Sometime back a friend of mine had asked about Rama leaving Sita. To provide a context, Rama was the prince of Ayodhya and was married to Sita. To honor a promise given by his father to his step mother, Rama willingly gives up his throne and goes to the forest along with his wife Sita and brother Lakshmana for a period of 14 years In the forest, Sita is kidnapped by a demon called Ravana. In an epic battle that follows, Rama defeats Ravana and returns to Ayodhya to be its king. Rama being an ideal king very sensitive to the feedback from his people, hears that there is a doubt(by a washer-man) on the chastity of his wife who has been in Ravana's custody for a long time. Though Sita is pregnant, to ensure that he is not smeared with any scandal, Rama banishes Sita to the forest. I was struggling to get a good framework to address the issue. after much thinking, I believe I have a framework.
The issue can be addressed along multiple lines of thought. The highest is at the pure spiritual level. At this level, the only reality is Brahman and every known object with a name and form is but an illusion. For example, at a microcosmic level, I am the reality. Everything in my dream is an illusion. So, from that highest perspective, the entire set of events of Ramayana are nothing but an illusion. We are like the dream characters who are questioning the behavior of Rama, another dream character. In reality, neither Rama exists nor do any of us. Just as it is pointless to understand the logic of behavior of characters in our dream, it is pointless to even understand the logic of why Rama did whatever he did.
Next, let us try to understand from the doctrine of Karma. What does this say? Any situation faced by us has a seed, something we have done or desired earlier. If I find a mango tree in my garden, I surely must have put a mango seed and not a tomato seed. So, the environment which was created of Sita being banished by Rama had as its seed something that was done or desired by each of them individually in the past. It is impossible to know how our past actions and desires manifest and when. Any manifestation of a karmic desire or action is an "algebraic result" of several desires, depending on their intensity and intent. Maybe Sita had a deep desire in previous birth to give birth to kids in a forest or she may have done something to separate a couple. Rama may have done something in previous birth to the washer-man and the washer-man in this birth was taking his karmic revenge. Karmic manifestation can never be predicted, but once it occurs can only be deduced or related to a past action/desire.
At a next level, let us analyze his behavior from his role perspective. Rama had one role as a king where he had to set an example of righteousness and his other role was as a family man and husband to Sita. A king has to be in-sync with the expectations, howsoever tough they may be of his subjects. Between his role as a king and a husband, which had the higher responsibility? With the type of stature he had, he could have ignored the washer-man's loose talk. However there is a saying, "Caesar's wife must be above suspicion", which implies that for people in high places, who are looked up to by others as a model, their actions not only have to be absolutely clean, but also appear to be absolutely clean in the minds of the public. To ensure that people do not cast any aspersions on him about defending a lady who has been with another man and which could cause societal disorder, Rama may have taken the painful decision to banish Sita.
At the next level, let us strip Rama of all divinity and see him just as a normal person in that period. We are not aware of the social environment that existed several thousand years ago. We may not be in the right mental framework to understand why Rama did whatever he did. Maybe based on the socio-cultural norms of that period(several thousand years before Chris), whatever Rama did was acceptable. We cannot apply our generation's social norms to evaluate what someone did such a long time back. During my childhood, if a boy and girl were caught talking, it would be a scandal. But today's kids would pass a judgement of my generation's stupidity. So, it is obvious that generations subsequent to Rama would pass moral judgement on his act using their own period's moral norms which may not be the right way to judge anybody's action.
Let me now take a final perspective. How often have we seen in history about absolutely sane people doing horrible things? During Hitler's regime, I refuse to believe that every one of his acolytes were mass murderers. It was sheer fear of consequences that made them do what they did. I was seeing a documentary of Stalin. Apparently Stalin ensured that a lady was imprisoned and probably killed. The lady was the wife of one of Stalin's top ministers. But Stalin made sure that the order to imprison her was signed off by her husband. So, due to whatever pressure, a person may do things which under normal circumstances he/she would never do. Maybe Rama was under such a tense environment that he did what he did.
None of this means that what Rama did was right or any justification for the act. I am just trying to think aloud about the context and what could have caused it. Hope it provides food for though!
-----------------------------------------------------------
The issue can be addressed along multiple lines of thought. The highest is at the pure spiritual level. At this level, the only reality is Brahman and every known object with a name and form is but an illusion. For example, at a microcosmic level, I am the reality. Everything in my dream is an illusion. So, from that highest perspective, the entire set of events of Ramayana are nothing but an illusion. We are like the dream characters who are questioning the behavior of Rama, another dream character. In reality, neither Rama exists nor do any of us. Just as it is pointless to understand the logic of behavior of characters in our dream, it is pointless to even understand the logic of why Rama did whatever he did.
Next, let us try to understand from the doctrine of Karma. What does this say? Any situation faced by us has a seed, something we have done or desired earlier. If I find a mango tree in my garden, I surely must have put a mango seed and not a tomato seed. So, the environment which was created of Sita being banished by Rama had as its seed something that was done or desired by each of them individually in the past. It is impossible to know how our past actions and desires manifest and when. Any manifestation of a karmic desire or action is an "algebraic result" of several desires, depending on their intensity and intent. Maybe Sita had a deep desire in previous birth to give birth to kids in a forest or she may have done something to separate a couple. Rama may have done something in previous birth to the washer-man and the washer-man in this birth was taking his karmic revenge. Karmic manifestation can never be predicted, but once it occurs can only be deduced or related to a past action/desire.
At a next level, let us analyze his behavior from his role perspective. Rama had one role as a king where he had to set an example of righteousness and his other role was as a family man and husband to Sita. A king has to be in-sync with the expectations, howsoever tough they may be of his subjects. Between his role as a king and a husband, which had the higher responsibility? With the type of stature he had, he could have ignored the washer-man's loose talk. However there is a saying, "Caesar's wife must be above suspicion", which implies that for people in high places, who are looked up to by others as a model, their actions not only have to be absolutely clean, but also appear to be absolutely clean in the minds of the public. To ensure that people do not cast any aspersions on him about defending a lady who has been with another man and which could cause societal disorder, Rama may have taken the painful decision to banish Sita.
At the next level, let us strip Rama of all divinity and see him just as a normal person in that period. We are not aware of the social environment that existed several thousand years ago. We may not be in the right mental framework to understand why Rama did whatever he did. Maybe based on the socio-cultural norms of that period(several thousand years before Chris), whatever Rama did was acceptable. We cannot apply our generation's social norms to evaluate what someone did such a long time back. During my childhood, if a boy and girl were caught talking, it would be a scandal. But today's kids would pass a judgement of my generation's stupidity. So, it is obvious that generations subsequent to Rama would pass moral judgement on his act using their own period's moral norms which may not be the right way to judge anybody's action.
Let me now take a final perspective. How often have we seen in history about absolutely sane people doing horrible things? During Hitler's regime, I refuse to believe that every one of his acolytes were mass murderers. It was sheer fear of consequences that made them do what they did. I was seeing a documentary of Stalin. Apparently Stalin ensured that a lady was imprisoned and probably killed. The lady was the wife of one of Stalin's top ministers. But Stalin made sure that the order to imprison her was signed off by her husband. So, due to whatever pressure, a person may do things which under normal circumstances he/she would never do. Maybe Rama was under such a tense environment that he did what he did.
None of this means that what Rama did was right or any justification for the act. I am just trying to think aloud about the context and what could have caused it. Hope it provides food for though!
-----------------------------------------------------------
