What do you think about Siya-Ram? I really wanted to know your thoughts on them, considering all of the debates surrounding them especially Janaki's second exile.
These days my mind has often lingered on them, and maybe it is my mood swings but I find myself tearing up thinking about them a lot. When I think about them, I see them as lovers, a young couple in a loving marriage and then I remember the exiles and the doomed incidents. All for the welfare of us, their children.
Seeta’s second exile is a debated topic, people finding themselves blaming Rama for it. It is the same Rama who vanquished Ravana, the same Rama who wept and wept himself unconscious in agony of being separated from his wife. It is the same Rama who in grief had wandered asking trees and animals if they had seen Seeta, his deer-eyed wife, who is being accused of not trusting the wife he holds dearer than his own life.
Introspection finds people, it found me through them. No one doubts Seeta as they had done during that time, we point our fingers at Rama instead, do we not? How could he cast away his pious and devoted wife just because of some rumours and gossips?
Did Rama not take the accusations and blame on himself, and gave Seeta her well deserved respect and love that she is worthy of? I remember Krishna’s marriage to the sixteen thousand and one hundred captives of Narakasura. People condemn him for it, calling him a womaniser and what not. But the women were hailed as the junior queens of Dvaraka during that era, no one dared questioning their chastity. They too were Shri themselves.
Narayana can tolerate everything except for insults against Narayani, it is a well known fact.
Seeta was a woman of strength, merit and virtues. She was Shri, the supreme mother of the universe. Earth parted beneath her feet when she spoke, “If I have never thought about any other man than Shri Rama and if he knows it, then the earth may swallow me whole.”
She knew she was never unloved. Her husband had made a gold statue of her instead of taking a second wife for the ashwamedha yajna, he had denied heaven without her. The crown was never of importance to him, unless of course it meant that Seeta would become the queen- then Rama had accepted the crown and made her sit on the throne.
Let’s come to another of the main points here.
Ayodhya’s people were questioning the queen. As a subject, would you want your king to prefer his family more or the citizens of his kingdom? What Rama did was to maintain the stability of his kingdom. Furthermore, I can say for sure, had Rama ignored the people’s questions and turned a blind eye to it, today people would still be accusing and tearing down Janaki.
My point still stands. We accuse Rama today because they had accused Seeta yesterday. Rama did what he did so that the next day, people might blame him but never doubt Seeta.
Seeta and Rama deserved a lifetime of happiness, a love so great, no separation, no exile and no society could ever erase it.
There I said it. No one can make me call their relationship misogynistic or patriarchal.
