The story Ramayana* is his entire life journey starting from his innocent youth, his mastery over skills in winning Sita, his role as dutiful and obedient son to adhere to his father’s words while aware of the flagitious intensions of his step mother. He gives up all the worldly richness and sets away to spend 14 years in jungle. Sita being his wife accompanies him followed by Laxman, Ram’s younger brother.
They spend quite an adventurous and romantic** life in the forest. Sita finds her world in her husband Ram and experiences an unspelled love for him. Everything works fine when one day, Sita gets abducted by Ravana while Ram is away to fulfill one of her impossible wishes. Ram does everything possible to get back his love. He gathers a huge army, builds a bridge across an ocean, does all that he could. Finally, he succeeds to kill Ravana and gets her back. With this they complete 14 years of stay in jungle and they return to their kingdom after which they should have lived happily ever after.
But the story takes turmoil instead, Ram’s story ends here and Sita’s story begins. This happens when a subject of Ram’s kingdom whispers “how could Ram trust Sita, who been with Ravana for so long”. Ram wants a test now, Agni-Pareeksha – A test to check purity of a woman, by entering into fire. Exactly this part of the story becomes hard to digest. This is where so many questions arise and is left unanswered.
- Did it serve right for a person like Ram ‘the so called God’ to come down to such a cruel act?
- Is he setting example for all men or rather his followers to commit such an act?
- Or is he doing right by following well set example from his predecessors?
- Ram must have done justice to his kingdom? But why not to his wife? Had he really loved her he wouldn’t have banished her at such a crucial moment. Continue reading “Sitayana – Sita’s Epic”
Women always had been easy preys for all the experiments of men. Men decide what “their women” wear; they talk, walk and even breathe. Its common mentality that “Dignified” women don’t sit cross legged; they don’t talk loud in a group, don’t attend social functions, travel as much alone as “their” men. What is Unfortunate is even lot of women think “why do we need freedom?”
There are several rules to live as women. They are called grandmother rules. Some of them are …
- Do not go walk around in any crowded public place…
- Don’t ever make eye-contact with a strange man, …..
- Any woman who sits in a restaurant alone or …..Etc etc.
One of the major reason people give for molestation is “cloths”. The dress she wears, the way she behaves in public, is inviting trouble. These are very strong point justifying perverts “rights”. I read a bold post on this topic, by wannabe punk. It says
Mentally you are traumatised. Paranoia takes over. You don’t even want to wear the same clothes that you were wearing “that” day. The day you finally come to terms with it, is the day you get harassed again. All the pseudo bravado is shattered
It is as baseless as saying that you got robbed because you were carrying a lot of money. Poor robber what was he supposed to do? He couldn’t control himself, because you were carrying a lot of money so it’s your fault, not the robber’s. It is as absurd as that. So wear what you want
But one thing is for sure. In India a normal woman never give a damn about it “it’s been happening since ages, lets tolerate one more generation”.
This is one of the hymns, much quoted on freedom of women. It says:
पिता रक्शति कौमरे भर्ता रक्शति यव्वना |
पुत्रः रक्शति वार्धक्ये नस्त्री स्वतन्त्र्यमर्हति ||
Pita rakshati kaumare, bharta raskshati youvana,
putrah rakshati varddhakye, na stree swatantryam arhati
Translation: A woman is protected by father in childhood, her husband protects her in youth, and in old age she should be protected by her son. At no stage in life should a woman be left alone and destitute. She deserves protection by man at every stage in her life. – Manusmriti.
Now, there are strong arguments that this hymn is being misinterpreted. I opine it might now have been, it made perfect sense provided the social context of 2nd century BCE. Also, If at all they wanted “women deserve protection” to be written, it could’ve been stree rakshanmarhati or anything else he likes, sanskrit pretty much never runs out of good vocab.