Srimad Ramayan EDT Week #4 Jan 22 - Jan 26 - Page 46

Originally posted by: Moonks

yeah they did, you should watch episode 212-220, there you will find that

Yeah, Sita Maa sits next to Sri Ram in Ram Darbar which definitely shows her position, and we can't compare it with Dasrath and his wife cause Dasrath has always sat alone on his throne

Oh okay will do that 👍🏻

Yup infact Ashta bharyas also in Dwapar yug were active part of Dwarka Politics. I was just not sure about positions but they were equals in roles and responsibilities as that of a King.

I will definitely try to read more about it to get clear idea though

Originally posted by: DiamondLife

I just said this - you put it better in words

This was shown in star plus Ramayan

star plus ramayan as well as br chopra ramayan and br chopra vishnupran showed valmiki version and no chhaya sita story in this version

regarding ravan and sanhastra ravan in star plus siya ke ram, ram did kill ravan as written in tulsi ramayan and that sanhastra ravan story shown was loosely based on adbhut ramayan

That story of Siya Mata's shadow getting kidnapped by Ravan and Ram ji knowing about it, how this story is made

So Ram ji didn't cried? Didn't got tensed? Didn't got angry? Also that means he knew he's a God? How was Ram ji shown in this story?

Originally posted by: RamAayeHain

Oh okay Agni pariksha ki baat hui thi kya wo to hua thaa

Also the scene, lakshman ji 🥺🥺🥺❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️ such strong dialogues and the way he delivered, bhai sahab goosebumps

Yep and Agnipariksha happens towards the end of the episode where Agni dev appears with the real Sita

Originally posted by: Moonks

my dad said that Agnipariksha part was there cause the Sita Ravan kidnapped wasn't the original one, it was her shadow and the real Sita went away with Agni dev just before Ravan came so, he hit two birds with one stone, got Sita back and made sure that none of them could question her

Yes, I remember watching this in one of the shows (I think sagar's)!

Originally posted by: Moonks

I will disagree to the fact that Sita Maa was his praja, she was not, she was his queen, equal of him in every sense, as a queen it was her duty to share his responsibilities, even if I don't believe uttarkand is real ( Valmiki doesn't mention it and Ramcharitmans which is the next most believable version, atleast from where I come, is written in 16th century, under the Islamic rule, you can't think that nobody would have modified it to suit their narratives) And even if we believe uttarkand, Sita was the one who took the decision to go away so Ram's respect can stay intact, I won't even talk about Ram as a king, but as a husband only, he said he will also go with her but sita refused by saying that people will look down upon him that he left his people for his wife, it was solely Sita's decision and Ram agreed with that half heartedly, but reverse the case for a second what if it was a Ram's decision to leave the palace and go to forest without Sita (not that she would have let him go alone), would not you have respected the fact and said it was not sita's fault, the only mistake of Ram's was he never told it was sita who took the decision, he took the blame upon himself, he never let her bore the brunt, it was him who shielded her from the accusing glances and taunts of the world, at the end everyone says Ram is wrong, he is a bad husband, he protected Sita's honour at the cost of his respect, if this doesn't show his maryada, his love, I don't know what does

It is the duty of the king to ensure justice . If Sita rings the justice bell there is no way Ram can deny it saying , u r the queen I am only responsible for the welfare of praja and not yours . So I am not the person u have to come up to with your problems . King has to listen to everybody . The king was the primary head and decision maker . The banishment of Sita sets a very wrong unjust precedence before the society . That victim has to be outcasted from society . As I said in my previous post, if Sita's banishment were to be true , one can only conclude that Ram Rajya had no place for a grieved woman. If someone rapes u , dishonors you the king and his kingdom will outcast you instead of giving you protection and sheltor .

It is only in Ramananda Sagar's Ramayan that I have seen that Sita herself made this decision of leaving Ram and Ram wanted to accompany her. Whatever I have heard and read Sita had absolutely no clue that she was going to be banished . Ram asked it is important to fulfill the wishes of a pregnant woman , therefore ask any wish. Sita says she has been wanting to spend some time near the ashram and asks Ram to take her somewhere like that for few days.

Next day Laxman tells Sita that Ram has ordered him to take her to the forest and Sita thinks it is pertaining to her wish that Ram is sending her to some ashram. She doesn't know that she is banished from Ayodhya . Her right eye twitches and fearing it to be a bad omen she prays to god to protect Ram . She didn't even know it is upon her that misery is falling.

Infact I remeber there was a chapter in my ncert hindi textbook stree shiksha ke virodhi kutarko ka khandan , where after getting to know from Laxman Sita says some katuvachan which was then used to come to a conclusion that education makes a woman arrogant .

I am currently in Bal Kand and I would surely like to read uttar kand on my own to know if Sita knew about her banishment or not .

Nevertheless whether uttar kand is true or not , Sita knew or not , the whole banishment of a pregnant woman on the basis of character proof is unjust, unfair and sends a wrong message to society . Something I can never accept and come to terms with

Originally posted by: Moonks

There is no such rule as far as I know, like if a girl gets married and leave her house, she still has the rights on her ancestral property, plus no character mentions the fact that Ram won't inherit the kingdom after 14 years their only problem was he will be away for 14 years

I see this explanation in lot of places and the same was told in a documentary. What is the source script of this rule , I do not know .

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-significance-of-the-14-year-exile-in-Mahabharata-and-Ramayana

Originally posted by: vaidharbhi95

It is the duty of the king to ensure justice . If Sita rings the justice bell there is no way Ram can deny it saying , u r the queen I am only responsible for the welfare of praja and not yours . So I am not the person u have to come up to with your problems . King has to listen to everybody . The king was the primary head and decision maker . The banishment of Sita sets a very wrong unjust precedence before the society . That victim has to be outcasted from society . As I said in my previous post, if Sita's banishment were to be true , one can only conclude that Ram Rajya had no place for a grieved woman. If someone rapes u , dishonors you the king and his kingdom will outcast you instead of giving you protection and sheltor .

It is only in Ramananda Sagar's Ramayan that I have seen that Sita herself made this decision of leaving Ram and Ram wanted to accompany her. Whatever I have heard and read Sita had absolutely no clue that she was going to be banished . Ram asked it is important to fulfill the wishes of a pregnant woman , therefore ask any wish. Sita says she has been wanting to spend some time near the ashram and asks Ram to take her somewhere like that for few days.

Next day Laxman tells Sita that Ram has ordered him to take her to the forest and Sita thinks it is pertaining to her wish that Ram is sending her to some ashram. She doesn't know that she is banished from Ayodhya . Her right eye twitches and fearing it to be a bad omen she prays to god to protect Ram . She didn't even know it is upon her that misery is falling.

Infact I remeber there was a chapter in my ncert hindi textbook stree shiksha ke virodhi kutarko ka khandan , where after getting to know from Laxman Sita says some katuvachan which was then used to come to a conclusion that education makes a woman arrogant .

I am currently in Bal Kand and I would surely like to read uttar kand on my own to know if Sita knew about her banishment or not .

Nevertheless whether uttar kand is true or not , Sita knew or not , the whole banishment of a pregnant woman on the basis of character proof is unjust, unfair and sends a wrong message to society . Something I can never accept and come to terms with

Ram's character graph has drastically fallen in end of the Ramayan, Valmiki knew what he was writing when he wrote Ram is a Maryadapurushottam, a great son, a great husband, a great king, so why would he focus on the part, if he knew what he did was nowhere right? It is clear what has done to our epics in the later age, Mahabharat nowhere mentions Radha, she wasn't mentioned in any text before 12th century, but after that she is mentioned and in brhama vaivarta purana, Krishna is degraded to a lusty man, they even showed him having relationship with Kubja, an old lady whose posture he corrected (Bro, he was Mahavishnu, who was above Kama, dhara, artha, moksha), they showed him with Radha, few books says he was 10 years old when he left Vrindavan, how can a 10 year old boy will have this great love story we have heard of? Does it make sense to you or anyone here? And if we go by Vedas, every person has to follow Four Ashrams pattern of life, where the second Ashram was of Brahmacharya (5-17 years) and in that age no one could marry, the point is all our text are edited to such an extent where we have to feel that we are wrong, our culture is wrong and it's right to leave that.

I don't believe Ram will ever do that, when he couldn't leave anyone in pain, how would he leave his sita, his Ardhangini? And Ram was fully aware of the fact that he is Mahavishnu and Sita is Mahalakshmi, uttarkaand doesn't make sense, atleast to me

Same i would also like to believe that Uttarkaand is not true and only later addition.

Plus as per sage Brigu's curse , Shri Narayan and Ma Lakshmi had already completed the separation as Shri Ram and Sita Ma so why would they separate again as mentioned in uttarakhand.

Why did people again gossip when Sita ji had already undergone Agnipariksha. Wasn't that enough evidence that she is pure

From where to watch NDTV Ramayan series.

I want to rewatch. Is it available on YouTube