Doubts and Discussions from the Ramayan - Page 99

Originally posted by: coolpurvi

There was no such legally recognised right to elect , right ot speech n expression in those days as it exits tody in may of the civilised nations. the existence of such right totally dependent on the will of the ruler. In case of subjects of Raghuvanshi ruler such right existed because of custom or convention of this dynasty. But that too dependent upon the will of the ruler. Danda a suryaanshi was exile because of public complaind against him. Dasrath decided to make Ram king because public wanted that. I agree avadhis had no right in private life of their king. But no king how powerful he may be can ever stop his subject form thinking anything or can stop such thought from getting spread or can ever compell them to truly respect or worship anyone on whom they have doubt. Even Hitler cud not do that.

Why u want to Sita to be like one of those forgotten 350 queens? Public slander affected Ram because Sita was his ego. Sita desrved respect from subjects. Ram wanted to praja to respect her n worship her for her greatness n satitva. Is comfort everthing? Ramayan wud have never been happy ending had it not happened. Did prosecuting all Avadhis for defaming Sita or severe punishment wud have served the purpose? I think no

He rejected public demand to remarry to show them that he abandoned her only because he is king of this country but as husband he respects her. I dont agree with u that he blindly acquiesced to everything his subjects wanted. A good king is one who can foresee future n can take apt decison in present. Lord Ram had a object behind all his decisions. He knew how to react in response to any public demand n waht will be its future results.

Originally posted by: coolpurvi

Even is todays democracy public will seldom dare to do so. They never thought that Ram will take such step for their slender though they wanted it. Gossip, paraninda paracharcha r something which r as old as human civilisation. No ruler can ever completely wipe off it. They never protested openly. Gossips r never official. They were showing respect to her which was fake. I mean they were showing fake repect to her. that's why Ram employed guptachars spies to find out what public actually thinks abt Ram's administration

Originally posted by: winnerasha

I think that the fact that rama was being crowned king made the people go wild with joy. i don't think theyy knew the details of what actually happened in the exile. once they came to know of sita's abduction, etc they started speaking against her.

Coolpurvi, I was of the same opinion. It was so cruel of them to acept her being made queen and not be happy with her being queen.

When Ram, Lakshman and Sita came back all three of them were welcomed back joyously. And when the stories of their exile spread like wild fire, it became the hot topic of all the gossip.

As Lailtha Janaki said, the gossips were never official. No one came with a petition to Ram that Sit must not have been made queen but they gossipped behind their backs.

No one can ever wipe out rumours and gossips. That's why (not only Ram) but all Kings had spies and secret agents to mingle with the crowd and know the truth.

I have read from Tamil literatures, that the best way to keep spies and secret agents is that one spy should not know the identity of the other. Their identities should be kept secret from each other as well. If a King can get the same information from 2 or 3 such secret spies it will definitely be true. Sometimes, the spies themselves did not know they were speaking to the king for the king himself will listen to them in the guise of someone else. It was interesting to read all this and more.

Purvi ji, excellent points!!! Great Reply!!! 👏

Thanks purvi for your thoughts in favor of Sita. Thanks Lalitha, Vibs & Ananya for your points too...........

Also another question, is either any mention of Valmiki's existence after the Ramavatar?

I am not sure of Maharishi Valmiki's life after the end of Ram Avtaar. I have been trying to find out but no such luck till now.

I too agree that the citizens of Ayodhya were given too high a status of entering the Sarayu along with Lord Ram. I did not want to be skeptical but I still haven't found a convincing reply as to why they were allowed to accompany Ram.

Originally posted by: Mandodari

So many posts already. Looks like I've missed out on some great discussion. Vibs, I wanted to thank u for posting the Bhavabuti version. I liked that version better than the Valmiki version of the Uttarkhand.

Got to read all the posts over the weekend to catch up. 😆😆😆

You're welcome Mandodari ji.

I didn't have time to put in all the information from all the sources I have read. I just posted the most intact account of Bhavabhuti's version.

Hopefully I can find a book that gives me a word to word translation of this version. It was interesting to read it all.

Interesting discussions everybody...hehe..just thought I would drop in!😃

Originally posted by: Vibhishna

Purvi ji, excellent points!!! Great Reply!!! 👏