Srimad Ramayan EDT Week #4 Jan 22 - Jan 26 - Page 39

Originally posted by: RamAayeHain

Sita Mata's purity was also the truth dear, Dharma can never be unfair to good people. Best example is Mahabharat those who followed dharma got valour and those who didn't got death.

I can never doubt the love he had for ma Siya and that's why understood the reason for Agni Pariksha

I have posted one topic also named Ram Rajya in Valmiki Ramayan which describes how Ramji was with his praja

And I don't believe Uttarkand is true that's why I said it doesn't make sense to me, scholars also said its later edition to glorify cast system and male dominated society. I have not yet read it fully but have read some points and summaries which just don't match with Ram ji's qualities mentioned in all 6 previous kaands.

I could be wrong and maybe Ram ji had left Maa Siya so peace remains in society but then how till 10000 years he was the best King for both men and Women, didn't any Women questioned him why he left his wife, they all can't be very understanding of each and every aspect of his relations right?

I completely resonate with this . Even if we say the decision was not that of a husband but a king . Even then it seems unfair . Does Sita as a wronged woman not come under praja ?

Isn't it raj dharma that says even one innocent cannot be punished , even if u let go 10000 criminals ? Isn't it a king's duty to show the right direction to praja ?

The woman in me can never make peace with Sita's banishment no matter how many explanations I hear and read . None gives my heart peace . None

The 2 major questions that come to my mind are

1) Ahalya's chastity was actually violated , even though she may not be at fault . Yet Ram gave her moksha . Here toh Sita is chaste and she proved it .

2) Sita is divine . Ravan was cursed . Hence Sita's chastity was intact . Yet she is banished .

But what if it's an ordinary woman whose honour is violated . How can it be raj dharma to banish the victim instead of giving her protection and sheltor . So a woman raped by a man even though faultless has no protection in Ram Rajya and will be outcasted from the society ? Is this not victim shaming ?

3)What was the fault of the unborn kids of Sita ? Why should they be punished

( I am reading Valmiki Ramayan sarga by sarga in the hope that I will get some answers about uttar kand mystery )

Originally posted by: vaidharbhi95

I completely resonate with this . Even if we say the decision was not that of a husband but a king . Even then it seems unfair . Does Sita as a wronged woman not come under praja ?

Isn't it raj dharma that says even one innocent cannot be punished , even if u let go 10000 criminals ?

The woman in me can never make peace with Sita's banishment no matter how many explanations I hear and read . None gives my heart peace . None

The 2 major questions that come to my mind are

1) Ahalya's chastity was actually violated , even though she may not be at fault . Yet Ram gave her moksha . Here toh Sita is chaste and she proved it .

2) Sita is divine . Ravan was cursed . Hence Sita's chastity was intact . Yet she is banished .

But what if it's an ordinary woman whose honour is violated . How can it be raj dharma to banish the victim instead of giving her protection and sheltor . So a woman raped by a man even though faultless has no protection in Ram Rajya and will be outcasted from the society ? Is this not victim shaming ?

3)What was the fault of the unborn kids of Sita ? Why should they be punished

( I am reading Valmiki Ramayan sarga by sarga in the hope that I will get some answers about uttar kand mystery )

I agree dear and that's why I don't believe in Uttarakhand of Valmiki Ramayan, seriously it doesn't make sense

Yuddhkand ending in book was like happily ever after thing I don't know who added Uttarkand, it just doesn't contradict Ram ji's characterisation but also many other facts which are mentioned in previous 6 kaands.

Regarding Ahilya maa you know in Valmiki Ramayan its mentioned that she knew that the man who has came in hut is actually not her husband and that's she had to suffer for these many years, dharma and karma doesn't differentiate between man and woman, it always gives you the consequences of your own action

Sita Mata was pure in her actions and nature so I don't think Ram ji did that to her. Uttar Kand is very debatable topic

From Valmiki Ramayan

He came to Ahalya and addressed her in these words. “O one who is well proportioned! Those who seek pleasure do not wait for the time of conception to arrive. O slender-waisted one! I desire to have intercourse with you.” O descendant of the Raghu lineage! She knew that it was the one with the one thousand eyes in the garb of a sage. However, because of her curiosity, the evil-minded one acceded to what the king of the gods wanted. Satisfied in her heart of hearts, she told the best of the gods, “O best among the gods! I have been satiated. O lord! However, leave this spot quickly. O lord of the gods! O one who shows honours! Always protect me and your own self.” Indra laughed at these words and told Ahalya, “O one with the excellent hips! I am also satiated. I will go back to where I have come from.” After the act of intercourse, he emerged from the cottage. O Rama! He was terrified and scared that Goutama might return. He saw that the great sage, Goutama, was entering. He was full of the strength of austerities and the gods and danavas found him impossible to withstand. He blazed like the fire and was wet with water from various tirthas.

Originally posted by: RamAayeHain

Sita Mata's purity was also the truth dear, Dharma can never be unfair to good people. Best example is Mahabharat those who followed dharma got valour and those who didn't got death.

I can never doubt the love he had for ma Siya and that's why understood the reason for Agni Pariksha

I have posted one topic also named Ram Rajya in Valmiki Ramayan which describes how Ramji was with his praja

And I don't believe Uttarkand is true that's why I said it doesn't make sense to me, scholars also said its later edition to glorify cast system and male dominated society. I have not yet read it fully but have read some points and summaries which just don't match with Ram ji's qualities mentioned in all 6 previous kaands.

I could be wrong and maybe Ram ji had left Maa Siya so peace remains in society but then how till 10000 years he was the best King for both men and Women, didn't any Women questioned him why he left his wife, they all can't be very understanding of each and every aspect of his relations right?

Yes - sitaji was truth, IF- he had to prove that King's life is not his own - his life is of his praja's - he cannot put personal life over praja's wish / thinking... understood.

However, I too wonder that - if women did not have rights to express their believes or thoughts about sitamata, how would they complain about themselves if they were abused or accused of something back then ???

How/why was that time called 'Ram rajya' then (if women had no voice) ???

In sitamata case, ram did not solve her problem, he just went with the flow and eliminated the issue.

Originally posted by: A4Anjie

Yes - sitaji was truth, IF- he had to prove that King's life is not his own - his life is of his praja's - he cannot put personal life over praja's wish / thinking... understood.

However, I too wonder that - if women did not have rights to express their believes or thoughts about sitamata, how would they complain about themselves if they were abused or accused of something back then ???

How/why was that time called 'Ram rajya' then (if women had no voice) ???

In sitamata case, ram did not solve her problem, he just went with the flow and eliminated the issue.

Bold - you answered it yourself 🤷 and still stand firm on my saying this didn't happened, they ruled together 🤷

He cannot put personal life above praja's wish, Sita mata was his praja as well , he didn't eliminated the problem because problem didn't occurred at the first place due to Agni pariksha 🤷

Originally posted by: Moonks

you mean it was possible to exile them for lifetime?

No

For 14 years I meant

Originally posted by: vaidharbhi95

Yeah but it didn't seem satisfactory to me . She kind of saved Dasharath from dharmsankat but the the actual promise was to make Kaikeyi's son only right?

It was large hearted of Kaikeyi to modify the vachan ..

See

Here they have shown since childhood Kaikeyi knew Ram will be Raj Kumar and king of Ayodhya

Dashrath declared During Ram birth to praja that your Rak Kumar is here

They grew up accepting this only

it was purely Kaikeyi ego that Dastarh is not valuing her now - how dare he? Which is not right.
just to satisfy your ego that you were not given that importance, you are snatching his happiness and most importantly Ayodhyawasi rights

With time specially after children birth, the priority changes

Originally posted by: RamAayeHain

aapki complain logo ki complain se bahut alag hai

This production do romanticize things more though, but ramayan kitni baar dekh padh li hai ki ab this version also seems fresh

And I really loved the brother's scenes very much

And Ram Siya ke scenes I always love

I didn’t see romance .. I don’t like to use this word personally. It was pure love full of admiration and respect.

All three brothers and sisters didn’t utter a word during ritual - they just smiled seeing each other - Ab itna bhi na dikhaye to kaise lagega - shaadi kar rahe hai ya jung mein ja rahe hain

Ramji and Sitaji gave samman to each other through words while collecting sand

I loved how they are showing Sneh between different relationships

Originally posted by: A4Anjie

I read somewhere.

- it was all vishnu's wish/order (to sarswati) - saraswatiji controlled kaikayi while asking for two boons and also controlled siya before siya haran (otherwise she would not think it, forget about saying - it was not siya, sarswathiji spoke from the body of siya) - to help vishnu to success in his plan .... fulfil the aim he came on earth for.. just like mahadev had vishwamitra to help ram to reach siya...

Yes

Sitaji became nimnit for Ravan destruction …so drama made her pushed Laxmanji to run for Ramji But it was her mistake to cross Laxman Rekha.

Ramji was epitome of Karuna and sacrifice

If Sitaji was not haran then don’t know what punishment he would have given to Ravan

Originally posted by: A4Anjie

Whole purpose of ram avatar was - to establish maryada - how to support truth, dharma!

It was not the husband who asked siya to leave, it was The Kind Ram who felt people not trusting their queen can cause vidroh in them will ruin ayodhya's peace - he chose his ayoudhya/praja over personal life - once again to explain people - a King's duty !!

I hope to get satisfactory answer this time

I feel in a way by doing this - was he trying to save Sitaji from getting hurt by praja

Looks like Sitaji also understood and accepted his decision
They were connected through mind heart

Hope Sitaji questioned praja for doubting her and made Ramji majboor to abandon her

Today's episode was better.Nice to see some sibling bonding. I also liked that at least other characters got some importance. Definitely liking the moments when there is so much respect between Sita & to-be BILs. Good to see positive moments.