Doubts and Discussions from the Ramayan

First Previous

Page

119

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Deepa

@chen2chic

Navigator

Posted: 16 years ago

#961

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

As for why she didn't look at anyone - Rama, Kaushalya, Kush, Luv, et al, it's possible that she didn't want their last images of her to be that of her sorrowful face.

Chandraketu, good explanation 👏👏👏

But, wouldn't they have already seen her sorrowful face all this while?

Quote

Deepa

@chen2chic

Navigator

Posted: 16 years ago

#962

Originally posted by: loveanime

Also why would Sita want to remain in the same kingdom where people think that way about her, she is a woman of great pride she wouldnt tolerate such a thing and Ram too would rather have her away from him then see anyone dare talk about his Sita like that. Isnt this one of the morals of Ramayan that pride and honor are more important than once personal desires.

In the story of Ramayan there are also these messages about how living with Sages and Rishis is the most divine thing, you can learn great things and it is a blessing to be under their guidance. So I guess it wasnt like the first Vanvaas Sita took she was in a ashram so Ram must have known she would be blessed to be amongst them eventhough it was no Royal life.

loveanime - Your above points are so very true indeed. Ramayan does give these messages to enable us to lead a fruitful life.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

+ 6

Posted: 16 years ago

#963

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

If a husband sends his wife back to her father's home (for good), the society will think that he was not willing to live with her anymore. When a woman is given in marriage, she belongs to her husband and will not be sent back unless there is some auspicious event for which both of them attend as a couple or if the husband is displeased - in this case she comes back alone. This is what King Aswapathi did to his wife (Kaikeyi's mother). After being made a queen and then taking back her title would not have solved anything. We all know that Sita never cared for titles or status. But taking it back will be a humiliation. If she was never given the title right from the beginning it was a different issue. Either way, the people would have talked - Ram himself did not accept her fully. If Ram had married more than once, he could have made another wife the queen and Sita could have stayed with the family. But she was his only wife and not making her the queen is a humiliation in front of everyone's eyes. Its would have been even worse to ask her to step down from the throne.

I was under the impression that the people accepted her chastity. They must have - atleast after Sita went into the Earth. I agree that Ram was the one who first made the change of dividing the kingdom. Some books say that he did so to avoid what happened in his life to any of his sons or nephews (Something I am not sure whether I'd believe) He accepted his sons and gave them their own kingdoms. I agree he did not follow the practice of primogeniture but accepting his sons was the right thing to do after his wife had proved herself once again - this time infront of his own people.

I agree with Vibhishna. Stripping Sita of her title as queen, but letting her stay in the palace would be more of an insult than anything. True, Sita did not care for her title, neither did Ram, but stripping her of her title would mean that Ramji agreed with the false allegations of the praja. The same thing with sending Sita to Mithila. That would be the biggest insult of all. One must think with the mindset of Treta Yug. Today, sending someone back to parent's house is not that bad. I don't think it's even done today, because the woman can just divorce her husband😳, but anyhow, back in my parents' and even grandparents' days, it was looked down upon immensely if a girl was sent back to her parents' home. Think how it must have been in the Treta Yug!😒😭 If Sita was sent back to Janak Pur, the Mithila Praja's sympathy for her may have vanished and they could have blamed her by saying she brought dishonor upon her father's family.

And sending sita back to Mithila would mean Rama acknowledges the Praja's words and believes them himself. So no. I don't think Shri Ram had any option but exiling her. He was Raja Ram, and by then, he knew he was Lord Vishnu because Lord Brahma told him. He knew best, and he took a decision that would save Sita's honor and also the honor of the Raghukil at the same time. Who are we to say he had other options?

And plus, Sita was a strong independent woman. She did not need someone to rely upon. She did not need the royal luxuries of her father's home to be happy. And an ashram was better for her anyway, because it could provide the peace of mind which her father's home would not longer give her. And anyway, how would she live peacefully among all the luxuries without being reminded of her husband constantly? The first time she saw Shri Ram was in the Pushpa Vatika. How would she ever be able to go into that garden again without being reminded of her beloved husband? And Ramji lifted the Shiv Danush in Mithila, and Sita got married to him in Mithila. Mithila would have all the memories of Ram in it. She would never be able to live in Mithila peacefully.

And also, after Sita returned to Bhomi Devi, the praja did accept her chastity, because she proved it to them in front of their own eyes.

Quote

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

+ 6

Posted: 16 years ago

#964

Originally posted by: chen2chic

loveanime - Your above points are so very true indeed. Ramayan does give these messages to enable us to lead a fruitful life.

Yes, wonderful reply loveanime.👏

Quote

Vrish

@Vr15h

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 16 years ago

#965

Originally posted by: chen2chic
Let me put my two cents in....................
Chandra - I do agree that if there was ever a way she could be with the family, without being the queen, both she & Ram would have accepted it...

But one thing is that, though the avadhis did not want Sita to be the queen, they also did not want Ram to have ties with her right? Acc. to them, Sita was tarnishing Ram's image, she was thought to be the blackmark on Ram, so they wanted Ram to severe his relationship with her, so there was no question of her staying in the palace without a relation to Ram....

The Avadhis did have a right to who their queens were, or weren't. But they didn't have any rights or inputs into the private lives of their kings. Like Dasharath had 350 wives other than KSK, but nobody ever bothered about them. Sita's status could have been like them. In fact (while it's not in Valmiki), even Rama drew the line at a point - when some suggested that he re-marry, he rejected such popular desires. So it's not like he blindly acquiesced to everything his subjects wanted. And if he denied them the 'right' to a new queen, he would have been on the same legal plane in denying them the 'right' to a divorced/separated Sita.

Returning to parent's home was a disgrace? Somebody might want to mention that to Subhadra, who even after marriage spent most of her time at Dwaraka, except for the 12 years that the Pandavas ran Indraprastha. Same for Uloopi, who never went to Indraprastha. In fact, even after the war, Subhadra seemed to have spent most of her time in Dwaraka, except for the time that Parikshit was born and before: when Krishna returned to Dwaraka after the Ashwamedha yagna, Subhadra went with him. Did the customs change so radically between treta and dwapar yugas?

Whether Sita was queen or not was a public issue. Whether she remained Rama's wife or not was nobody's business but theirs.

Edited by Chandraketu - 16 years ago

Quote

...ASB100...

@...ASB100...

Inactive

Posted: 16 years ago

#966

for how many years/months did rama and sita live in Ayodhya after the coronation (before sita was banished)

Quote

Samiksha Birla

@Savi13

Dazzler

Posted: 16 years ago

#967

Originally posted by: winnerasha
for how many years/months did rama and sita live in Ayodhya after the coronation (before sita was banished)

even i am confused about the same..

Quote

Janaki

@RamKiSeeta

Achiever

+ 6

Posted: 16 years ago

#968

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

The Avadhis did have a right to who their queens were, or weren't. But they didn't have any rights or inputs into the private lives of their kings. Like Dasharath had 350 wives other than KSK, but nobody ever bothered about them. Sita's status could have been like them. In fact (while it's not in Valmiki), even Rama drew the line at a point - when some suggested that he re-marry, he rejected such popular desires. So it's not like he blindly acquiesced to everything his subjects wanted. And if he denied them the 'right' to a new queen, he would have been on the same legal plane in denying them the 'right' to a divorced/separated Sita.

Returning to parent's home was a disgrace? Somebody might want to mention that to Subhadra, who even after marriage spent most of her time at Dwaraka, except for the 12 years that the Pandavas ran Indraprastha. Same for Uloopi, who never went to Indraprastha. In fact, even after the war, Subhadra seemed to have spent most of her time in Dwaraka, except for the time that Parikshit was born and before: when Krishna returned to Dwaraka after the Ashwamedha yagna, Subhadra went with him. Did the customs change so radically between treta and dwapar yugas?

Whether Sita was queen or not was a public issue. Whether she remained Rama's wife or not was nobody's business but theirs.

The circumstances also matter. There's a difference in going to a parent's house for protection and because your husband sent you. It would have been a disgrace for Sita, because it would seem as if Rama was disowning her and believing the allegations made by his praja. But the Pandavas were exiled, and Indraprastha was no longer theirs. They had no home or property to call their own. Their wives had no protection, so it would not be disgrace at all to stay in their parents' home. What do you expect? Them trying to seek protection from Duryodhan?

And to go to a parents' home for a visit with the permission of their husband is also not disgraceful. Sita also would have gone to her parents' home shortly into her pregnancy had the praja not doubted her, because it was a common custom that a woman would deliver her child in her parents' home and return after that. The Baby Shower was also customarily done in a parents' home.

So there's a difference between being exiled to a parents' home by a husband and going on your own accord with the husbands' permission, or sometimes, along with him. So you can't compare Sita with Subhadra. The praja never doubted her, and she was not the chief queen of Indraprastha. Draupadi was the chief queen, and she went into exile with her husbands. Moreover, there never came a time when Subhadra's chastity became a doubt, and a possibilty of her exile arose.

And of course customs changed drastically between Treta and Dwapar Yugs, just like they changed drastically between Dwapar and Kali Yugs. Ulupi does not even come into consideration when comparing with Sita. Ulupi was what, the 2nd wife of Arjun? And Arjun was the 3rd brother, so he was not even King. Where she spent her time was beyond the care of the Indraprastha praja. Moreover, she was a Naga Kanya, and their customs differed from humans, just like the Vanaras customs differed from humans.

Quote

purvi

@coolpurvi

Voyager

Posted: 16 years ago

#969

Great discussion going on

Congrats to Ananya on becoming a goldie. Keep posting n enlighten us dear

I want to share my views on some of the issues raised here

@ sending sita to her father's house instead of valmiki Ashram

Sending wife to her father;s house is not always insulting as Subhadra , ulupi, chitrangada too live in her father house. But those circumstances were totally differnt.. Sending wife to her father's house when people were gossiping abt her chastity is indeed very insulting. Who knows people of Mithila wud hav started saying the same or wud have casted the same doubt . Common mass follow the trend ..the wave . they have sympathy for Sita because she suffered all these. who knows they too might have behaved like Avadhis after some years. doubts need no logic . they r highly infectious . they can spread like anything n can spoil vivek (right judgment ). What was done by Lord Ram was apt for that situation

@ taking away from her title of queen n allowing her to live in Ayodhya in place of sending her to ashram

Whole purpose of sending her to valmiki Ashram was to uphold her honour . People forgot all her sacrifices. The only thing they remembered was her abduction.....her stay in lanka.
Sita has been described as Ram's ego by Valmiki. Her honour was more dearer to him than his own

For pregnant Sita after getting stripped from the queen titlle because of Avadhis n then stay in Ayodhya in palace of any queen mother or stay in mithila wud have been very insltuing. This wud have made her very weak. N what abt Luv kush they too wud have never got their rights n honour had Ram not sent her to Valmiki Ashram when she was pregnent. No one knew where Sita was sent except Ram n Laxman. For Avadhis it was abandonment which they wanted. Valmiki Ashram was more pious than Ayodhya infact the best place then where she cud take refuge. All such dirty slander wud have made her life miserable. Ayodhya had turned very unsympathetic to her. Raghuvanshis never worried for comfort or luxuries. Ram has seen her strength during vanwas. He was confident that Sita can lead Ashram life n can give good upbringing to luv kush. He knew that her sacrifice will one day make Avadhis feel ashamed of their thoughts.Ram wanted to show that he is not blinded by "moh " of Sita at he same time he has never severed marriage tie with her n Sita is worthy of being worshiped as epitome of purity. . Uttar kand gives true lesson of love n sacrifice. As king if he can abandon Sita for his subjects at the same time as husband he can renounce all royal luxuries for her. He didnt marry for second time n led a hermit life in palace to give give message to world that as king he abandoned her but as husband he has always respected her. That's why he installed her golden statute for performing Yagna