I think this expalanation of Sita’s separation is much more digestible than any other ones that I have tried to understand. But, still (with the limited power of comprehension that I have as a human), I still dont understand one thing. If Ram did banish Sita for whatever reason(even if it was to experience the greater experience of love), for the ordinary man, he banished his wife and as “Maryada Purushottam”, he did cross his “Maryada” as a husband. & I say this totally from the lay man perspective, not including the spiritual side of the situation. But if you take the whole situation at face value, it still looks like Ram’s flaw to have banished his wife. I f he was not a “Maryada Purushottam”, it was acceptable, but if he is, it is not.

Rama must be the jealous kind of God,and thats acceptable because even
the God of Heaven and Earth,who created all things is Himself a jealous God,He forbids idolatry of all kinds and forms.No matter what,
Rama is a God,according to this post.It is because of his attribute as a jealous God that had caused his separation from his wife.If there’s a greater God above themselves,then,God the most high can restore everything,whether physical or not,the God of love will unite them in time.Only by faith,hope and love can make all things that are impossible becomes possible and visible.
Great post.

I like the blog, I like the discussion and exploration of the scriptures regarding Rama.
If we ourselves, are not illumined saints, there is always going to be a realm of misunderstanding. There are going to be things which we simply cannot understand.
When approaching scriptures and finding something difficult to understand, we can project upon those scriptures our understanding of life…and try to make the scriptures fit into what we understand.
If we do this, then we limit the entire realm of spiritual discovery to what we already know.
If there is something beyond us, something Transcendental and Infinite, it would make sense that we are not going to understand all of the manifestations of what that would represent.
So, the spiritual attitude would be to assume that there is a truth in the scriptures that we don’t understand…and to let our daily spiritual practice illumine us, over time.
I think any discussion of Sri Rama is a form of meditation. The discussion itself makes us reflect on Him and that itself becomes a mild form of meditation. I think this is one of the underlying purposes of studying scripture. That it lengthens the amount of time we can spend in meditation…where our soul’s consciousness mixes a bit with the Divine. And it is through that inner communion that spiritual light is transmitted. Not necessarily as knowledge, but in all realms.
And, I think, that is one of the fundamental keys of spiritual discipline and practice…to keep ourselves absorbed in the consciousness of the Divine. Not by force to the point that it is beyond our capacity, but to move as much of our life towards the Divine as truly fits our capacity.

WHEN ALL THE THINGS AND ISSUES IN OUR WALKS OF LIFE BECOMES DIFFICULT
TO HANDLE,WE SURRENDER ALL TO GOD,EACH OF US,THERE’S A PLAN A PURPOSE
AND GOD ACCOMPLISHES THAT PURPOSE IN OUR LIVES,IF WE LET HIM,IF WE DON’T LET HIM,HE SHALL CAUSE THINGS TO GET HIS PLANS AND PURPOSE GET ACCOMPLISHED BEFORE HE WILL TAKE US HOME TO HIS KINGDOM.IN THE SCPRIPTURES,WHATEVER GOD HAVE UTTERED FROM HIS MOUTH,IT WILL NEVER RETURN TO HIM VOID,SO,THEREFORE,GOD IS OUR ULTIMATE SOURCE OF ACCOMPLISHMENT.BY MEDITATION OF THE WORDS,,WE ARE HEADING TO WHERE GOD IS LEADING US,AND WE WILL LET HIM TAKE CONTROL OF OUR DESTINY.

Thank you for the thoughtful post. Here’s some more on the subject from The Bhakti Collective. A screening and review of “Sita Sings the Blues”.
http://bhakticollective.com/2009/11/22/sita-sings-the-blues/

It is always amusing to watch mortals justify the unskillful actions of their gods.
Rama banished Sita because he feared losing respect as a “righteous” god. All fear is fear of losing. What’s unskillful about that is that Rama DID lose respect, for the very action by which he hoped to keep it!
Ever since, his followers have twisted the plain words of the Ramayana to make it seem as if Rama did something skillful. They make the simple, honest truth into complex, dishonest delusion.
Most amusing, but it doesn’t fool anyone.

A very interesting post. I never thought of linking the seperation of the Lord Ram and Sita maiya in this regard. But I still see so many loose ends to it that I am still not completely convinced of this thought/analysis.
I am a big devote of Lord Ram/Krishna. Whatever I am in life today is because of the almighty, his biggest blessing to me are my parents, beloved husband, and beautiful kids. I can never thank him enough for being with me all the way, answering my questions in some form or other, helping me out and being with me in my happiness and sorrows. There are still some episodes in our scriptures which are very mysterious to me as I don’t have all the answers. I have been thinking from various angles to get the answers that would convince me. I will appreciate if you can help me in seeking these answers:
After reading this analysis above, I am still confused, Lord Ram abandoned his wife when she was in the last trimester of her pregnancy and needed him the most. Having kids would have given a new dimension to the love they shared. They had already experienced the deeper love of separation once, when Ravan had abducted Sita. Why did they choose to go through it again and not experience the new dimension that kids would have added to their life. How could Lord Ram feel that experiencing the separation again is at a higher priority than nurturing babies who needs both the mother and father and taking care of the wife who was just about to give birth?
Secondly, if male and female combine to form one eternal God, then why was this separation decision taken by Lord Ram alone without any consultation with Sita maiya. He did not even give her a chance to express her opinion, instead showed to the world that the biggest decision in a house hold could be taken by male alone without consultation with the better half or with any other elders in the family (mom, grand-mom, etc). Was that male ego, or was that to express that when you are in love you take the other person for granted and can make decisions on their behalf. Why did He not set an example of trusting his wife and telling people that they need to trust and have faith on the ones they love.
I don’t even understand the episode of ‘Agni Pareksha’ by Sita maiya, why did she had to go through with it – to prove that her only love was Lord Ram, did lord not trust her enough or love her enough to have asked her not to go through with it. Was Lord not insulting his wife in front of the whole world by doing this? Why did Lord Ram not go through with it as well, he had also stayed away from Sita maiya for so long…..in this case Sita matte trusted Lord Ram and didn’t ask him to go through the Pareksha. Is this what Lord expects from the male and female followers that male doesn’t need to explain anything, prove anything but female needs to mutely go through ‘Agni Pareksha’ and after proving her love still stay with a man who does not trust her, just because she loves him, and never ask him to prove his love because either she loves him or she knows that he could never be as pure as she is.
How come lord Ram loved Sita if he did not trust her as He asked her to prove herself (even if that was for the others in the world) through ‘Agni Pareksha’ and then didn’t even trust the ‘Agni Pareksha’ when he decided to abandon her into the forest just because a washerman said to his wife that he is not Lord Ram to trust his wife in a way Lord Ram did? Nobody in the world could be compared to Lord Ram.
Why did Lord Ram asked Lakshman to leave his bhabhi into the forest was it because he loved Sita so much that did not had the courage to do it himself or did he feared that Sita maiya would be able to convince him to change his mind which he did not intend to change anymore at any cost. How could Lord Ram ask his little brother to commit a sin on his behalf?
Another confusing episode is that if male and female together form the complete God, why is that goddess never give birth to female child. Sita matte gave birth to twin sons, why not one girl and one boy for completeness. Parvita matte had Kartika and Ganesh.
The only convincing answer that my mind was able to create for all these above is that our scriptures were written by humans not by Lord himself and they wrote their own interpretation to it.

the priority for all spiritual seekers is obedience to God. If that conflicts with devotion to family, then it conflicts with devotion to family.
God is the Source of all. Our family are God’s children. We serve the Father, the Creator, not His children. If we first serve the Father, then the children are served as well. If we serve the children, the creation, over the Creator, all we do is cause harm all across the board.
Harmony only comes from obedience to God’s will. When Buddha left his wife, it was because He got an inner spiritual command to do so. When Abraham was asked to sacrifice his son, he was ready to do so…and Christ spoke openly about how His mission would cause strife in families.
We can be attached to the world and try to serve its unending ignorance. Or we can serve God, and through that, everything else falls into place.
The great saints have a direct line to God’s will. It is not guesswork.
Gandhi and Socrates directly heard a voice from God directing them what specifically to do.
If we do not have that kind of powerful intuition, then we must use our morality, spiritual values and our subsequent judgment to make the best decisions possible.
If we are a doctor, called to do some life saving surgery instead of going to our child’s birthday party – is that some act of betrayal to family, or simply a higher calling to duty?
When Rama did what He did it was to serve the Highest Calling. And that takes precedence over everything else.
Just because we can’t hear that calling, doesn’t mean they didn’t.
Every time we obey conscience instead of peer pressure, we obey God. It is the voice of the soul within. And it is the beginning of a connection that ends with a direct understanding of God’s specific will for us, in each situation.

Rectification needed for your divine understanding:
1. Ramayana is a story of LORD RAAMA’s life as Maryada-purshottam incarnation in Sattyug.
2. Sita and Raama were never separated. The fiction of Ramayan by Tulsidas will elucidate that the Sita that was captured by Ravana was not the real true mode of LAXSHMEE but a MOHINI SVAROOPA of MATAJI.
3. The society is the main reason and main karmic cause of LORD Rama’s dismal sorrows of not being able to endure human happiness. This is linked to the curse that Raja Dasharatta inherited from Shravana by accidentally killing a dear [] In the analysis of the fiction, Sitaji finally is subdued into MOTHER EARTH because she can no longer take the ordains of raja Raama who is only trying to follow the society norm, society and his praja or his people as a king. In the ultimatum: Sitaji gives a sati shraapa to Lord Raama, that in Kaliyug and tretayug, Raama, would have to be torn apart between the love of three women….SUCH IS THE CASE IN KRUSHNA—-RUKHMINI — RADHA — AND MEERABAI…………Krushna is torn apart in love and Krushna is hence leela or maya svaroopa.
4. There is much camouflage and complications created out of simple RAMAYANA…….Please do not create VERSIONS OF INTERPRETED RAMAYANA.
5. I strongly suggest that you first see in dvd, all episodes of Ramayana and read in full the complete ramayana at least twice before embarking upon this platform………..
Half knowledge can sometimes bring astonishing observations. Ramayana should be views, enjoyed as a karmic experience of humankind and enthralled as an example of our own lifestyle. Ramayana is an epic of RAGHU-PATTI-PRIYA RAJA RAAMA whose loyalty and faithfulness as a King was for the praja-and whose loyalty and fidelity as a loving husband was towards SITAJI. Ramayana also at large speaks of separation of fifteen years of vaanvaas and it also speaks of duty and sacrifice by the son in fulfilment of PROMISE, VIRTUE and DHARMA.
In the modern world, we neither keep our promises, nor virtues and half of our dharma……..
What to speak of such divine experiences under such imperfect world conditions of imperfect humanity, imbalanced dharma, and dissolving faith…
It is sufficient enought to struggle to ensure that we have endevoured and endured our best in our karmic duty as humankind. We can only strive to do best and to be better than best and to give light of hope to our future generation children so that they are NOT confused.
We cannot begin to form different school of thoughts over ONE RAMAYAN, ONE TRUTH AND ONE DIVINITY…….
The mainstream issue emanating from RAMAYAN is that RAAMA IS SATTYA, LIKE HIS MANTRA IS SATTYA, AS IS HIS NAME.
Raama Naama Satt Ekam Aum Karraa roopam, ekam aum karraa namaaa
Jaya SiyaRaama
Aum Shree Raama
Aum aaapdamapaa hartaraama daataraama sarvasampaddaama Lokabhiraamaam bhuyou bhuyou namaamyaham Aum namoh Raama Namah Jaya Siya Raama, Jaya Shree Raamayan Jaya Shree Raamayan
Sri Raama Raameti Rame Raame Manorame
Sahasra Naama Tattulyam Raamanaama Varaanane
“Raama” eliminates differentiation between Hari and Hara [Shiva]. It vehemently declares that both of them are one and the same. “Raama integrates bhakta and bhakti.
Lord Shiva had declared that the chanting of the Raama mantra was
equivalent to chanting the thousand names of Lord Vishnu. As taught by Lord Shiva Himself; “Raama” alone provides Shiva-shanta or moksha.
therefore, also known as Jagadabhi Raama or Aatmaa Raama. This is the fundamental import of this mantra.

Hi Vineet,
Can you help me understand something the poster above me wrote? I also recall from the Ramayan videos that we used to watch at home that after “Sita” was freed from Ravan’s realm, Ram sent this Sita away and the real Sita who had been in the god of Fire’s protection comes back. From what I understood at that time, Sita had been put into that protection just after Ram was exiled and replaced by an incarnation. Is this not the case? Doesn’t this complicate the sending Sita away altogether thing that Ram does? I wondered at the time if he was only doing it for show to everyone else despite knowing that his real Sita was nowhere near Ravan.
Would love to hear your thoughts.
Anita