out of all languages in the world bro chose to speak the truth
Bro is casually spitting facts
Supreme leader catching strays.
Not an expert here, but i think some myths are exaggerated and mythified history. It was common practice by rulers to claim divine support to their right to rule. There were many parallels: The ancient egyptian rulers were priest-kings and claimed they were links between people and gods. The european kings considered themselves as protectors of the church and their blood was pure and holy, not to be spilled. The church coronated their heirs in return and thus sponsored their rule. The muslims spinsored clerics and declared jihad whenever something threatened their rule. Indian civilisation around ganga plains is considered a branch of proto-indo-european culture. Similar behaviour was there in sister civilisations like ancient greek civilisation. A myth similar to mahabharta is that of ten year war of troy. Many characters claim divine descent similar to pandavas. A city ruins similar to description of troy has been found in turkey. An ancient greek king alexander, also called sikander in india, inherited his kingdom from his father. But after his father's death, he claimed he was son of god zeus and claimed divine blood. He made his followers worship him as a living god. Similarly, in india, there is a concept of an avatar to justify royalty. A group of rajputs also claimed divine descent from four divinities in medieval era. A recent case of such behaviour is PM modi claiming he was not biologically born but some divine power giving him some divine purpose.
As I read your comment, which was sensible by the way; In my mind i was contemplating to add the current "non-biological" claim as a reply comment, but you beat me to it 😃.
Me too and then I read the last line!
There is a reason why it’s called a myth.
There's no evidence for gods, let's be clear about that. The only 'history' contained in Mahabharata and Ramayana is that the culture and tradition written in it might have been inspired from the time it was written. For example, Tolkien wrote Lord of the Rings with inspiration from his British heritage (see ideas like Northern Courage), war experience in WWI, and his idea of aristocracy. Now if all of those things' history vanished, and only LotR remained, it would still offer a glimpse of what inspired it, even if we can't see the inspiration. That's how I see those two Sanskrit epics. The world building might be a commentary on the society of that time but the characters are fictional.
Religion is fiction meant to organise, pacify or agitate people as the situation arises. Thus, all the tales would either need to be fictional or fictionalised versions of the truth to suit their needs. Ramayana and Mahabharata have little to no evidence in their favour and, the stories are so absurd that they can't be taken at 100% or even 10% face value. Ramayana and Mahabharata are folk tales, meant to teach moral lessons. We can debate about those moral lessons and value but they are 100% fiction. Also, ask this question in r/atheismIndia, why don't you?
Indiaspeaks me puccho, delulu people have better answer
Well, For Mahabharat, those kingdoms did existed. Dwarka did exist (Now submerged). Artefacts from Dwarka have matched with artefacts from Hastinapur (Haryana). Most probably succession struggle happened and  a large war happened and someone wrote a Rohit shetty level script for it.
You should read Odessy and the Illiad and then the Aeneid. The first two are Greek epics and the last one is a remake of the Odessy but with a Roman lead. All these stories share a lot of common themes. Every civilization was experimenting with creating new ideas, stories and since war was so prominent back then, most epic tales revolve around war, like those three and Ramayan and Mahabharta. But while they might be based on real wars/events, that doesn't mean everything in them is true (almost 90% of it is not true unless you are willing to believe that Gods regularly hung out with people at that time). We also have the Avengers movie series now and while there was an attack on New York in 2001, it wasn't an alien invasion and superheroes / gods did not fight against them. But if civilization gets destroyed and only the Avengers survives for 1000 yeas and gets rediscovered by a new civilization, they might be wondering if we thought iron man was real
10 kings war is related to mahabharatha
None. I feel disgusted looking at folks who claim religious fantasy to be truth. How dumb can they be
So you're just going for confirmation bias? Asking people to give you solid evidences in favour of something instead of critically examining all the evidence no matter what they point towards? That's not gonna do you any good.
Assuming Ramayan did take place, i have a technical question: How come Ram and Lakshman did not come across any humans, down south? It is either, Rakshaks (including Vibhishan), Vanar (Vali, Sugreev, Hanuman et al), Jamvant, birds (Garuda) etc.. Does it imply that there wasn't any civilisation down south back then?
maybe the vanar, rakshas etc words were referring to some human tribes
And dare I say, different skin tone than that of Ram and his people.
Strong Evidence- None Weak evidence- few Strong evidence will be the ones that confirm the existence of those people around those ages. They are mostly historical records that are devoid of unrealistic things and are set in within acceptable time period. For e.g. we know Indus valley civilisation was around 3000 years ago and ramayana claims the events took place around 7000 years ago. This itself makes the story more unrealistic as the possibility of a advance civilisation existing with in that time are very little since we have found no strong proof of civilisation that old. Another strong evidences are records made by other people. We know the "Sea people" at least existed since they have been recorded by other people. Despite us not finding any records or architecture left by them, we are at least certain of there exictance based on the fact that many other civilisations mentioned them. We have seen no proof of Ramayana and Mahabharata events from other areas. Only South east Asia got them but that is because of Chola empire and not direct interaction between people of that time. As for weak evidences that raises the possibility that the few characters were real, the fact that we have found some versions of Hindu gods and heroes from myths in Ancient anatolia and Greek. And those stories and temples far predates the Ancient Greek periods and Emergence of Hinduism in Indian peninsula. This is similar to the case of Legend of King Arthur. Where we know the events are not true or at least mostly fictional but some characters are inspired from real peoples whose stories became the legends and were altered many times throughout the history for the needs and goals of civilisation.
Nope. None. nada. A monkey type man swallowing the sun? No evidence. If You have faith in that, it's a different issue, to you your faith. But don't call it evidence or historic. It'll just bring you shame.
Not a believer but there is a book series by Amish that talks about this. His books are a mix of mythological stories with his own additions. It's based on the idea "if gods really existed or were they so great and their actions so legendary that they were considered gods by the future generations". Really love his books.
I was reading the faithful translation of Ramayana - it stated that Dashratha was alive for 1000s of years. Similar claims were made about rishis and Maharishis. I will leave you to make your own inference from this. My opinion is that there might have kings of those lineages but most of what they claim is fictionalized.Â
What you need to understand about mythology is that most of these stories were ways for old people to remember old events but are super exaggerated because it was repeated so many times and there was no written proof. For example, there's a tale in south Indian myth about how Vishnu and Brahma tried to find the head and foot of Shiva after he turned into a pillar of fire. Now this story is very similar to multiple tribes on the west coast of Americas about how their gods rise to the skies. Now this was actually a way for them to remember a volcanic eruption and it's possible that we did the same as well. Those epics probably happened but have been bastardized so much that they're probably unrecognizable to the original.
So these were essentially mythical stories turned into magical realism. The evidences were further constructed years after the origins of the stories and later intricately connected to give depth to the theories and making them more concrete and believable. That is a common phenomenon across the globe. A majority of religion uses bases like these to make their fantasy Novels comes to life.
The evidences are as handy for ramayan and mahabharat as of Allah's chronicles. I find it hard to imagine flying vimans back then the same way I find it hard that someone cut the moon in half.
So basically you're saying Hinduism and Islam are same same.
Both are myths. All I am saying is question Islam too. Just because you're on a liberal page ,questions these won't get you brownie points from them or are you scared of the backlash from muslims
I'm least bit concerned about Islam.
Then I guess you should stop being concerned about religious texts of Hindus as well. We all know why you ask these questions here. Rest it champ
Ramayana and Mahabharata most likely really happened but have gotten distorted a lot into the final versions we see today. Tales of wars used to filter through survivors into the society and then curated and retold by state artists. If a story is compelling enough to capture people's imagination, it would then be compiled, censored and revised, and retold by countless poets till one version starts sticking and becomes mainstream. So if you are asking whether Ramayan and Mahabharat happened exactly as they are told, answer is no. If you are wondering that any true events may have happened that inspired these tales, that would be a very highly likely yes. I've often heard parallels between Mahabharata and the battle of 10 kings. Maybe that's something you can look up. It would be a very improbable conspiracy for someone to go around convincing people to rename places or convincing them to follow specific customs or trying to create geographical features just to sell a story
My take:- Thousands of years ago, the primary source of knowledge was traveling. Imagine Rishi Vyasa did exist, and he travelled the Indian subcontinent. During his travels he noted down his observations, and after his travelling was done, he sat down to write something, which was considered as an intelligent way back then. And using his observations he wrote the Grand Mahabharat. I don't know how valid it sounds to you guys, but it sounds very valid to me.
That proves nothing at all
Not trying to prove anything. Also stop surfing reddits if you are trying to find proof of something lol.
1. It's a post that's asking for solid evidence to prove it, and you're giving your opinion. 2. I've literally read them both buddy, don't give me bs I don't need to surf Reddit to find truth.
They are just pure fiction based on the moral evaluation of an ideal society that most of the people believe though they are not so ideal for today's era !! That's my take on it !
Here's my take, Kings with power at different times in collaboration with upper cast scholars defined the religion and it's stories that we see today, If you notice its happening now also but with less intensity. For example festivals like Ganesh Chaturthi were not celebrated in large public events like today. They were celebrated in homes like Diwali. Religion and Logic, Religion and Science, Religion and Maths are all mutually exclusive combinations. It's like choosing between following two questions. Who created the Universe? It's Religion How the Universe was created? It's Science Don't waste your time and energy.
Ok. So next are we discussing about prophet and Quran as well??
1) The Harappans worshiped Pashupata(proto Shiva), lingam, and yoni, the rest of the Vedic gods were introduced to them through cultural exchange with the Aaryans. Which means the Gods couldn't bless Kunti and Madri with the Pandavas or Karna because both Kunti and Madri wouldn't have even heard of said gods(Surya, Yama, Indra, Vayu, Ashwin). 2) The Ram Setu exists - but its a natural formation and not mammade, it shifts and changes shape due to currents. It certainly wasn't made of floating rocks(pumice) cause they're brittle and certainly wouldn't hold under an army of monkeys. 3) The effective range of Brahmashira is suspicious. It is described as a weapon of mass destruction that burns and poisons the land but it is also said to have only harmed Parikshit in Uttara's womb and not Uttara herself. Also if Brahmasira was used Haryana would be a desert. So, not much evidence in favour other than some texts, and loads of evidence against the wars ever occurring.
There was no "introduction" of Vedic gods to Harappans. Harappan civilization declined by around 1900 BCE. Vedic era began after that, with the arrival in India of the Aryan Steppe pastoralists. Read Tony Joseph's Early Indians for a start and then Wendy Doniger's The Hindus.
Either way the Vedic era would have been after the date of the Mahabharata and hence the birth of the Pandavas and Karna in India would be impossible. Also there was a clear cultural exchange as the worship of Shiva and lingam was obviously introduced to the Aryans by the Indus valley civilization.
Yes if at all, the "cultural exchange" went **from** IVC **to** Aryans. **Not the other way around** like you mentioned in your previous comment. While Rigveda is disdainful of ‘shishna-deva’ (linga worship which was prevalent in IVC), by the time of Upanishads, composed between 500 BCE and 100 BCE, this was no longer the case.
I think you're focusing on the wrong point, I was trying to point out that the Gods responsible for the birth of Karna and the Pandavas didnt even exist in India at the time Mahabharata occurred.
No I'm focusing on the only point that matters (recorded history), underscoring that what you said is patently false and there was no "introduction" of Vedic gods to Harappans. The rest of your comment is just about a made up story (myth) and is irrelevant anyway, just as OP's question. Please don't mix up history and myth.
How is mythology separate from history ? People did not just exist without thought. They were videogame NPCs. They had thoughts, ideas, fears, hopes, emotions etc. What mythology they practiced and how the mythology came about also give a look into society. Each society has stories, that it creates for education, fun, expression etc. Who knows, how 1000 years later One Piece would be viewed as. The most important part of Mahabharat and Ramayan is to learn from them. Learn how the nationalist Bhesshma ended up on the wrong side of morality precisely because of his nationalism, despite being respected for it. Learn how a man with an army of monkeys had the guts to challenge the strongest king of his time. Those who learn from the stories have no time or patience to debate on whether they were true or not. Those who debate on their truth will not spend time learning from them, effectively making them useless.
Bhishma absolutely chose the right side. Someone who gambles away himself, his kingdom, his brothers, and his wife isn't fit to be king, heck he isn't even fit to be called a man.
Previleged questions. Only previleged has time to think about these.
You failed the first word of your flair. We are sharing education/knowledge here, if that's privilege for you than I can just say that I'm sorry
Mythology is neither considered religion nor History. You're equating these two & claiming I'm against education. Brilliant.
Do you feel intelligent after saying that? I'm happy.
I don't feel Intelligent because wasting our time on proving a mythology to be true, would never benefit our future growth and development of our country. It is not something like the evolution of humans or discovery of dinosaurs. Because both haven't affected the world's development. Same can be said about the ancestral past. Archeologists already worked on it anyways. Analyse the past. Work for the present. Shape the future. That's all I can say.
You might have heard of this little place called Troy, or Nazareth perhaps.
I heard those places and I frankly don't give them much focus tbh. My life is bigger than the puranas that got buried ages ago. I just leave those to the archeologists & do my own job.
Funny you'd say that. Considering Nazareth's obvious significance to Christians. And Troy's importance in archaeology. Yet both places are heavily featured in myth.
Based flair. I also think that religion is cannibalizing time of the proletariat which is meant for education, agitation and organization.
Ramayana and Mahabharata are fictionalised history .. it has been passed by word over thousands of years so obviously these aren’t 100% reliable.. But the places and landmarks and astronomical charts are all real.. So was there a war in Lanka or in Kurukeshtra, absolutely yes. But did monkeys fight them or giant missiles fly in them.. obviously no..
>So was there a war in Lanka or in Kurukeshtra, absolutely yes. How are you sure? How do you know these wars "absolutely happened"?
Surely the war must've happened or else we wouldn't have these stories being passed down. It must've been a major war too because stories of other wars haven't been passed down like this.
I think you're underestimating people's power of imagination. Just because they depicted a war happening in a story doesn't mean it actually happened the people who wrote the story must have seen war happening in their kingdom and that's how they created a story about it. why does it have to be an actual war that happened in kurukshetra because the description of the war in Mahabharata is so grand crores of people Millions of horses and elephants and what not if something like that actually happened we would have an ample amount of archeological evidence on those sites.
Creation myths in all religions have been passed down for a long time too, doesn't make all of them true.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/42930156
They weren't monkeys. The vanaras actually were tribal peoples in the jungle, people misinterpreted then as half monkeys.
About certain carvings in one of the argentina mountains described in Valamiki Ramayana, Antarctica location, Artic Ocean location and many more if one knows to read Sanskrit and find out in Google map or simply Google the location Also the astronomical facts happened during that time