Gandhiji asked," Did Mahabharat and Ramayan Really happened?

This is based on an article in newspapers which I read years ago.

Gandhiji wrote a long letter, to Muni Rajchandra. He asked a list of questions to him about Raamayan and Mahabharat. Gandhiji was a lawyer. He asked pointed questions.

Some of his questions were, as I recollect from reading of article in newspaper,

1) Were Rama and Krishna really Gods?

2) Did Ramayan and Mahabharata really happened? Or are they just poems written by ancients Munies?

Tough questions.

Muni Rajchandra replied to Gandhiji. Gandhiji accepted his reply. Then it is matter of general knowledge that Gandhiji worshiped  Ram and Krishna as God. Whenever, he needed spiritual power, he turned to Rama. Whenever he needed philosophical guidance he turned to Krishna.


I recollect as under.

Regarding First question, Muni Rajchandra said, “Whenever any God has to come to Earth, he will have to come only through a human being. Therefore, there is no harm in believing that they were Gods.”

Regarding Second question, he said, “Since Thousands of years, people are believing that these are narrations of true events, there is no harm in believing that these wars really happened”.

Like you, I also paused when I read these answers. Aren’t they evasive answers?

Now considers, you are told that, there are 200 hundred galaxies are then in sky. You have no means to verify what some persons are saying. Then you will tell yourself, when there are so many people saying like this, There is no harm in believing that there are 200 hundred galaxies in sky.

Same way, when there are things which we cannot verify by material standards, the way to believe some thing true or not, is as above.

Perhaps, so Gandhiji to believed in Rajchandra Muni, and made experiments. He found, a flow of spiritual energy supplying him strength. So his belief was confirmed that Rama and Krishna are also Gods, like so many other Gods. He never said that his were the only Gods and others had no Gods.

Now, I have also made experiment and found that these Gods help us. The only thing is they are not at our command. They are unpredictable. When they will help, how they will help is entirely unpredictable. But we can certainly feel their presence in our room the moment we remember.

Whatever it may be. Many of you may also have made experiment with Gods and might have real personal experiences which you cannot prove to anyone.

It doesn’t matter. This is not an authentic blog. This is for recording my personal recollections only. You are entirely free to reject what I have said.

Haresh Raichura


4 thoughts on “Gandhiji asked," Did Mahabharat and Ramayan Really happened?

  1. True, Sir. In fact Krishna says, Inquisitive Marg is better than Bhakti Marg, but it is a little difficult for ordinary people, because here, are required to see abstract and conceptual form of God.

  2. भक्ति मार्ग में भी ज्ञान सुलभ है .भक्त कविओ की रचना में ज्ञान ही है वोह भी सरल भाषा में . और ज्ञान मार्ग में भक्ति सुलभ है. पर भक्ति मार्ग में अहम् नहीं आता जो इसे सरल बनता है

  3. This is an answer given to the question "Did Mahabharat or Ramayan really happen?"original link truth in the Mahabharata then in many other religious based texts. The states and places within it are all real places and discribed, if your going to go and write such a huge epic why would you make it difficult for yourself and base it on real aspects of your world and not just some dream world. Like lord of the rings etc… The Mahabharata also refers to the Ramayana as a true tale, both books are separated by several hundred years and by different writers, and in different styles. Why on earth would the Mahabharata take the time to speak of the Ramayana if the Ramayana was not a true belief and based on some facts of a war that did occur, if they believed it was a fictional tale then you wouldnt put it as history in a book that you want people to have faith in. Also its not just the reference but the decendants and the lineage links between the two stories can be traced, why go to the trouble of noting down real family ties and decendants and all those names etc.. if your writing something that is based on fiction. You can also visit the battleground where the war was fought, they have also found ancient arrow heads there. Dwaka was fortoled to have been submerged in the manabharata by a flood, they have found such a place off the coast of gujarat, with many emblems and coins depicting events of the times. The mahabharata also discribes a solar eclipse event, which can be traced and falidates the suggested date of the events it proposes, though the only copies we have may be of a later date, it does not mean it the event did not occur when it suggests it did. The date for the mahabharata is estimated to be around the mark of 5000 BC but is still debated.Theres far far more truth in these books then in a the bible that much is certain.TO Lilitu ABOVE: She clearly has not read or studied the mahabharata or ramayana. For example she believes the story is of indigious people fighting with migrants. IT IS NOT.RAMAYANA: is a tale of a prince from central India, who fought the demon king od Sri Lanka who kidnaped his wife (this is the high level summary).MAHABHARATA: tale of rivalry between a large ruling family, who decend from King Bharat, (KIng Bharat is why the country is in hindi termed Bharat Vash or just Bharat as he unified a large amount of the country, that is a real story to and can be traced in historical texts. Anyway the Mahabharata clearly states the two groups of cousins fought for control of the lands that they governed due to a dispute between their fathers. If they are COUSINS! how on earth is it immigrants fighting indiginous people? The term Aryan means noble, it is not a race! Sanskrit was developed in the indian subcontinent, and spread to other parts of the world, thats why sounds and languages in europe have similarities to it. Indians are caucasoid, but vary with mixtures as you move across and up and down the country, one big melting pot. Also its not whites vs blacks! that concept is actually fairly recent due to misinterpretation and propaganda from the british empire. If you look at the Ramayana and the Mahabharata the lead roles and the dieties, and what is suggested to be god incarnate, comes as a dark skined character. If these are fair people writing a story they want to just tell, why make the 'hero' dark?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s