a question on Ramayana and answer to it.

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhagavatas:

An interesting question has been raised by Sri Krishna Kalale. As the

subject will be of interest to all readers, I am giving below the question

and an answer to it. I request knowledgeable members to offer their inputs

also. Thanks.

 

Incidentally it is precisely for accommodating such questions and doubts

that we intend providing a "Question Box" feature in "Sri Ranga Sri"

journal. Hope you will welcome this.

Dasoham

Anbil Ramaswamy

========================================================================

Reply:

Dear Sri Kalale:

This question has been troubling me too for a long time.

(Please see the question, after the reply)

In fact, I posed the same to our Acharyas. The reply I got from them has

been incorporated in my book "Myths, Miracles and Mysticism". The relevant

excerpts therefrom is given below for your info.

========================================================================

(b) The case of Sita

 

When Sita was redeemed after the war, she was brought before Rama fully

bedecked as ordered by Rama. And, when she appeared, Rama reproached her

and she performed a rare feat of going through the fire ordeal. This is in

Yuddha Khanda.

 

When her innocence had thus already been proved once, Rama is again seen in

Uttara Khanda as banishing her to the forest when a washerman made some

unsavory remark about her-long, long after their return to Ayodhya.

 

It is questioned,under what kind of jurisprudence, past, present or future

that she was banished - a second punishment for the same offence from which

she had already been exoneated.

 

Rajaji in his Ramayana (published by BVB, 1990- p.311) offers some kind of

explanation for this.

He says -

"As the prince returned from Mithila, he met Parasurama. I have heard it

said that with that meeting Parsurama's Avatar came to an end. Likewise, it

should be held, I think, that Rama's Avatar came to an end with the slaying

of Ravana. After that battle, Rama remained only as a king of the Ikshvaku

race. On this theory, Rama's treatment of Sita after the battle and in the

Uttarakhanda can be explained as the behavior of a king in accordance with

the customs of the times".

 

He adds that "her banishment mirrors the voiceless and endless suffering of

womenfolk. Since joy and sorrow are God's play, he and his divine spouse

having come down to the world men and women had to go through the drama of

joy and sorrow like other ordinary folk."

 

Explanations given by H.H. Srimad Andavan Swami of Paundarikapuram Ashramam

:-

(i) The banishment of Sita only shows how as a king, Sri Rama respected

even the will o' wisp of even the least significant citizens in his kingdom

where it concerned his own rectitude or that of those closely associated

with him. No one would dare say anything derogatory about Sita, not because

she was the queen, but because everyone knew how the lady was pure and

serene beyond a shadow of doubt. In such a background, even the fact of an

uncharitable remark being slipped out was unthinkable and needed to be

disabused.

 

Though he was convinced personally about Sita's conduct (especially as

revealed by the fire ordeal), he had to demonstrate that he as a king, was

not carried away by a blind love to her in accepting her and was wary of the

feelings of his subjects. This, he could do only by such a draconian step as

banishing Sita to the forest.

 

(ii) Also, Sri Rama was concerned that his sons should be brought up in the

proper environment of the hermitage where only they could acquire

appropriate knowledge and build character to be able to propogate the values

unfolded in the great epic Ramayana. May be, this was another reason why he

sent Sita to the forest"

=====================================================================

The Question:

"Krishna Kalale" <kkalale1

<Ramanbil

a question on Ramayana.

Tue, 26 Dec 2000 00:18:28 -0800

Dear sri Anbil Ramaswamy

I have a different question regarding Ramayana. The way Sri Rama abandons

his pregnant wife Sita does not really reflect dharma as people see today.

there were many options for Rama :

 

1. he could have given up his throne stating I am not able to rule justly.

2. that washer man is an idiot, I am not going to abandon sita whom I know

is pure, listening to his words.

3. Or I will make arrangement to Sita to be comfortable by setting up

another home where she can be comfortable during pregnancy and childbirth

4. even criminal gets a trial. Sita never had a trial. She was just

abandoned without any misgivings, this act is very difficult for me to

understand and support the idea that "ramo vigrahavan dharmah"

 

adiyen Krishna Kalale

=======================================================================

 

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com