A political scientist and a yoga instructor, I once found myself in a class with thirty-plus students discussing Prakriti (feminine energy) and Purusha (masculine energy) from a yoga perspective. Prakriti and Purusha represent duality, manifest and the unmanifest, and their union depicts harmony, bliss, perfection, balance, and union as understood from the Advaita perspective.
A handful of students who seemed to have sufficient knowledge about the Brahma-Saraswati, Vishnu-Laxmi (incarnations Rama-Sita), and Shiva-Parvati said that they understood Brahma as Purusha manifesting and engaging with Saraswati to bring forth creativity and creation and that Shiva-Parvati is Purusha-Prakriti. However, the students sought an explanation for the interpretation of Rama-Sita as Purusha-Prakriti concerning balance and harmony. They were curious whether Vishnu’s avatar, Sri Rama, could be associated with the aspects of harmony, given the academic attention Sita’s so-called ill-treatment brings by existing literature and popular discourse.
This question delves into something profoundly thought-provoking. The idea of a man going to great lengths to find his missing wife, even waging war for her, evokes images of deep love and devotion. However, the perplexing aspect arises when this man decides to part ways with the same beloved. Sri Rama’s actions in this context have always been a conundrum, wildly when contrasting the story with the prevalent negative narrative surrounding him.
In many literary interpretations, particularly from a Western feminist perspective, Rama is often portrayed as a feeble and troubled ruler who did not assert himself among his people and ultimately abandoned his wife. However, considering the diverse narratives and angles presented in the Ramayana, countless methods exist to analyze the intricacies of the Sita-Rama relationship. Indic explanations that aim to redeem Rama from the skewed modern-day viewpoint revolve around his commitment to fulfilling his dharma:
- He upholds his duty towards his father, even in the face of apparent injustice inflicted upon him.
- He is seen as fulfilling his duties as a householder and husband, making it his mission to locate his missing wife.
- He is viewed as fulfilling his dharma as a leader, prioritizing his role as a ruler over that of a husband to maintain the legitimacy of his kingdom as per the norms of the times.
The chronological sequence of these phases is crucial. In the first phase, Rama is the obedient son, happily accepting whatever punishment is handed to him as he considers it his dharma to obey. In the second phase, as Rama exercises his responsibilities as part of the Grihastha ashram, he demonstrates unwavering devotion to his wife, embarking on the mission to destroy Lanka and defeat Ravana to reunite with her.
A prominent Indian guru has clarified a crucial point: the number of washermen, whether one or many, is not the issue. What truly matters is that a ruler’s character must be seen as legitimate by the people he governs. In Rama’s case, he was initially banished by his father but adhered to his dharma towards his father as he did not have to uphold his dharma towards his future constituents. He was not in power yet; therefore, there were no duties to be relinquished pertaining to his future populace. No circumstances compelled him to choose between obeying his father and serving his people. However, this is no longer true when Sita’s character is questioned when Rama and his wife are back in Ayodhya and on the throne.
Upon returning to Ayodhya to rule after their exile, Rama prioritized his dharma over his constituents, a shift from his earlier stance, even if it came at the cost of his wife. He was forced to make zero-sum decisions in each phase of his life and consistently opted for dharma, the greater good. During this time, Rama, as king, not only had to uphold the law but also maintain legitimacy, which may or not may not have been lost by his father’s decisions. He could not let the Kshatriya dharma fumble again and, therefore, made a complicated personal choice to uphold legitimacy in his kingdom.
Rama demonstrates a nuanced approach to handling adversity, meticulously considering fairness and justice in specific, era-related contexts. However, it remains to be seen how this apparent imbalance in the Rama-Sita relationship can explain the concept of harmony between Purusha and Prakriti. The lens of yoga remains our guide in examining the Rama-Sita relationship. In essence, Purusha can exist in a manifest or unmanifest form. Once determined and prepared to engage with the ever-changing Prakriti, dualism dissolves, giving way to notions of balance, harmony, and oneness. We delve into the qualities of Rama and Sita that enable them to coexist harmoniously, particularly after their exile. We seek to understand the reciprocity of sacrifice and tyaga as they fulfill their dharmic purposes. However, in the context of our contemporary world, marked by gender pay disparities, the invisible glass ceiling women face, and the need for female leaders to emulate male traits to be considered competent, certain realizations begin to emerge.
Gradually, certain pieces of the puzzle fall into place. To achieve harmony between Rama and Sita, it becomes apparent that Rama may have been an early advocate of feminism as understood by the Indic context. He might have believed that Sita, for whom he tirelessly searched and waged war, could thrive independently, even if she was no longer Ayodhya’s queen. The idea of not needing a man for survival in one’s life during Rama’s time confounds conventional feminist principles of Western female empowerment. The crucial factor here is the intention behind Rama, Sita, and their actions. While Rama’s actions toward Sita may appear unjust, Rama might have believed that Sita was exceptional and capable of fulfilling her role as a wife by agreeing to part ways.
Conversely, Sita does not seem to contest her right to remain his wife and queen and consents to her wifely and Kshatriya dharma. According to Indic laws, the populace can replace a governing king and his clan if they have failed to do their governing duties. Thus, Sita seems fully conscious of her role as a public figure who might have lost legitimacy and is, therefore, okay with the decision to remove herself from royalty.
The subsequent week arrived, and the class commenced its usual routine. Another student posed an intriguing question, asking, “What if Sita remained untouched by Maya? What if she possessed full awareness, akin to a goddess or a realized yogini, comprehending the necessity of events unfolding as they did?” His point revolved around the notion that Rama might not have been cognizant of his role as Vishnu’s avatar or a deity as he was immersed in the mayavi illusion. In contrast, Sita seemed to possess a profound understanding of her existence and the specific role she needed to fulfill in that particular birth, particularly in dismantling much of what Ravana represented.
This student pondered how Sita, who willingly relinquished the comforts of a palace, could become entranced by a golden deer. He suggested that her apparent infatuation was a ruse, and she may have intentionally acted as a catalyst in the unfolding of the Ramayana as needed. This catalyst role began with her sending Rama after the deer and then deliberately transgressing the boundaries of Laxman Rekha.
The student’s question led to a deeper exploration of Sita’s character. It raised the question of why someone as knowledgeable, humble, and brilliant as Sita would engage in seemingly reckless actions jeopardizing her life and that of her husband and brother-in-law. This line of thought led to the speculation that Sita might have acted entirely per her intentions, even going so far as to allow herself to be kidnapped, ultimately leading to the initiation of the war. This theory proposed that Sita possessed a heightened awareness and purposefully followed the illusory golden deer.
In this context, harmony does not fit the mold of a Disney fairy tale with a romance-oriented “happily ever after” ending. Instead, it is embodied in the post-exile life of Rama and Sita. Neither may have been content with their separation, yet neither seeks a replacement after Sita’s abduction, and Rama refrains from remarrying after parting from her. Remarkably, Sita also does not pursue other partners, despite the allure of Ravana, nor does she harbor a thirst for revenge following her separation from Rama. Instead, there is a mutual acceptance of their circumstances, and a sense of dignity is maintained.
Sita’s journey unfolds as she fulfills her dharma and role, even giving birth to Rama’s twin sons, after which she willingly chooses to cease her physical existence in that particular avatar, aligned with her own will. Sita plays her part in the story with a profound absence of disillusionment and from an Indic perspective, upholding her dharma as a wife and a female where again the position of queen came second is something that Sita follows. Nowhere do we read or hear about Sita’s protests or her singing the blues. Sita seems grounded in her femininity irrespective of circumstances. Rama and Sita believe in following their respective dharma, engaging and disengaging as required to guide life and samsara onward. Their circumstances are challenging, and their intentions are free from malice, restoring a new balance or harmony after their separation.
The student who initially posed a question further delves into this intriguing concept by asking, “What if Sita embodies the Purusha, determining when to engage with Prakriti, and who, then, is Rama? Given Sita’s greater power and Rama’s need for adaptability and submission in his dealings with his father and his countrymen, could we suggest that Rama represents the feminine principles of Prakriti?” This idea contemplates gender roles from centuries ago. Such questions invite us to ponder and continue our quest for answers, showcasing the introspective tradition of Sanatan Dharma’s charm and remarkable diversity.
Image: Jaipur Painting/Art searched from Google. It looks like a painting from the Mehrangarh Fort Art shop.