Vaidehi's Vanwas : Was it inevitable?

Hello Everybody, I am a fairly silent member of the forum, but there are few doubts in my mind and I look towards my fellow co-members of the forum to clear these doubts as they always do with their incredible posts.

@Ananya Ram had to deal with perceptions. Deep trenched perceptions that a woman is dispensable. If you see Ram goes around and sees none of his praja will take back the woman who was in another man's custody. They tolerate Sita being the queen just because of the power factor and nothing else. They actually don't like her as the queen, because the perception is that she is impure. How will you change perception. By living a life. How did Ram do with Aswamedha horse, a golden aswamedha horse. Same thing he is going to do with Sita. A golden statue of her in all the rituals where wife is needed with the husband. He doesn't go for second marriage which a king of those times could have easily done. He is showing the praja their reflection with the golden statue. She was sacrificed because they think her impure, not him . For him she is pure and no other woman can take her place in his life. Only that yogi life Ram led dedicated to a single woman, even in her absence breaks the perception. Guilt is there in the praja as they forced their king to live such a life away from his wife and kids.

Coming to prove her purity. yes Ram gives her the chance with his yogi like life and Sita proves her purity beyond doubt when she calls Mother Earth and disappears.

Interesting perspective Di 👏

Ram & Sita were not normal humans. They were born for different purpose.

Originally posted by: ..Ananya..

Hello Everybody, I am a fairly silent member of the forum, but there are few doubts in my mind and I look towards my fellow co-members of the forum to clear these doubts as they always do with their incredible posts.

I am not sure if Sita's Vanwas was really necessary? I was watching some previous episodes, and few doubts came to my mind.

1.) In the episode when Sita comes to know about her being bhoomija, she goes to the tree worshipped by farmers and there an old woman tells her how Sita was a devi, a Goddess to them. They considered her their protector, their benefactor, their guiding light. It was her birth that rid them of their acute sufferings. The people who consider her divine, will the same people see her as someone impure. When banished by her husband, won't these people take her in their shelter, won't these people protect her who has protected them all this while?

Was Mithila, the land of knowledge so shallow, so judgemental? Doesn't the people of Mithila not aware of Sita's divinity, purity and nature? Will they really abandon their princess to a hard life of forest?

2.)During the Ashwamedha Yagya sequence, Ram had changed a tradition which had till then be considered auspicious and unbreakable. He had changed the mindset of his population then, why couldn't he do it again? When he could do it for a horse, why couldn't he do it for his life, for his wife. He had said that change is inevitable and the biggest truth of life, then why couldn't he change the norms society had decided for women. When Ayodhya's population had stood by him then, understood what he was saying, were they really incapable of doing it again. Were they not aware of Sita's unflinching love and devotion towards their bwloved King? Did they so easily forget how she put up a fight to go to vanwaas with her husband, leaving behind all the palatial luxuries and comforts? How could they now force her to leave for this Vanwaas alone, especially now when she is pregnant?

These doubts make me think was Sita's Vanwas really necessary or inevitable? Was she given a fair chance to prove her purity and loyalty? Why was one agnipariksha not enough? Wasn't this vanwaas imposed on her?

Disclaimer: I, in no means, belittle the epic nor am I criticing Lord Rama, all I seek are answers to my doubts.

Good post. Questions like these really create doubt on validity of Uttar Ramayan which many scholars have pointed to be a later edition and not written by Maharishi Valmiki. I don't believe in Uttar Ramayan.

Originally posted by: shruthiravi

@Ananya Ram had to deal with perceptions. Deep trenched perceptions that a woman is dispensable. If you see Ram goes around and sees none of his praja will take back the woman who was in another man's custody. They tolerate Sita being the queen just because of the power factor and nothing else. They actually don't like her as the queen, because the perception is that she is impure. How will you change perception. By living a life. How did Ram do with Aswamedha horse, a golden aswamedha horse. Same thing he is going to do with Sita. A golden statue of her in all the rituals where wife is needed with the husband. He doesn't go for second marriage which a king of those times could have easily done. He is showing the praja their reflection with the golden statue. She was sacrificed because they think her impure, not him . For him she is pure and no other woman can take her place in his life. Only that yogi life Ram led dedicated to a single woman, even in her absence breaks the perception. Guilt is there in the praja as they forced their king to live such a life away from his wife and kids.

Coming to Mithila. Yes she can go there. But even there, a woman discarded by her husband, the society wont take it lightly. Also it will look bad on her father who has stood for the knowledge. People will feel if a girl is educated, liberated then her married life can go in jeopardy which is happening even today. As we blame woman's financial independence major cause of divorces. So her father's policies also can be questioned. Hence it was good for her to be in ashram. There she was free and at peace only thing was that she was living a humble life.

Coming to prove her purity. yes Ram gives her the chance with his yogi like life and Sita proves her purity beyond doubt when she calls Mother Earth and disappears. Sita rejects Ayodhya by that action of hers, yet doing all her duties towards her husband. Even today a man wants a wife like Sita, what more can be the testimonial for her purity, when a woman doesn't want a husband like Ram. Ram took the blame on his head to vindicate his spouse not then, but forever. Sita was Janaki, but Ram became Siyaram

It is actually not Vanvass if you look. Hari sends Mahalakshmi from a place where she is not valued.

Tell me a way how will you change. Even after 70 years of independence, with PM Narendara Modi speaking at every occasion " Beti Bachao, Beti Padao" with woman like Sakshi Malik and PV Sindhu gracing the Olympic podium, female foeticide continues unabated. Still kul ka Deepak is boy not a girl. If perception has to change you have to practice what you preach.

Originally posted by: mnx12

The question should be did they ever fail while setting an example for others?

May be answer is no. There can be only 1 king & Ram was the chosen one. His actions were for his people. He killed Ravan not only because he abducted Sita, but also because adharma had to end.

Sita on other side set an example for other women about importance of being an independent woman. She was inspired by Gargi as a child. Gargi had her own independent thinking & lived her life accordingly, respectfully. Valmiki made all the arrangement in his aashram for Sita to feel safe, cared & wanted.

Both Ram & Sita showed how to face challenges, how to live without compromising one's self respect.

They followed their dharma to kill adharma be it any Asura or a doubt of a common man.

Ram was not an ordinary man. Sita wasnt an ordinary woman. Which was proved by their unusual life.

Originally posted by: shruthiravi

Tell me a way how will you change. Even after 70 years of independence, with PM Narendara Modi speaking at every occasion " Beti Bachao, Beti Padao" with woman like Sakshi Malik and PV Sindhu gracing the Olympic podium, female foeticide continues unabated. Still kul ka Deepak is boy not a girl. If perception has to change you have to practice what you preach.

Ram did that. Even in her absence he remained loyal to her. That loyalty is the mirror he showed to the society.

I do not know how to explain breaking perception beyond this point. If you couldn't understand only thing I can say is that at the right time the Lord himself will make you understand why he did what he did

Originally posted by: ILTHBEB

It's not yet clarified that why could ram haven't tried to change the mentality of his objects about women that staying at another man's home can't verify any woman's character because this can be that woman's helplessness hence she compelled to stay at another man's home. Wasn't it ram's responsibility as he was considered one kind of Lords to change this kind of sense among his objects? Why he didn't try to remove the accusation came against sita to his objects rather not sending his pregnant wife in forest? What kind of lesson ram did leave for his devotees that the respect of own clan is more important than humanity? was it not a selfish act by ram? Did he not fail to accomplish his duty as husband due to wanting to be great emperor? I have no intention denouncing about ram but after watching this serial i feel his activities are similar to a normal human being not like Lord.