@Arshics,
For me Ramayan is both history and a highly revered religious text, just like the Mahabharat and Bhagavatham. I am not saying our religious texts should not be questioned, but I also feel there is a general guideline to use when questioning them. Like, personally from my point of view, there's something not right about judging the characters from a modern mindset, keeping today's beliefs and ideals in mind, because I don't feel our modern society today is perfect. It's not a great standard to judge ancient people by, because we are not devoid of crimes. Women today are still in danger everyday, in ways even worse than the ancient era. So when questioning certain actions, we should also think in the POV of those times before labeling them as right or wrong. That's just strictly my opinion.
Also, there are certain actions we do not have to question, because they are already labeled as wrong in the epic. Incidents like Dashrath shooting an arrow at Shravan Kumar thinking he was an elephant was already considered a grave crime even then, and he was cursed for it, a curse that brought about his death in the loneliest of manners. As for such things like hunting deer and other animals, it was a very common and acceptable practice back then. Forget back then, it's common even now! Yes, there may be laws in some countries against it, but people still hunt animals, and even if they don't, don't people eat animals? Non-vegetarianism is still very much prevalent in society. In fact, the rate of it has increased, and personally I don't care who eats meat and who doesn't, but if those who eat meat find hunting wrong, no offense, but isn't that rather hypocritical? Maybe you don't hunt animals, but if you eat animals for your meal, then it's more or less the same thing. So hunting animals and eating them is not something that was common then, but is also common and acceptable now. So it's not something to hold against someone unless you blame all the non-vegetarians out there of the same crime.
Also, just some general information as per Valmiki Ramayan.
1) Ahalya knew it was Indra in the form of her husband Gautam rishi. Still she chose to have an affair with him due to lust and desire. And in VR, Ahalya was never turned to stone. She was cursed to "become one" with the dust of the Earth until Ram set foot in the ashram to free her from her curse. You can read the story here.
http://www.valmikiramayan.net/utf8/baala/sarga48/bala_48_frame.htm
So Ahalya was not totally blameless. It was later versions who wrote of her being blameless in the matter. Whether she was blameless or not, Ram still sets her free from her curse, thereby giving the message to society that a woman, fallen or not, is still worthy of respect.
2) Sita was never asked to give an Agni pariksha. She chose to enter fire on her own. I shall post an excerpt from Valmiki for the whole Ram-Sita samvaad if you wish.
As for Draupadi, in Vyasa's Mahabharata (which is the main version of the epic), it is written very clearly that she looked at each brother with desire and that she was not at all unwilling. Television serials and movies dramatize this even SO MUCH and make it seem like she was forced against her will to marry them, when that was not the case. Personally, I do not see what is wrong for Draupadi to desire all five men. If men back then could remarry, why not women? The idea may not have been hers, but Draupadi was not against the idea. It was her father who protested, but she willingly married them all.
As for Karna, I will not get into a discussion of him here, as I have sooo many things to say regarding his so-called tragic life. If you are interested in discussing him, we can do so through PMs. I would be more than happy to share my views on him. Let's just say the general belief of him being a tragic hero does not hold with me.
When it comes to questioning our epics, I believe the people who did wrong were already punished for it throughout the epic, in some way or other. So Ram's message for us was already very clear. He never told us to commit those wrong actions. Whether by liberating Ahalya or eating Shabari's fruits (though she was from a low caste), he taught people not to ostracize women for faults that are not all their own. Maybe Ahalya knew it was Indra, maybe she didn't, but the fact is that it wasn't just her fault, and her punishment was too harsh, and by liberating her Ram taught the world not to view women as unequal to men. In Shabari's case, Ram taught people that everyone is equal and there are no distinctions in caste and social class. He was equal to the wealthy and poor alone.
Also, Ram may not have condemned polygamy outright, but was he not Eka patnivrat? Did he not refuse to marry any woman who approached him? Did he not give Sita the place of being the sole woman in his life? Even after Sita was exiled, Ram never gave her position to someone else. He slept on floor, he gave up royal luxuries, and he lived like a celibate until he left the Earth.
So before questioning Ram, it's important to under his incarnation deeply. He was God, and God cannot make mistakes like a normal human. That's my belief, not forcing it on anyone. My basic point is that no immoral incident was preached as the "right" way. Draupadi's vastraharan was never justified in Mahabharat. In fact, Lord Krishna highly condemned it and criticized both the Pandavas and Kauravas for their share of the blame. Lord Krishna's rescue of Draupadi proves that God protects those devotees who surrender to him without any doubt or scorn in their hearts. Yes, our puranas are full of examples of immoral actions done by various characters, but they are punished and in the end, the Lord gives an example to human kind that he will be reborn whenever unrighteousness is prevalent in the world.
Yada yada hi dharmasya glanirbhavati bharata
Abhythanamadharmasya tadatmanam srijamyaham
Paritranaya sadhunang vinashay cha dushkritam
Dharmasangsthapanarthay sambhabami yuge yuge
The meaning of these two
slokas is"
[1]Whenever there is decay of righteousness, O Bharata,
And there is exaltation of unrighteousness, then I Myself come forth ;
For the protection of the good, for the destruction of evil-doers,
For the sake of firmly establishing righteousness, I am born from age to age.
Hindi TV Shows
