Ram, a great king but a bad husband?

Recently, senior supreme court lawyer and former law minister of India Mr. Ram Jethmalani was in the news for his comment about Ram, the central character from the epic Ramayan. He called Ram a bad husband for not standing by his wife when she needed his support most after someone from his kingdom questioned her character. I am sure many political parties and religious organizations will come after him for this statement and Jethmalani will receive a lot of criticism from all quarters of society. I wrote one post related to Sita and her significance for women of today's world a few months back. I personally think that Ram failed as a husband to protect her wife on two occasions. On the first occasion, it was not entirely his fault but on the second occasion, when someone questioned her chastity, he could have protected his wife who already suffered enough trauma in captivity of Ravan and already proved her innocence (by giving agnee pariksha). But he chose to make his people happy rather than standing by his innocent wife.

This issue has been the subject of many debates and discussions for many years and many people have expressed their opinion about this issue. Some favor Ram and call him a great king who put the interest of the people of his kingdom before his personal happiness. Some criticize him for failing to protect his wife just because few males raised objections about her chastity and character. According to the epic, Sita was abducted forcibly, even though many blame her for crossing the Lakshman Rekha (line drawn by Lakshman to protect her), she crossed the Lakshman Rekha willingly but she was tricked into doing so. She stayed in the captivity of Ravan almost for a year, resisted all his advances toward her, and protected herself from him. But that was not enough to prove her innocence, just because she was a woman and people couldn't believe that a single woman could protect herself against a mighty king. They thought Ravan must have polluted her. Some people in Ayodhya (Ram's kingdom) were not convinced about her chastity. They refused to believe that she was chaste or pure anymore after staying for a year in captivity of another man away from her husband. I am pretty sure what they mean by this is that she was raped or willingly had sex with Ravan. So, it was not a question of Sita's moral character but it was a matter of her sexual behavior. Why do the people of Ayodhya were only concerned about Sita's sexual behavior, but not Ram's? Does this mean if a wife gets raped she is not pure or deserves to be a wife anymore? Having more than one wife (Ram's father Dashrath had three wives) was not considered bad in Ramayan. Men were allowed to have multiple sexual partners at the same time but women were not (even rape was considered as her fault). In this case, there was just an element of doubt, not any proof. Ram is considered a 'maryada purushottam' (a person honoring all rules). So, how did he fail to honor his duties as a husband? Why did he rescue Sita if he wanted to abandon her after coming back to Ayodhya? If he could leave the kingdom to honor a promise that his father gave to one of his three wives, then why he didn't leave the same kingdom to protect his wife and her honor?

One can ask many questions like this and debate this issue endlessly. For me, this was a clear case of using double standards for men and women. No one objected to Ram's character because he also stayed away from his wife for almost a year and was a royal guest of a few kings (like Sugreev). He must have met many beautiful women during that one year, but no one even thought about asking him any questions or asking him to prove his chastity. Why? Just because he was a man. Why ask Sita? Just because Sita was a woman. Did anyone say double standards?

I am not interested here in deciding whether Ram was a better king or a bad husband but I see one thing clearly, he failed to protect and support his wife when she needed his support most. He just abandoned her and never bothered to check what happened to her afterward. He didn't even care to check if she was alive or not, that says a lot about his attitude towards his own beloved wife and Ramayan doesn't give any proper explanations for his behavior. Ram is considered a God and is worshiped in many temples across India, which is why any comment against him or questioning any of his actions generates a lot of controversy and uproar from the conservative section of the Hindu population. I read that someone has announced a reward of five lakhs (approx. 10,000 USD) for anyone who spits on Jethmalani's face. These people do not want to debate or discuss to explain their point of view but want to punish Jethmalani for expressing his views. This is the strange but true face of organized religion where disagreement is not tolerated rather it's punished using the harshest way possible so the next person thinks twice before questioning anything. Hinduism is becoming dictatorial like other organized religions. The organized religion is damaged beyond any repair and people who follow it are not interested in repairing it. However, there is an element of hope. Questions like this, and posts like this keep the fire of disagreement burning, and one day people may realize that all humans deserve to be treated with equal respect and honor regardless of their beliefs, race, and gender. Till then keep asking questions and have patience.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

References:

1. http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/ram-was-a-bad-husband-says-ram-jethmalani-290412
2. http://awara32.blogspot.com/2010/09/ram-bashing-and-how-to-end-this.html
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rama

(Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing) 

How Authentic Are the Scriptures?

Many people ask this question, and there are various theories and opinions about this topic. All scriptures are very old books, some going back thousands of years; we don't even know when they were compiled for the first time. I think it's a waste of time to argue about their authenticity; we don't have enough data about it. I think whatever scriptures we have are very useful and are full of knowledge and lessons about life (the Bible, Qur'an, Guru Granth Sahib, the Gita, the Upanishads, and many more). They cover almost every aspect of life, and discussions in them cover topics about most of the problems we face in day-to-day life, and also offer possible solutions. Most of the time, the messages in these scriptures are delivered through many stories with a lot of interesting characters and themes. It's very easy to deliver a complicated message via an interesting story; people understand it in a much better way and also remember the message because of that story. Our ancestors realized it, and that's why most of these books contain a lot of interesting stories. We still use this technique of storytelling to teach our kids; we tell them a lot of bedtime stories that have some lesson embedded in them, the same way these scriptures try to convey their message to us.

People debate whether the incidents mentioned in the scriptures really happened or not. Is this debate going to make their content better or worse? These books are the source of knowledge, and if we don’t want to take any lessons from them, then it's better to just ignore them. These things (scriptures from all religions) are gifts to us from our ancestors, and we must value them. One can definitely raise questions and argue about the theories and philosophies mentioned in them. It's necessary to validate and test any information we receive; we should not believe anything blindly. This process of analysis will surely help us to realize how wonderful these texts are; they teach us so much, but only if we are willing to learn. Mostly, these scriptures are concerned with spiritual knowledge; some of them do talk about many scientific things but mostly they are about spirituality and the meaning or aim of human life. If someone is not interested in things discussed in these books, they are useless for them, and it's a simple fact to understand for both those who believe in them as well as those who don't believe. It’s as if you are not interested in movies or engineering or chemistry, then anything related to that subject will not appeal to you, or rather will sound very boring and complicated, and it’s quite natural to feel like this, nothing wrong in it.

All these books have been there for centuries, and there are also different versions of them. As these books are very old, there are some doubts about the authenticity of their contents, and many of these questions are reasonable. There are also many theories about who wrote these books, whether the original contents were modified or not, and if modified, then to what extent. I think all these questions are interesting from a historical perspective and archeological research; there is a lot of research done in this area. The results of that research are very interesting and are published in various journals and books. Naturally, not all devotees agree with these findings, as it hurts their feelings, and also many think that, as these books are sacred, they should not be criticized or analyzed. I personally think they should not be disturbed by these findings because they do not reduce the importance or significance of these books. We should study them, and if possible, also (many people did that in the past, but for some reason, this process was discontinued). Because of the sacred status of these books, it's almost impossible to challenge anything written in them or edit anything (even if it's outdated or wrong). All these books were written in certain eras, and many things written in them were according to that era and socioeconomic conditions. When people or devotees insist on following everything in these books as it is, it creates problems, as some of the things are not relevant in today's world. If people who claim these books as their property (by associating them with a particular religion or sect) want to preserve the good messages and teachings mentioned in these books, then they need to show some flexibility and broad-mindedness. Knowledge is not stationary; it's always evolving, and every day new information is generated; it's a continuous process.

Many people also argue about whether Ramayan, Mahabharat, or people like Ram, Krishna really happened.  Devotees who believe in God reject these doubts altogether and want to stick to their beliefs. This is expected from devotees. In this process of argument, both sides miss the actual benefit that one can get from these books. One side considers these characters and books as sacred and worships them blindly without trying to understand the true meaning of their messages, and the other side rejects them just because of some technical gaps. Arguments like whether Jesus was God or not, or whether Krishna was real or not, are endless; it’s not these people who are important, but their teachings are. If you don’t agree with their teachings, then they don’t exist for you; it’s as simple as that. For me personally, the question of their authenticity doesn't matter; I don't worry about it. I consider these books and these people as sources of knowledge and useful information. I read all these books like many other books I read. I don't associate any of these books with any particular religion; for me, they are all the same. I take from them whatever I feel is relevant to my situation or whatever appeals to me and leave the rest. If I find anything in them that sounds somewhat wrong, I don't hesitate to raise a question about it or even criticize it. I share my beliefs and whatever I understand from these books, and people who hear or read them are free to agree or disagree with them. I have my opinions and beliefs (and they can change over time), and people can have theirs; there is nothing wrong with it. The problem is not with anyone's beliefs but when they become really aggressive about their beliefs (almost dictatorial) and start projecting them as 'facts' and are not willing to listen other side of the story. I think that our society has evolved enough to understand that there can be more than one truth, more than one way to reach the same destination, and also realize that many religions and beliefs can coexist peacefully.

Thanks for reading, and your comments are always welcome.

Reference:

1. Interesting read for some information about the Bhagavad Gita and historical facts about it, http://www.vvshirvaikar.de/Dnyaneshwari/PROLOGUE.html 

2. http://www.biblica.com/bibles/faq/3/

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible

4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Quran

(Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing)

Can Sita Be an Icon for Today’s Woman?

Recently, I read the news where Mumbai High Court judges used an example of Sita, a character from the epic Ramayana, to advise a wife to follow her husband when he was transferred because of his job. The court wants her to relocate with her husband against her own wishes. The statement created a lot of controversy; many people called it inherently sexiest, and many people defended it by saying Sita was an ideal woman, so what's wrong with quoting her example? 

The story of this particular case is something like this: this couple had an arranged marriage some 11 years ago and has a 9-year-old kid. The couple was staying in Mumbai, but after some years of marriage, the man was posted to Port Blair in the Andaman & Nicobar Islands. The wife refused to join him, so the husband filed a divorce case in court on the grounds of his wife's unwillingness to relocate to his new place of work. During the hearing, the Bombay High Court judges invoked the Ramayan to persuade this woman to join her husband. The media reported that high court judges want all married women should take a cue from goddess Sita, who followed her husband Lord Ram even during his exile. She stayed with her husband, whether in a palace or in a forest. It seems that they think a wife should be like goddess Sita, who left everything and followed her husband Lord Ram to a forest and stayed there (but they forget that she did it willingly, not on her husband's order or wish). 

Ramayan is an ancient epic; many versions of Ramayan exist, but the most popular ones are Ramcharitmanas by Tulsidas and Ramayan by Valmiki. It is believed that Valmiki's Ramayan is the original one, and all other versions were written after that. Tulsidas was a devotee of Ram, and he wrote Ramayan as a devotee, so obviously, he didn't find any fault with Ram and his actions. Tulsidas projects Sita as a very devoted and obedient wife; his version is more religious, whereas Valmiki's version is more secular in nature, maybe because Valmiki wrote as a contemporary, and not as a devotee. When judges referred to Sita, what kind of image of Sita were they referring to? Is it an obedient, devoted, submissive wife who follows her husband wherever he goes, and suffers silently without protesting? Or is it independent, courageous, bold, fearless, powerful Sita who fought with her husband to accompany him to the forest, faced aggressive and powerful Ravan, raised her kids as a single mother, and refused to go back to her husband after he deserted her? Tulsidas's version of the Ramayan is more popular than other versions. Today, Sita is only looked at as a loyal, faithful, devoted woman or wife. Sita's liberal, fearless, and independent nature is conveniently ignored. The question to ask here is, why do we put so much pressure on women to be perfect? Why do we even need a perfect woman or man? What's wrong with a real woman or man?

Whenever we want to look for any ideals, we always tend to look into the past as if there are no role models in today's world. Actually, there are many role models in today's world to whom we can relate very easily, who are living or lived in similar conditions in which we are living today. Why do we expect texts written long ago, in a totally different era and time, to guide us today in every aspect of life? Mythology and these texts or epics are fascinating for a number of reasons; they teach us many valuable lessons, but to expect them to provide answers for all our problems in the modern world might be expecting too much from them. We don't live in the same era in which these texts were written, so why do we expect answers to our complex questions in them?  Some people advocate that we should totally get over these myths and beliefs, but I don't think it's possible; their hold on society and our culture is so strong that it is impossible to ignore them. We should positively use them rather than using them for selfish purposes, as per our convenience.

Today's women face different challenges than Sita or Draupadi faced in times of Ramayan or Mahabharat; both these women had difficulties in their lives and fought their way out. There might be some similarity in certain situations, but the value system and society structure is totally different today, so maybe Sita and Draupadi can not provide all the motivation necessary for modern women to excel. Whenever Sita's example is invoked, most of the time it is to tell women that they should behave in a very polite, obedient manner and follow their husband's instructions without any protest, as Sita does in Ramcharitmanas. It's always used to constrain them to show their boundaries and to remind them that they should not cross the so-called Lakshman Rekha. Valmiki's projection of Sita's character is a very strong character compared to Tulsidas's, but people conveniently ignore the strong characteristics of Sita's personality and only try to project her as an obedient and faithful wife, which is a very limited representation of her total personality.

One aspect of Hinduism that I like is that there are many versions of the same book. Some are more popular than others, but almost every book has different versions written by different authors. Most books do not try to project the world as either good or bad. The good can become bad, and bad can also become good; there is a lot of grey in the world, and many times it's very difficult to differentiate the good from the bad. 

Society is not static; it changes over time. Even though the content of books might remain the same, their understanding and interpretations change over time; every era interprets them differently. Many times, people think that they are in charge of religion or consider these books as their property. They insist that these books, which were written long ago, in totally different times and eras, should be interpreted in the same way as they were interpreted thousands of years ago. They even insist that they are relevant even in today's world, and any objection or different interpretation of these books is heavily criticized or even criminalized. Whether people like it or not, every generation will interpret and understand these books according to their own needs and requirements and judge them accordingly. If we want to get inspiration from these books, then let's take all the positive things and try to leave the stuff that is no longer relevant in today's world. This won't dilute the impact of these books; it's not an insult, rather, it's proof of their greatness that we still study them and use them as our guides. Maybe Sita from Ramcharitmanas is not a very ideal example for modern women to follow, but many of her qualities, like fearlessness, faithfulness, and an independent nature, are certainly useful even today. Sita of Valmiki's Ramayan lived a very independent life, and women today also want to live an independent life, so there are many similarities, and we all can take a lot of inspiration from Sita's character. But the courts should not force any religious idols on any society, let society or that particular individual decide what he/she want to become, whom they want to follow. Advice should be offered whenever it's required, but let people have the freedom to accept or reject it. Let us stop using these characters at our own convenience for our selfish motives. Let's study them so that we use their relevant teachings, or it is also okay to move on, as many things around us can provide us inspiration and guidance. Why insist on or depend on just one source when we have many good options?

Thanks for reading, and please share your views.

References:

1. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-05-09/mumbai/31640952_1_divorce-plea-family-court-computer-training

2.http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/the-buck-stops-here/is-sita-an-icon-for-the-woman-of-2012/232452

(Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing)