Originally posted by: S_rocha
Excuse me madam. how you jump to this conclusion that i haven't read Valmiki Ramayan. I have read Valmiki Ramayan and Know every part of it and my so called doubt are genuine okay.
I never doubted sita for her chastity did I😲, stop blaming me further. I only criticize Ram for being so cruel to sita. If his rejection of sita is according to Raj Dharma as his subjects were against her then she besides being his wife was her subject too and to satsfy the wrong jugement of other subject if injustice is done then its dharma??? No obiously not. If Ram has tested her and satisfied by her agnipariksha and if its already been proven she is pure then why he banished her after listining to gossips of few illiterate ind ignorent people. There is other options too which he never took but did injustice to her only. I will write more rite now too busy in other shedule.
S_rocha, I don't mind explaining my points and view to people who are genuinely puzzled and would like an explanation and would be receptive enough to listen to all the points and not stay adamant and try to convince others as to what they say is true. - This is my policy and I'm not blaming anyone (including you) by saying this. I don't blame anyone neither support nor go against anyone unless I have a very good reason.
Chen2chic had explained so well already. I am adding some points to that post.
Ram was a king and he had to saitisfy his subjects as it was his duty as a good king. He might have very well continued to do what he wanted ignoring what his subjects said but Ram was not that kind of person.
Ram was considered to be an ideal man by all of the people and not without reason.
First of all, a man (that too a king who was born into the mighty house of the Sun) had a reputation to live up to. His fame and honour being tarnished he'll not only put himself down but also the name of his house that has won praises throughout the ages. A slightest blemish will be blown up to a big issue. Not only that, Ram wished that his fame and the Suryavanshi's must be carried over through the future ages and any honourable man would have wished for the same. Hence, he could not allow even a small blemish on his honour. For that, his people must not find a single fault in him and his rule. Its is definitely not easy.
Secondly, Ram did not test Sita. It was Sita who decided to enter the fire. Ram, when Sita was brought in front of him told her that he had done his duty and that she was free to go anywhere she wanted. Sita on hearing these words chose to enter fire and asked Lakshman to build a pyre and entered it with an oath of chastity saying that if she was entirely pure, Agni Dev should protect her. She came out unscathed and was accepted by Ram. The reason Ram had spoken thus was not because he doubted Sita but as the norms of the society those days were completely against a woman leaving the house especially spending even one night alone in another man's home. Thus he had to uphold his duty or else people would have said that he loved the woman (Sita) so much to accept her again blindly. Ram never doubted Sita. This step also proved to the world that she was the most chaste in all the world.
Thridly, the reason Ram chose to banish Sita was this. Ram could not answer the rumours - the people had spoken so badly and he had no answer. The people were against Kaikeyi but she had asked for the two boons that was promised to her. I am saying that what she did was correct. She had changed and realised her mistake and had paid dearly for what she did. A king can forgive a person who had realised her mistake and give them a second chance. When this was so with any ordinary person, he cannot be so harsh to his mother. The people have to accept the king and the queen. Sita was Ram's wife and his responsibility. She was Ram's wife whether he banished her or not. But she could never be the queen when the people did not accept her. Ram fulfilling his duty as a husband did not abandon her just anywhere in the forest but near a gret sage's ashram so that she will be cared for and also fulfilling the norms of banishing her to the forest.
The reason I said that Ram could not answer the rumours is this -
The washerman had asked his wife "Do you think I am Ram to accept back a wife who had spent her nights away from home in another man's house?"
When the this issue spread, the rumours (from the men) were - "Now we have to tollereate our wives leaving the homes at night and speaking back that Ram himself accepted Sita back after she stayed at another's home for so long and why shouldn't you?" A king had to be the example to his subjects. When people had asked is it alright for the women folk to spend nights away from home what will Ram answer?
When the people of his country and others say that this is a country ruled by a good king whose queen had spent her days in another man's home what will Lord Ram say? When the people from other countries say that the kingdom might have women who follow their queen, how can Ram answer them and his people.
Of course he can say that she was taken back after a test of fire but they didn't believe that as well. To ask Sita to prover herself again and again would be an ultimate insult to her chastity. When the people did not believe the proof she had already given, they would definitely not believe any words from Ram either.
But posting the doubts of the people, I do not believe these rumours. I am just posting what I have thought about.
Again I say this, I don't mind helping anyone who wants to learn more but I'd consider it a wate of time if the person is not receptive enough. If there are things you don't agree you can give valid reasons as to why you disagree.
