Doubts and Discussions from the Ramayan - Page 105

Reading the posts of Mandodari ji, Chandra Bhaiya and Lalitha Janaki, a doubt sprung up to my mind. Something that I was contemplating long back . . .

I am sure that Bharat would have know what happened to Ram, Sita and Lakshman. Atleast he would have known the fact that Sita was taken away and Ram was searching for her. My reason for believing this - A part of the vanaras were sent to the North as well in their quest for Sita. Surely Bharat would have come to know of what happened. Ayodhya had spies and definitely they would have informed Bharat and Shathrugan about it. If that was the case, what steps did Bharat and Shathrugan take to help Ram. I read in a book that Bharat and the King of Kasi tried to send their armies to Lanka but either they couldn't or before they could start Hanuman came with the news Ram was back. I too think they would not have reached on time to participate in the war.

Did the common people know of the quest of the vanaras. If so the news would have pread along with the insertions and additions by those who pass it on. They would have had enough time to discuss it all and then if they still doubted Sita's chastity, they wouldn't have been so joyous in her welcome. I think that the Washerman threw out his thoughts he had kept within himself or that he himself had thought about it at the time of sending away his wife and that started the people thinking along those lines.

What are your opinions on this, friends?

I have already exhausted my time here. It took some time to read through all the posts.

Would be back tonight 😉

Guys is it just me or is anyone having a problem with this weepy Ram. OK the romantic in me is loving this it is great to see the lover Ram torn apart, but Ramayan is more than just a love story it is about dharma which is like the theme of the whole story and the courage in face of the most awful times. For the sake of teaching us the truth, the young generation real Indian values, they shouldn't mess around with Ram's persona or character he is a integral part of Indian mythological history and for generations to come is an inspiration. I wish they wouldn't show Ram soooooooo tired and given up. It changes the message and it misrepresents the story from what our parents or even grandparents think of Ram.
I personally at first liked the change in the story compared to the original Valmiki version only because I liked how Sita got to say her proper goodbye and it seemed like a mutual decision between husband and wife. But this sequence was so much better played in the old Ramayan serial with Arun Govil, where we knew he was heart broken but he didn't shed a tear, the pain of the situation was no less I think it was more dignified the way they showed the separation. Here the same story but Ram is crying more for me that is not true to the symbol of what Ram is as a man, he is the pillar of strength even in the face of death. Ram is not a bollywood hero, don't make him one please I would go rather watch an romantic SRK movie if I want to see a weepy romantic hero.
With any other serial directors can take any such liberties. But Ramayan and Mahabharata is part of Indian history and I don't think it is justified when they change around a character, forget including extra scenes or what not but to make a character Ram or Sita into something else just to add some masala drama sends a wrong message out.
Sorry guys just had to get that off my chest. Hppefully I didn't offend anybody. My deep apologies if I did. 😃

when rama was in the forests, did any one attempt to annex ayodhya? i mean, everyone was literally in mourning, and it would be an ideal time to attack ayodhya. probably bharata would have defeated them but did any one even attack ayodhya? coz its impossible that for 14yrs all the kings lived peacefully without any battles or conquests.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Mandodari

Fully agree with ya!!!👍🏼

You are right for more than one reason:

1. Sita was abducted and held against her will;

2. Re: her chastity, what was the legal standard even then? Was it innocent until proven guilty, or guilty until proven innocent? Because the latter is how it turned out in Sita's case.

We cant anylise Ramayan of Treta Yug on the basis of modern jurisprudential concepts. We cant analyse Ramayan on the standard of moderns State-citizen or court-litigants relationship. There was so developed rule of procedure or codified law or evidence as today. Many ancient Indian jurisprudential norm do not match with todays norms. Both of u has used some legal term. chandra i guess u've studed law or political science. It was not typical court case regarding chastity of woman or or
quo warranto regarding Sits's entitlement to be queen or to continue as queen nor it was a parliamentary proceeding of impeachment , enquiry etc. So we just cant anyalyse Ramayan on the basis of todays norms n concepts.

For impartiality judge shud be totally disinterested in the cause according to natural justice which is now integral part of many legal system of today's world U must have heard "nemo judex in causa sua"---- no one shud be judge in his own cause one of the basic principle of natural justice. In those days function of executive, judiciary n legislature all were done by the king. In India it was be lived that supreme law or "Dharma' is king of kings an all kings r bound by it. If they fail to rule according to it they will be punished by God. Dharma was suprema lex , divine.

In uttar kand Ram was to judge n he n his wife Sita were a party here also. So it was impossible for him to be 100% impartial because he was judge in his own cause. He choose make his praja happy n choose sorrow for himself n Sita. Sita's second exile was equally painful for Ram in fact more painful. Sita was carrying no guilt feeling. This was her strength. But Ram knew that he took a harsh decision for Sita. With this feeling in heart he had to discharge all his royal duties n ensure welfare of his people. Thus this second separation was more painful for him

Status of Sita was totally different. Neither she was ordinary subject of Ayodhya nor was she one among the many wives of Ram. She was queen of Ayodhya. She was the wife of King of Ayodhya. Most imp this is that she is a avtar like Lord Ram. For her circumstances was different.

Today Sita is worshipped for her purity n benevolence n forbearance. Uttarkand made it possible

Manu prescribes certain rules for the king called Vrata. Indra accords rains for four months to sprout the seeds, so the king shall sprout the people's hopes. Sun evaporates earthly water slowly and insignificantly so as to give the next rain, so the king shall collect taxes and spend them again for the welfare of people suurya vrata . Air pervades everywhere to enliven people, so the king shall pervade everywhere through his agents to watch out good and evil for his subjects maaruta vrata . Yama, the God of Time, has no friends or foes and ends the lives of any one at the end of their time, and so shall the king in according punishments yama vrata . Rain binds one and all and it is the livelihood of any living being, so is king to bind his subjects for a good livelihood varuNa vrata . Moon is both a pleasant one and presiding deity for medicinal herbs, so shall the king be pleasant to his people and keep their health chandra vrata . Fire is fiery and burns down evil and the king shall be fiery to his enemies, either internal or external aagneya vrata . The earthly earth sustains scholars and stupid, wealthy and poor, prosperous and pathetic alike, so shall the king bear with all of his subjects pR^ithvii vrata.

Here they observed (Ram-Sita ) prithvii vrata. They sustained the stupid gossips of Avadhis. He knew that to remove this evil he'll have to give big sacrifices instead of punishment. Punishment wud've proved worthless here.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

3. Another legal standard - okay, I'll admit guilty to thinking like 21st century rather than treta yuga, but wasn't there a conflict of interest involved? How could Rama be expected to make a decision on Sita - shouldn't that have been escalated to, say, Vaishistha, and let him give a ruling? After all, if Rama decided to keep Sita, it would be said that he was being partial to his wife, and if he decided, as he did, to get rid of her, it would be said that he was compelled to do it to demonstrate how he put his royal duties above his personal desires.

There's a reason that in juries, people who are related to parties in cases are waived from jury dury - conflict of interest. If I was being tried for a hit and run in Redwood Shores, there's no way my wife would be allowed to serve on that jury. And vice versa.

There was simply no way Rama could be impartial in this case for the simple reason of being Sita's husband (he'd either have favored Sita, thereby looking like he was being partial to his wife, or disfavored her, in which case he'd have looked like he was deliberately discriminating against her for the sake of his reputation), and shouldn't have been in the position to judge in the first place. So give it to an imparital third party adjudicator.

U cant apply nemo judex in causa sua principle here.

the object of Avatar of Ram Sita wud have failed had Ram not sent her to Ashram. Generation after genration doubt abt Sita wud have take a very very dirty shape. Sita was not a common woman. She was public figure. They r remmberd generaration after genrations. Public figure , great personalites r subject matter of dicussion , gossips even today. For her Shiv dhanush was broken she was the cause of Rams great war with Ravan. I was must for her honour. All her sacrifices obsevabce of Dhrama wud've been forgotten by later genrations(exept her stay in lanka). Try to see this issue from Sita's side

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

4. Why didn't the Avadhis object when she was being crowned, as Lalitha asked?

Remember Ram had to employ spies to find to what people thinks abt his administration .in was not a case of Referendum. The people protest was not a open one. They were enjoying dirty gossips abt their Queen which were intolerable for Ram. Might be Avadhis have doubts for Sita from moment they heard abt her abduction n her capture. But u cant expect people openly protesting or sending referendum against Sita before the most powerful Ram. Might be thay were thinking that if he can eliminate mightiest demon Ravan for, can give severe punishment for such remarks.His first duty when he reached Ayodhya was takeover kingdom secure its borders etc. As perVamiki Ramwas well versed in science of good administration. After he rule for sometime he wanted to know people opinion so he employed spies n the then he came to know abt people view abt Sita


Regarding whether the avadhis shud have gone with Ram or not my view that Lord Ram had done right by forgiving them . In those days ther were no newspapers tv radio or IT nor copies of
valmiki Ramayn were available for all in the bookstalls of Ayodhya. People didnt knew how things actually happened nor they knew abt Ravan that he was not that cheap person. He has his own ideals which he followed. Tehy had no idea of lanka palace ashok vatika etc etc. they knew the half news. Its a old saying "Ignorace is cause of the evil' n same happende with avadhis. If we were at Ram's place we wud not have forgiven them reason we r mere mortal beings not
God. But He is God. He created everything our action its fruits all belongs to Him so He can forgive avadhis

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

Reading the posts of Mandodari ji, Chandra Bhaiya and Lalitha Janaki, a doubt sprung up to my mind. Something that I was contemplating long back . . .

I am sure that Bharat would have know what happened to Ram, Sita and Lakshman. Atleast he would have known the fact that Sita was taken away and Ram was searching for her. My reason for believing this - A part of the vanaras were sent to the North as well in their quest for Sita. Surely Bharat would have come to know of what happened. Ayodhya had spies and definitely they would have informed Bharat and Shathrugan about it. If that was the case, what steps did Bharat and Shathrugan take to help Ram. I read in a book that Bharat and the King of Kasi tried to send their armies to Lanka but either they couldn't or before they could start Hanuman came with the news Ram was back. I too think they would not have reached on time to participate in the war.

Did the common people know of the quest of the vanaras. If so the news would have pread along with the insertions and additions by those who pass it on. They would have had enough time to discuss it all and then if they still doubted Sita's chastity, they wouldn't have been so joyous in her welcome. I think that the Washerman threw out his thoughts he had kept within himself or that he himself had thought about it at the time of sending away his wife and that started the people thinking along those lines.

What are your opinions on this, friends?

I have already exhausted my time here. It took some time to read through all the posts.

Would be back tonight 😉

@bold agree with u.

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

Besides, Ram took this decision because the majority of the people believed that he should not have brought back Sita to Ayodhya and made her his queen. Lets say that Ram had left the matter to his jury - his ministers os someone else like his Guru Vashishta. The ministers would either speak their minds or would be too scared that they would displease the king. If the person who decides, says that Sita should be banished, then it still would have been inevitable and Ram would have been put to shame - people would have said that Ram unable to decide for himself and left the matter to others. What sort of a King is he? We thought so high of him and eventually he too ends up being a slave to a woman. I don't think Ram could have faced that. If the ministers fearing the wrath of the King had spoken in favour of Sita remaining as a queen, the people would have talked that there is no justice in the country, the ministers are the Kings puppets and so on. Either way, it is the King's duty to provide justice and he cannot delegate it to someone else. If it was the case that someone had a problem with him, that is, if someone demands justice that the King has wronged him/her, then the others can decide if he does not provide satisfactory justice.

well said vibs. Only Ram cud take apt decision here n he did took a apt decision considering future

Originally posted by: loveanime

Guys is it just me or is anyone having a problem with this weepy Ram. OK the romantic in me is loving this it is great to see the lover Ram torn apart, but Ramayan is more than just a love story it is about dharma which is like the theme of the whole story and the courage in face of the most awful times. For the sake of teaching us the truth, the young generation real Indian values, they shouldn't mess around with Ram's persona or character he is a integral part of Indian mythological history and for generations to come is an inspiration. I wish they wouldn't show Ram soooooooo tired and given up. It changes the message and it misrepresents the story from what our parents or even grandparents think of Ram.
I personally at first liked the change in the story compared to the original Valmiki version only because I liked how Sita got to say her proper goodbye and it seemed like a mutual decision between husband and wife. But this sequence was so much better played in the old Ramayan serial with Arun Govil, where we knew he was heart broken but he didn't shed a tear, the pain of the situation was no less I think it was more dignified the way they showed the separation. Here the same story but Ram is crying more for me that is not true to the symbol of what Ram is as a man, he is the pillar of strength even in the face of death. Ram is not a bollywood hero, don't make him one please I would go rather watch an romantic SRK movie if I want to see a weepy romantic hero.
With any other serial directors can take any such liberties. But Ramayan and Mahabharata is part of Indian history and I don't think it is justified when they change around a character, forget including extra scenes or what not but to make a character Ram or Sita into something else just to add some masala drama sends a wrong message out.
Sorry guys just had to get that off my chest. Hppefully I didn't offend anybody. My deep apologies if I did. 😃

The only thing I m not liking in this new Ramayana is Sita proposing for her exile before Ram. Same was shown in the Ramanand sagar's version so i didnt liked this part of previous version too

Loveanime Ramayan is infact a love story. valmiki has written the story in ths way. Love romance is in its pure form in Ramayan. ramayan contains all rasas. Rama is shown as a complete hero. A true hero shud lament for his heroine on separation. U'll find a good example of this in Aranya Kand , kishkinda , sundar n Yuddha kand . It is a attibute of hero. check this link I've posted some portions from this kand https://www.indiaforums.com/forum/ramayan/961117/rams-reaction-when-he-returns-to-cottage . dont know why it was not shown in new Ramayan. Ram's doting nature was not perfectly shown in any serial or movie. U can check this link when some extact from Ayodhya kand is posted where Ram shows Sita how to were hermit robes https://www.indiaforums.com/forum/ramayan/906209/how-do-they-wear-these-a-beautiful-story.

Ananya is sanskrit pandit she throw more light on it

Is showing pain or dilemma of husband Ram undermines or destroys the message of drama according to u? In my view it is no way affecting the msg of Dharma. What I cant digest is Sita herself proposing for exile. It contradicts with the other portions of the story.

Ram's nature has been described as person who hide his pains from others. But its no where written that he never shed tears. In fact in one place Ram said that separation from sita was more painful than the exlie awarded by Kekayi n separation from other relations. If he shed tears in that occasion what wrong in showing Ram shedding tears here. Is he shedding tears in public? Sagar r showing him worried in his own private chamber. what's wrong in that?
I dont want to see a heartless Ram. I want to see Valmiki's Ram.

Originally posted by: loveanime

Guys is it just me or is anyone having a problem with this weepy Ram. OK the romantic in me is loving this it is great to see the lover Ram torn apart, but Ramayan is more than just a love story it is about dharma which is like the theme of the whole story and the courage in face of the most awful times. For the sake of teaching us the truth, the young generation real Indian values, they shouldn't mess around with Ram's persona or character he is a integral part of Indian mythological history and for generations to come is an inspiration. I wish they wouldn't show Ram soooooooo tired and given up. It changes the message and it misrepresents the story from what our parents or even grandparents think of Ram.
I personally at first liked the change in the story compared to the original Valmiki version only because I liked how Sita got to say her proper goodbye and it seemed like a mutual decision between husband and wife. But this sequence was so much better played in the old Ramayan serial with Arun Govil, where we knew he was heart broken but he didn't shed a tear, the pain of the situation was no less I think it was more dignified the way they showed the separation. Here the same story but Ram is crying more for me that is not true to the symbol of what Ram is as a man, he is the pillar of strength even in the face of death. Ram is not a bollywood hero, don't make him one please I would go rather watch an romantic SRK movie if I want to see a weepy romantic hero.
With any other serial directors can take any such liberties. But Ramayan and Mahabharata is part of Indian history and I don't think it is justified when they change around a character, forget including extra scenes or what not but to make a character Ram or Sita into something else just to add some masala drama sends a wrong message out.
Sorry guys just had to get that off my chest. Hppefully I didn't offend anybody. My deep apologies if I did. 😃

You are right. It should be stopped, otherwise show can be ruined. So far I liked Ram character, but last two episodes were just out of touch. And I'm afraid third episode will be the same.

Originally posted by: Same108

You are right. It should be stopped, otherwise show can be ruined. So far I liked Ram character, but last two episodes were just out of touch. And I'm afraid third episode will be the same.

cant Ram the husband lament in his own chamber. Is he shedding tears in public? I m glad they showing his pain. Ram led a life of sanyasi he slept on floor etc after her sent her to ashram. Sagars shud show both things how he discharged all the duties of a kings. he tried to give his praja all happines while for hismself he choose the biggest sorrow .but they shud show the pain of Ram which he hided from all others. Its in no way affecting the story

Originally posted by: coolpurvi

cant Ram the husband lament in his own chamber. Is he shedding tears in public? I m glad they showing his pain. Ram led a life of sanyasi he slept on floor etc after her sent her to ashram. Sagars shud show both things how he discharged all the duties of a kings. he tried to give his praja all happines while for hismself he choose the biggest sorrow .but they shud show the pain of Ram which he hided from all others. Its in no way affecting the story

You are correct. But it is just not that he is sad, he is not able to make up his mind and he keeps going back and forth which is showing deep confusion on his part. I don't perceive Ram is supposed to be confused for such a long period of time and unable to take a decision. That is all I feel. But it is still entertaining to watch, though I do feel all these tears do make it very sad.

I have seen the original Valmiki version in Tamil. Where Ram sends Sita away that was probably the coldest Ram I ever saw. LOL. They showed it took him less than five minutes to make up his mind about Sita. I was very young I must confess it left a bad taste though I loved the character of Ram, I felt really bad for poor Sita when she tried to commit suicide and was stopped. So for a long time I didnt like the original version because of the way they showed Ram in Tamil more unfeeling and all about being King, but I think now everyone has a point the original is better in its own way because that is the real ramayan.