RAMAYAN DAILY DISCUSSION THREAD - Page 96

Originally posted by: Mandodari

Thanks Chandra!
I did not like the storyline either. According to the Sagar interview recently, the Sagars said they wanted to show Sita as a strong woman. I guess that is the reason for this storyline. I have a problem also if the original is tampered with too much. This changes the whole concept of dharma. The reason for Sita being sent to Valmiki's ashram is because Rajya dharma takes precedence over pati dharma. You are correct. This whole storyline of the Sagars makes the dharma argument pointless.

Mandodari ji, congrats on hitting 500 👍🏼

I wonder what is going on these days in Ramayan. The storyline of the recent episodes has brought out the best of talents in the artists. But what about the original portrayal of the characters of Ramayan in the Epic itself. Ram was definitely depicted to be more strong in will. Excellent performance by the actors and actresses but what is happening with the characters of Ramayan 😕 😕 😕

They are showing Ram totally unwilling to part with Sita whereas in the original story the decision was Ram's and Sita accepted and understood though she was heartbroken by the turn of events.
😕😕😕

It was nice to see a Lakshman and Urmila scene. Finally . . .

As I had said before, I have always seen this Ramayan as a new version by itself.

I agree that any original story modified too much will raise more questions than it can solve.



I still can't agree to the fact that Ram might have sent Sita to Mithila to live with her parents. I just does not seem right. Banishing Sita to the forest made people believe that she was punished (it surely was punishment to have been banished by a husband when she was carrying his heirs). The reason Ram sent her away to the forest was to uphold the duties of a king and not because Ram was not happy with her. Sending her away to her parents home would have made people talk much worse than what they did. They would have been convinced that Ram was not happy with Sita and hence he sent her away to her parents and refused to take her back. It would just insult Sita Devi more and more. Though I understand why Ram banished Sita, I was not happy with the turn of events in their life. But under the circumstances, he did the best he could do.

Originally posted by: Mandodari

Thanks Lalitha. I really appreciate it.

Thanks Lalitha for the explanation. Please help me with my doubts too.

I'm pretty dreadful in Math myself but someone help me with this

Sita was 14 when she went to vanvaas with Ram? I had read that they lived together for 12 years after their marriage in Ayodhya. 😕😕😕
😕
I read somewhere else that she was 18 when she went to vanvaas with Ram and they had lived together in Ayodhya for 12 years. Does that mean that she was 6 years old when she got married? I had always thought that she was atleast 10 or 12 when she was married . . .

Totally confused 😕

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

Thanks Lalitha for the explanation. Please help me with my doubts too.

I'm pretty dreadful in Math myself but someone help me with this

Sita was 14 when she went to vanvaas with Ram? I had read that they lived together for 12 years after their marriage in Ayodhya. 😕😕😕
😕
I read somewhere else that she was 18 when she went to vanvaas with Ram and they had lived together in Ayodhya for 12 years. Does that mean that she was 6 years old when she got married? I had always thought that she was atleast 10 or 12 when she was married . . .

Totally confused 😕

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

You can always write about the episode be it the summary or the highlights. I enjoyed reading what you had posted so far.

Originally posted by: Khalrika

Anyone good at math here unlike me? How old was Sita when she went into the earth?

1. I think Lalitha's initial calculation was right, and she was ~42. All numbers below are Sita's age, even after her passing. Note that I'm not assuming that Rama & Sita spent 12 years in Ayodhya before their exile, or else, they'd have had kids.

14: Sita gets married

14+14: RSL exile

28+2: Rama & Sita as queen

30+12: Sita's exile

42: Sita goes underground

2. For those who believe the 11000 year reign account, change the above to

28+10000: Rama & Sita as queen (the 2 years replaced by 10000)

10028+12: Sita's exile (these 12 years count in Rama's reign)

10040: Sita goes underground

10040+(1000-12): Rama rules w/o Sita after her passing

11028: Rama ends his journey on earth. He is a tender 11028

3. A variation of the above might be

28+(10000-12): Rama & Sita as queen (the 2 years replaced by 9988)

10016+12: Sita's exile (these 12 years count in Rama's reign)

10028: Sita goes underground

10028+1000: Rama rules w/o Sita

11028: Rama ends his journey on earth. He is a tender 11028

P.S. The account about Rama being 25 and Sita being 16 is patently false, since the same account has Lakshman being 18, and we all know that Lakshman was born just a couple of days after Rama.

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

I had no idea they changed the person who played Sunaina. I was wondering who she was . . .

Originally posted by: _LalithaJanaki_

You're welcome Mandodari and Vibhishna.😊😳

@Vibhishna

I know. All these numbers confuse me as well. I just wish all the versions follow a specific number.😳 I actually grew up learning that Ram and Sita were exiled soon after their marriage, so Sita was 14 almost 15 and Ram was 16, but then someone told me that they lived many years in Ayodhya before Dasharath proclaimed Ram as Yuvraj. And they told me that Ram was 23 when he was exiled and Sita 14. That means they had 9 years age difference, and we know for sure from Valmiki Ramayan that Ram was almost 16 when he went with Vishvamitra. So does that mean that Sita was 7 when she was married? But it's kind of hard imagining a 7 year old and a 16 year old falling in love with each other in the Pushp Vatika, doesn't it?😕

I know this was discussed already in a thread before, but I'd really appreciate it if someone can post what it says in Valmiki Ramayan, as in what the ages of Ram and Sita were during marriage and during beginning of vanvas.

Originally posted by: chen2chic

From the top of my memory based on Valmiki, I guess Ram is around 12 when he kills Tadaka, as per what Mareech says to Ravana, though Dasaratha mentions that he is not yet 16, he could have meant any number under 16.

Also when Sita introduces herself to Ravana, she says that Ram was 25 and she herself was 18 when exiled. So my calculation here would be

Marriage - Ram ~ 13 and Sita ~ 6

Exiled - Ram ~ 25 and Sita ~ 18

Return- Ram ~39 and Sita ~32

Sita exile - Ram ~ 41 and Sita ~34

Sita leaving - Ram ~ 53 and Sita ~ 46

Also, please note there is no Pushpvatika as per Valmiki and it was a fully arranged wedding in Valmiki, so no romance here before the wedding. 😉

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

1. I think Lalitha's initial calculation was right, and she was ~42. All numbers below are Sita's age, even after her passing. Note that I'm not assuming that Rama & Sita spent 12 years in Ayodhya before their exile, or else, they'd have had kids.

14: Sita gets married

14+14: RSL exile

28+2: Rama & Sita as queen

30+12: Sita's exile

42: Sita goes underground

2. For those who believe the 11000 year reign account, change the above to

28+10000: Rama & Sita as queen (the 2 years replaced by 10000)

10028+12: Sita's exile (these 12 years count in Rama's reign)

10040: Sita goes underground

10040+(1000-12): Rama rules w/o Sita after her passing

11028: Rama ends his journey on earth. He is a tender 11028

3. A variation of the above might be

28+(10000-12): Rama & Sita as queen (the 2 years replaced by 9988)

10016+12: Sita's exile (these 12 years count in Rama's reign)

10028: Sita goes underground

10028+1000: Rama rules w/o Sita

11028: Rama ends his journey on earth. He is a tender 11028

P.S. The account about Rama being 25 and Sita being 16 is patently false, since the same account has Lakshman being 18, and we all know that Lakshman was born just a couple of days after Rama.