SKR-Of loops and symbolisms#5: Hard way and Smart Way : P.88 - Page 92

Originally posted by: shruthiravi

7/10/2016

Yesterday's episode had many pertinent questions. The most prominent one being justice for Sita. But before I come to that I will look into the aspects of why Sita's murti and why Ram didn't search Sita. And Sita's dialogue I am the cause of sadness and I am the cause of happiness.

First and the foremost Luv-Kush says if Ram has kept Sita it means he has accepted Sita. Then why instead of searching Sita in the jungle, he is keeping murti. That means he is egoistic. Yes it is a very valid question. But the point here is this is where we have to differentiate Ram the king and Ram the husband.

Before I come to discuss on that let me take you back to the Juvenile Justice Law amendment. This law was not amended for ages. And even in the case of the 26/11 terrorist Ajmal Kasab the defense had tried to make use of this law telling Ajmal is a juvenile. But I guess the bone marrow test or something of that sort proved him to be above 18 and he was tried as adult. But the point is if the test had proven him to be juvenile no judge would have been able to give him death penalty. He could have got the maximum 3 years punishment. It is different what the judge feels as a person, but when he sits on the chair he can take decision only on basis of what is written in IPC. Same happened with the juvenile of Nirbhaya case.

And even when I write this today in the rarest of rare gesture Supreme Court is going to hear the review plea on its judgement in the sensational Soumya rape and murder case in an open court. Visitors, media persons are allowed to witness the trial. Govindachamy the prime accused in the case has been let off the noose by SC based on a technicality. He was awarded the noose by both the fast track and Kerala High court. The judgment was criticized not only by the civil society but also by many prominent judges and lawyers across the country.

Now what is the difference between juvenile of Nirbhaya case and Govindachamy in Soumya case. In the former judge cannot do anything because IPC says so. But in the latter the judge has to look at the overall picture and not one technicality that is missing. Because in Govindachamy's case section 302 can be imposed even if Soumya has jumped from the train. What do you expect a girl to do whose head is smashed against the door of the train and a man is trying to rape her. Last ditch attempt to protect her honor she jumped. And the animal called Govindachamy ( sorry I am not civil enough to call him human) raped this girl who was lying in the track half dead with serious head injury. Attack, forcing to death and brutal rape. Does section 302 looks improbable. The technicality the SC argued was no evidence Govindachamy pushed. Does only physical push classify for section 302. These were some of the questions that were raised in Soumya case.

Now let us come back to SKR. Ram was not the judge of Soumya case. He was the judge of Nirbhaya juvenile case. As per the law of the land he had to banish his queen. Because the law says so. Ram the husband loves his wife, but Ram the king has to take decision based on law. Same thing applied by Shatrughna.

So can the amended juvenile justice law applied to Nirbhaya killer. No. It can be used only in future. Same is with Sita. If Sita is called back that means Ram didn't understand the laws and made a judgement. No. Ram made the judgement perfectly as per the existing laws. So here it is not Ram, but the laws are outlived. It is not Ram, but laws need change. Calling back Sita would have meant again Ayodhya will escape. Ok we repented, Maharani is back. Everything backs to normal. While the law remains the same. To ensure law is changed Sita should not be called back.

Ram delivers on the vachan to his praja that he will rule as per the law and to his wife that he will only have one wife. Sita banishment is based on the law of Ayodhya. A woman who stayed in other man's premise is impure. So Ram the king and Ram the husband becomes correct in keeping the murti and not searching Sita. It has nothing to do with Ram's ego or Ahankaar, but it creates the beautiful perception of ego and Ahankaar for Luv-Kush to question him.

Now Sita's dialogue 12 years back she was the cause of sadness and now she is the cause of happiness. See when Mahalakshmi is send away from a home can anybody be truly happy. Will the kingdom have prosperity in real sense. They thought by having her as Queen the maryada is getting polluted, but after her banishment these people were afraid to look inward and lived in misery. She is the cause of happiness. Because Sita who went away 12 years back had lot of questions, unanswered grievances, still it is the vachan that Ram gave to her and her kids that kept her going. But Sita of today has her questions answered when she sees the murti and she blesses Ayodhya. That means true happiness will comeback. By staying true to her Raghunandan has ensured she brings only happiness to Ayodhya.

Now last but not the least. Justice. Savitha justice is not yet served for Shanta. It will be served only when laws of Ayodhya change. It will be served only when the society who rejected girls like her, gets rejected by a woman when Sita does Bhoomipravesh. That is the justice for Shanta. Rejection of Ayodhya and its one sided rules that are tilted unfavourably against woman by refusing to come back.

Let us come back to Luv-Kush. Actually they reminded me in a way of Arjuna standing against Bhishma in MB. What is the difference between Arjuna and Luv-kush. Why Arjuna had to be given knowledge of dharma by Krishna, why Luv-Kush didn't need it. Reason is perception. Luv-Kush doesn't know who Ram is. For them he is an unjust king. Arjun knows who is Bhishma to him. His Pitamaha. Interestingly Luv-Kush are Ram's blood children, while Arjuna has no blood connect with Bhishma. Still Arjuna hesitates to take the bow. If they had grown up in palace, their perception would have been different. They would have imbibed the toxic Raghukul ki maryada. But growing up in a pristine environment has instilled in them a sense of dharma that is inline with rules of Prakriti.

Luv telling horse would have made many places under Ram's kingdom. If it is comes to Valmiki Ashram it will also become Ram's kingdom. They will not allow that. Now what is the symbolism of it. People under Ayodhya means, people under its toxic Sanskriti and toxic laws. Valmiki Ashram is a place where Sanskriti and Prakriti co-exist. If you allow the toxic Sanskriti to enter Valmiki ashram then that place also will lose its purity.

So the boys are not battling against Ram, but they are battling against the toxic sanskriti of Raghukul. Same principle Krishna tells Arjuna. You are not fighting the person, what they are trying to protect.

If you look they tell Laxman if he really cared for Sita, he should have stayed with her and took care of her. He shouldn't have left her in jungle because the king told so. In the question to Laxman Luv-Kush tell him if he had wanted, he could have raised the voice against the adharma that is being done to Sita. When adharma happened to Ram and when at the receiving end was Kaikeyi all the 3 brothers were quick to punish her and show their allegiance with dharma. But while on the receiving end was a woman and it is the man who did adharma why the same voice didn't come out. It was a beautiful question on gender disparity. How the so called people who tell who follow dharma are also biased. Ram's hands were tied. As he is the judge. But were the hands of brother's tied. Bharath argued on Dharma with Ram. Why they couldn't have argued on Dharma with Ram again. Here is the beauty of Rama. He had given his brothers freedom to defend his bhabi if they had wanted, whereas Yudhi takes away that freedom from his brother's when he makes them slave one after another. Unfortunately none of the brothers rise to the occasion.

Even now Laxman has his ego. Yes he says what happened to Sita is bad, but he has to protect Ayodhya's sanskriti. When it comes to that sanskriti it doesn't matter to Laxman he is going to fight 12 year boys. Because Ayodhya Sanskriti is over and above the right questions of the youngsters. They are asking justice for Sita. Instead of telling let me see what can be done, Laxman raising his dhanush means he has chosen adharma.

Parallel is Abhimanyu in Chakravyuha. 16 year old is brutally murdered to protect the system. Parallel is Soumya judgement. Technicality is used to defend a criminal like Govindachamy. Used to protect the perpetuators of a worst crime against a woman. Rape.

Ram was the judge of Nirbhaya case. He had to go as per law. But his brothers and other Ayodhya vasis could have discussed the futility of such a law, questioned Ram, challenged Ram. They didn't do it because according to them what Ram did was dharma. Same thing with Panchali. When she raves and rant the whole kurusabha stands mute because they feel what is happening to her is dharma.

A Valmiki was needed to awake luv-Kush towards Dharma. A Krishna was needed to awake Arjuna towards Dharma. We have to see awakening always happens through a third party who observes both sides neutrally and then comes to the decision of what needs to be changed.

Pls avoid quoting more than twice. It is the thread rule. Moreover it takes a long time to load. 😃

@naq I guess ram was the only one who tried to change the law and it did happen then.

Guys Friday epi was a beauty. Need some time to write as I have to connect it with mb. Will post as soon as I get some time. .naq when arjuna stood against bhishma it was questioning. When luv kush tie aswamedha horse it is questioning. Those days symbols meant a lot.But today we need dialogues as most of us don't understand ancient symbols its meaning. Way of questioning was different but in every yuga questions were raised. Sanju coming to mythology I have views. Will make a detailed one when I am a bit free after festivals

7/10/2016

Friday's epi reminded me of Star MB a lot. Will tell you why. But before that it was another loop closure Yesterday Sita faced the tough question. Her sons were telling her they are doing what she has taught them. To always stand for what is right and question what is wrong.

But Sita the wife, Sita the kulvadhu, Sita the mother is traumatized by her son's decision. Reason in their quest for justice they are fighting their father's decision, they are fighting with their relatives. Her kids whom she wanted to be the kul deepak's of Ayodhya are now threatening the existence of that kul itself. What should she do. Should she tell the truth. Here we see Sita's dilemma with respect to being a woman and being the multiple roles she plays in the society. It's a natural dilemma.

Go back, go back where Sita tells Mandodari what was your duty as a woman when Mandodari she has done the duty of a wife. Sita tells Mandodari the duty of a woman is to ensure her husband walks on the path of dharma, and if he doesn't then if it was her she will reject him. If Sita has not shown in practice what she had told Mandodari then it would have remained theory. Sita the wife was fine with Ram's vachanpalan, but is Sita the woman satisfied with the justice system of Ayodhya. If she had accepted it as justice as a woman Sita would also be like any other woman. But when her kids comes saying if she is unhappy they will stop the fight she tells no they should not stop. They have to fight. As dharma is above everything. Rising above the roles Sita takes the decision as a woman. This is where every girl woman has to understand Sita. Because when men takes decision roles come secondary to them, they take it as men. And since they know when they take decision as men they propogate their superiority they have ensured or created the perception that woman has to take decision based on her role. Sita says during vanvass it is her decision as a woman, today also she took it as a woman. At times rise above the roles. Think as a woman. Men have created better world for men. What kind of world we want to give our sisters, daughter's. Don't tolerate injustice. Stand up, fight show them a path. And if you have sons ensure they grow up respecting their mother so that they question the injustice shown to woman in any form.

Now why Panchali of Star MB. I don't know how many have seen it. Uttara's mother tells Panchali that she has agreed for Uttara's alliance with Abhimanyu because Krishna had told her Uttara's son will be the king. Uttara's mother didn't see the real meaning behind what Krishna said. But Panchali she runs, runs behind Krishna and questions him. Of the children her son born to Yudhi is the eldest and ideally lineage should go from him. Why he wont be king. For that matter why Abhi wont be king. She tells will they die. To which Krishna nods. The lady cries. The woman who demanded justice tells Krishna she doesn't want war if it means losing her kids. She is fine the way she is. Krishna tells her it is her putramoh that makes her say this and that night in Virat Sabha the story of Krishna's birth is shown.

Devaki a woman who saw the brutal murder of her 6 children, suffered through that pain which no ordinary woman would be able to undergo to give the world her 8^th born. For dharma she sacrificed her 6 kids. She knew what is the fate of each of her child from the time her 2^nd kid was born. Still she trusted the prophecy to give birth to her 8^th born. Actually it is a very beautiful scene where Narayan comes in front of this traumatized woman telling her, he is coming as her 8^th child as Poornavatar, choosing her as mother and asks her permission to enter her womb. Her one son makes her immortal. The pain she underwent in giving birth to him, he gave the knowledge to the world to stand up and fight adharma as Bhagavat Gita.

So Krishna tells Panchali it is the duty of a mother to give her sons for the fight of dharma. If she refuses then adharma will flourish. What happened to her will happen to her daughter, her daughter in law. Today she holds the power to establish dharma. Should she let go of that opportunity in the name of Putra moh. Panchali chooses the sthree dharma over and above her role as mother, wife.

Now what we need to understand is Sita knew her Sthree dharma, Krishna had to direct Panchali towards her sthree dharma. Same with Ram. He knew his maryada, Krishna had to direct Arjuna towards maryada. Actually Krishna has given that knowledge to us humanity in the form of BG for every woman to understand her sthree dharma and every man to understand his maryada so that they compliment each other. I will always say and again repeat if you are thirsty of real knowledge bow in front of Krishna as Arjuna or Panchali. If you surrender to him the way Arjuna surrendered or Panchali surrendered he will guide you. Knowledge will reach you through various means to lead a better life. A life of fulfillment, a life of co-existence, a life filled with love in relations.

Last part the way Luv-Kush treat Lakshman. Now if you see Lakshman plays by the rules of war as the boys are also playing by rules. Why. Because he is guided by Ram. Lakshman knows if he uses any indirect means for victory against this youngsters his brother wont forgive him. For Ram maryada matters. He practices it and has ensured his brothers do the same. We don't see everyone surrounding the kids and attacking them.

This is where the problem happens in MB. Such dharma doesn't exist in Kuru army when Abhi enters. When he defeats each warrior individually to win at any cost they surround and kill him. In Kaliyug it is worse. We need to understand that system has power. Very huge power. People will do anything to safeguard power. If you don't understand the power of system you will belike Abhi in Chakravyuha. Half knowledge. If you have to break chakravyuha you have to understand power. How it works, how it moves. If you react to power you will lose. The game is making power react to you. Which is only possible if you take the right direction with proper guidance.

You can always question the system. But unless you can make the power react to you, you cannot win against the system. For that you have to burn.Like Ram did. Like Arjuna did, like Sita did, like Panchali did.

Guys I will not be posting analysis tomorrow as tomorrow is Saraswati pooja where the books are kept in front of Maa Saraswati and we dont read or write till books are taken on the morning of Vijayadashami. So will put the analysis on tuesday only.

Updated Chapter 101 Seven Vows. Do read and comment

@Meena thanks a lot for making this post a sticky. But I would really thank my readers for making it happen. Because unless you enjoyed it, derived something from it, this wouldnt have been possible

Happy Saraswati Pooja shruthi Di.
Devaki trusted the prophecy to give birth to her 8^th
born. Actually it is a very beautiful scene where Narayan comes in front of
this traumatized woman telling her, he is coming as her 8^th child as
Poornavatar, choosing her as mother and asks her permission to enter her womb. Her one son makes her immortal. The pain she
underwent in giving birth to him, he gave the knowledge to the world to stand
up and fight adharma as Bhagavat Gita.


One thing in BG which inspires me a lot is this line, live a life according to your vision. the emotions which our epics kindle in us is something that is truly thought provoking. Star mb had presented this scene just like u have mentioned. True divinity indeed!
We should never react to the system we will surely lose if we do that. This is so true di at times people with right intend also fall into this. Interestingly we have elocution on Tuesday on woman empowerment I had prepared and today reading ur analysis on panchali and Sita. What I had prepared more or less conveys the same. Will pm u sometime later this week tell me if the essence is intact. I know u will be busy till Tuesday its just for me to know personally if what I had conveyed or rather understood is right. Thanks in advance 😃

hey ppl.. i hope you all are doing well...

Happy to see you DD. Our thread has become a sticky😃. Do join when you can