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?
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
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)
