Is ramayan true or false?
366913
Ramayan? What's ramayan? Did u mean, ramayana?? If it's ramayana... emm.. it false. Only a story in my country..
112461
Aha! The liar paradox rears its ugly head again....\n\nThe asnwer is - neither true nor false. The propositional content and the semantic content of the statement contradict each other.\n\nTo unpick this paradox, you have to separate the statement from the proposition it contains. \nNote that the proposition has a positive truth value - it claims that "[yadda yadda] IS [bladiblah]"\n\nNow...\n\nIf the statment is true, the proposition that it contains is rendered false, leading to a self-contradiction.\nSo [This statement is false.] is false.\nBut if it is false that the statement is false then the proposition it contains is rendered true, and again the statement is rendered self-contradictory.\n\n(Repeat ad nauseum)\n\nIf you got that, ponder this one. It's a doozy:\n\n"This staitmennt contaynes three mistakes"
86034
neither true or false...
775679
He represents the figure of the ideal being, as he is humble yet brave. His physical prowess, mental discipline and spiritual purity have made him. But most importantly there is a philosophy that will tell you how old the Ramayan was.\nhttp://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/science/sc-moff2.htm
855312
The answer is 'True".
71741
Definitely a fact.  It's in the Bible and the Bible is truth.  The only absolute truth we have actually.
141458
Check out Godel's theorem.  The way I read it it states that given any language you can write sentences that are true, false, or neither true nor false (i.e. "This sentence is false.").  I see God as the language which is Truth.  If you have the concept of truth, falsehood is derivitive from truth.  So if you have a true omnipotent God who is all good, you can have the false concept of his opposite, suffering, or any other sort of bad or evil thing you can imagine.  Just because you can say it in the language of God, doesn't make it true.  The material world is an example of sentences which you can construct in the language of God which are not true, i.e. illusion or relative.  As our thought becomes more spiritual or absolute, we find that the so-called evil in the world falls away from our experience, not that we ignore it, but our thought changes the world within the sphere of our consiousness.  The world is our collective shared consiousness, lots of people think that it is all that is real and filled with both good and evil, so it sure seems like God must have created all this suffering, while in fact he is of purer eyes than to behold anything but pure 100% good everywhere.  Just because you can have the concept of suffering or anything else bad, doesn't make it necessarily real.  We are God's image and likeness, we have free will, therefore, we can believe that which is not true to be true, i.e. believe that illusion is reality.  Without free will, the universe would not be infinite.
414676
1 is not true. Most scientists are religious. \n\n2 is true if you add "some" at the beginning. Not all people believe that there is a god.
205979
Heh, yeah, I heard that one before. Well, it is a statement, so i'm assuming it's true. A statement of THAT nature can't possibly be false, because it holds nothing of substance.
565721
Though it cannot be evidenced that this was something to do with Ramayana or not however considering the quality and details included in Ramayana it is very likely that author of Ramayana had seen some sort of connection between two which looks like bridge and that's why he would have included this in his books.\n\nSome Hindu groups claim that the bridge is evidence that events narrated in the Ramayana epic actually took place and cite NASA's imagery of it as proof of their claims. NASA has distanced itself from such claims:\n\n"The images [...] may be ours, but their interpretation is certainly not ours. [...] Remote sensing images or photographs from orbit cannot provide direct information about the origin or age of a chain of islands, and certainly cannot determine whether humans were involved in producing any of the patterns seen."\n\n\nArcheological studies of the bridge are ongoing, and some archeologists claim to have found evidence suggesting that the bridge is man-made. For instance, some researchers from Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli, announced that the "bridge" is only 3,500 years old.\n\nSea levels rose about 10 or 20 metres in the 6th millennium BCE to reach levels similar to today, so in 6000 BCE the bridge would have been an isthmus situated above sea level. As such, it almost certainly would have been a viable route for humans to have reached Sri Lanka by dry land.
1044051
The aim of the Ramayana is to live life as Ram did - Marayada Purushottam, if you understand what it implies.\n\nThe truth of the epic is a personal belief, in case you choose to believe it or not, that's your prerogative, and that's the beauty of Hinduism-more than a religion, it's a way of life.\nst
807465
It's false.\n\nLet A be a formula such as A[X] = true, for every X.\n\nThen A[true] = false\nand A[false] = false.\n\nYou can see that A[true] != ~A[false]
836954
Not one single fact so far.  Surprise, surprise.  What a particular writing or book claims is irrelevant.  What are the facts that can point out any one religion as the "True" one?\n\nHint:  There are none.  All religions and their validity are matters of opinion.  Facts do not enter into them in the slightest.
935095
FALSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1133386
According to astrologers it is true. According to astronomers it is not true
221126
Nobody gave a concrete proof.\nMany scientists too agreed who made studies on it.\nLET US SEE LOGICALLY.\nScience says both energy and matter are neither created nor distroyed only they change the forms. Life is a form of energy which has a special capacity to work to attain something it desires to achieve. That means it will catch a new body to complete unfinished tasks.\nBhagavadgeetha ch.2. Verse 15, says.. "dEhinoosmin....." It means just like one attains youthhood from childhood and then the old age he attains another fresh body after death.\nch.2. V 22, says - The life force(energy) scraps the old or spoiled body and changes to a new one, similer to a living individual changing the old or unusable dress material to a new one.\nThere are long and appropriate answers to a few importent questions.\nWhat controls the next form of birth? (Short answer - The actions, Karma). Is an individual has the choice of next \nform of birth - Short answer Normally No. But Yes After the  MOKSHA (The deliverence). After Moksha one can choose the form and nature of his next body or birth).\nThe experience of this life will be passed on to the brain chip of next body just like an e-mail passing from one computer chip thru the WEB to another BRAND NEW COMPUTER, without any dependence of the computer where the mail is originally created. \nScientifically a freqency perfectly catches another similar frequency, and therefore we can select different channels in Radio and TV. Similarly the life energy will have a certain thought frequency depending on the previous body experience. Therefore it can select the parents of similar matching thought frequencies for its next birth. For example if some one behaves very cruelly like tiger and remains as criminal in the world, and if he never repents his cruel actions, his mind freqiency will match with that of a tiger. After leaving the present body that life energy may select a tiger as its mother because of well matching frequency available there!      \nEnough for now.
541708
NASA took a photo of the Palk Strait between India and Sri Lanka that shows a series of shoals lying in the water between two points of land.  It the shoals were above water, they would connect the two points of land and form a bridge between India and Sri Lanka.\n\nSome have claimed that this is the bridge that Rama commanded to be built in the Hindu epic Ramayana.  A few archaeologists claim to have found evidence suggesting that the bridge is man-made.\n\nNASA has distanced itself from such claims with the following quote:\n\n"The images [...] may be ours, but their interpretation is certainly not ours. [...] Remote sensing images or photographs from orbit cannot provide direct information about the origin or age of a chain of islands, and certainly cannot determine whether humans were involved in producing any of the patterns seen."