Doubts and Discussions from the Ramayan II - Page 44

Originally posted by: Khalrika

It is not overtly stated in Valmiki that he took the eka patni vrat but it is implied all the time. This is from my reading and what I got out of it.

I think not re-marrying was also part of his raj dharma and not just pati dharma. This is strictly IMHO, but I got the impression that he was trying to make a point to all Maharajas; that the Maharajas of the time should not marry more

No, setting an example to other rulers would be Vishnu's role as Maryada Purushottam, not Rama's role as Chakravarty Maharaj. Raj dharm at the time said nothing about how many wives a ruler could have, since rulers typically married princesses of different kingdoms to form matrimonial alliances whereby they'd all be in mutually defensive agreements, although that would usually be hard on the queens who were not the chief or favorite queens (think Sumitra).

Pati dharm, otoh, would have required that he dedicate himself to one woman in his role as husband, particularly if he gave her such a vow. Incidentally, how exactly is it implied - what are the verses that suggest it?

In short, Raj-dharm and pati-dharm had opposite goals. Raj-dharm encouraged polygamy, since it would prefer a king to have wives from as many kingdoms in order to maximize military alliances and enhance the security of the kingdoms. But the more wives one had, the more difficult it was to fulfill one's pati-dharm, which is why, for ordinary citizens, monogamy was the norm.

But more importantly, let's say, for the sake of this discussion, that Rama did give Sita such a promise. But he also promised, by marrying her, that he'd eternally protect her as long as they were both alive. If his raj-dharm could trump that promise, why couldn't it trump a far less significant promise he made to his wife? After all, the marriage was a far more serious vow than a promise he made to her just as a gesture of his love for her.

Originally posted by: Khalrika

than one wife. Also, the people of Awadh did not want Sita as their queen sitting on the throne. I don't think they asked for her banishment. It was Rama who took that decision. I am sure if Ramji had removed her from the throne and made her just his queen then the people of Awadh would not have minded.

No, we've discussed this at length before in the predecessor to this thread - and the point that time made was that the people of Ayodhya had a negative opinion of Rama for retaining Sita as his wife, not just as his queen. I happen to think the former was none of their business, but that aside, Rama banished her due to that reason, otherwise he could easily have demoted her and made her Kaushalya's attendent or something similar. In fact, I'd be interested to know what 7:43 exactly says - the sarg that deals with the rumors and innuendos.

Originally posted by: Khalrika

One more thing, the people of Awadh are the quentessential example of mob mentality. They get swayed by emotions. At one point Sita is bad and at another point Ramji is great for using her statue.

Yeah, somehow, logic seemed to be completely absent in their reasoning whatever it was they did.🤢

Originally posted by: Khalrika

To answer your question about the relevance of the statue to this yagna, according to Hindu dharma a married man cannot do any ritual big or small without his wife at his side. She has to sit beside him. If the wife is not at his side then the kusa grass (darba) is placed at his side to signify the wife (we did shradh for my father-in-law and got all this information from the priest). Ramji being a Maharaja can afford a golden statue, that is all.

Originally posted by: _LalithaJanaki_

In the previous serial, it showed the Ayodhyavasis thinking that Ram might marry the Princess of Kasi. What do the Ayodhyavasis think in this serial? I didn't get to watch the precap.

Looks like Sagars are now racing to finish this disaster of theirs by June 26. Well, whatever...

Oh, and I had a question for everyone else: Does anyone know how long we can keep discussing in this forum even after the serial ends? Because it has been a loooooooooooong time since KHMK was stopped and the forum is still accessible.

Kasi seems to be a catch-all for any kingdom being mentioned, sorta like Acme industries, foobar.com or widgets. In the previous serial too, I think Kashi was just randomly chosen.

In the precap, they only showed Nani-ji talking to Sita - they didn't show any of the Ayodhya street-side gossip. I don't know that they'd even jump to this tomorrow - probably, they were only hinting that the next thing they'll be showing is the Ashwamedha yagna.

Originally posted by: _LalithaJanaki_

Thanks for the info Khalrika.

It doesn't say in Valmiki Ramayan that Ram made the vow, but I think it implies it during the time when Shurpanakha asks Ram to marry her. Doesn't he tell her that he made a vow to take only one wife, so she (shurpanakha) should try to charm Lakshman?

Lalitha

Rama's statements to Shurpanakha said nothing about him taking a vow of monogamy: here is what he says:

3-18-2kR^ita daaro asmi bhavati bhaaryaa iyam dayitaa mama |
tvat vidhaanaam tu naariiNaam suduHkhaa sasapatnataa || 3-18-2

2. bhavati= oh, honourable one; kR^ita daaraH asmi= made, married, I am; iyam mama dayitaa bhaaryaa= this is, my, dear, wife; tvat vidhaanaam tu= to your, sort of [females,] but; naariiNaam= females; sa sapatnataa= [living] with, co-wife; su duHkhaa= will be distressing.

"Oh, honourable one, I am married and this is my dear wife, thus it will be distressing for your sort of females to live with a co-wife.

In other words, Rama put the 'blame' of not being able to marry Shurps on her, rather than on any vow he had made to Sita.

Originally posted by: ananyacool

Kanchani mama patniim cha dikshayam yajnyascha karmani |

agrato bharatah kritva gachchatvarge mahashaya||

(Let) "the golden idol of my wife and all the folk who're required in yajna along with the important members of royal family may proceed (to yajna place)with Bharata"

Thus addresses Rama to the gathering in 7-91-25

This is before Ashwamedha begins. So its not that the golden statue of Sita only mentioned in 7-99-?

and our scriptures do permit the use of golden statues of a wife. Its mentioned in "Hemadri smriti" which is a book of religious laws.

Anybody who can afford gold can make a statue of his wife it need not be that the idol should be 'life-size' ; even a smallest idol can do.

Since ramji was a king he could afford to get a life size idol of Sitaji,done

@ Khalrika di: Not 'all' of the religious duties/rituals are incomplete without a wife. Even a satyanarayana pooja can be done without a wife next to her husband. In ganesh chaturthi poojas awife is not required at all. this is followed in brahmin communities not necessarily by all of them. and as far as 'darbha' being substituted for wife's position , its strictly in case of shra^ddhas only ,as you've mentioned.

The scientific reason for using 'Kusha' grass or darbha in shraddhais because its known to act like a 'link' between you and yourPitrus/ancestors; its mentioned in vedas too.

Commonly there's no role of women in shraddhas.

Ananya

Thanks for this detail. So the decision to use a golden statue was simply Rama's alone, due to Sita's absence, and there was no other factors, like the rishis/people wanting him to marry, involved?

From reading the chapter 90 and 91 , I think nobody pressurized Rama to get married again not even the rishis nor the people of Ayodhya.

Originally posted by: Chandraketu

Ananya

Thanks for this detail. So the decision to use a golden statue was simply Rama's alone, due to Sita's absence, and there was no other factors, like the rishis/people wanting him to marry, involved?

Thanks, Ananya. Lalitha's da man!!!!😆

Yep, that's what I hate about this soap-opera twist to this tale of Rama being pressurized to marry, and Sita being distraught in the process. 😡Both this serial as well as the previous one (sorry, Lalitha). As it is, Sita had enough sadness going on in her life, not knowing whether she'd ever get Rama back again: what's the point in showing yet another painful twist in her life?😭

I'm just trying to calculate - do they have enough episodes left for all the battles K-L will be fighting, as well as the singing and all that? Ooops, what was I thinking - Bharat & Mandavi are already gone, so one less obstacle for K-L. They'll probably just fight Shatrughan, Lakshman, Hanuman and Rama.

Note that they've not learnt the Ramayan yet - which is the most significant role of theirs in the story (aside from the historical aspect that they continued Rama's dynasty), but they know how to identify medicinal herbs, they know their divyastras, they know how to use poison ivy and handle snakes. Quite some characters, our divya balaks

Ananya

Can you put here what 7:43 actually says re: what the Avadhis had to say about Sita? The whole chapter