You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : January 1996

Rama's banishment of Sita

From: mysore sheshadri (msheshad_at_astro.ge.com)
Date: Thu Jan 18 1996 - 13:27:56 PST

I could'nt wait at the sidelines anymore! So, here goes .....

This is in response to some of the points raised by John Grimes:

1) Rama has already paid the price for doing sita's bidding in going 
through the agony of separation. You only have to read through Valmiki's
detailed narration ( in unabridged form) of Rama's suffering to 
appreciate it.
	Rama didn't have to banish himself. In the days of the Ramayana
( and even today ) any married woman who spent a long time (or, for that
 matter, a short time) in another man's house was considered tainted(
whether she was tainted or not). She was banished for this reason, not
for kidnapping.

2) I agree with your, "to banish Sita is a utilitarian solution - the
 greatest good for the greatest amount of people" theory, but it was 
necessary even when it was unfair to Sita. This is the price royalty
 have to pay for the "other privilages" they enjoy over lesser 
mortals like us. Why do you think Princess Diana wants out of the
marriage? She simply cannot handle the protocalls associated with being
"royal". 


3). As to Sugriva's incident, I don't have an explanation. Incidentally,
 you might recall Rama kills Vali by hiding behind a bush - against all
 rules of combat. I am sure it would be a piece of cake for Rama to
come out in the open and finish off Vali just as easily as you and I could 
exterminate a mosquito. I suspect Valmiki, being a very wise saint, had
good reason portray the incident the way he did. 


                                             M. Sheshadri