Shri Ram Never Banished Ma Sita to Forest

Ramayana, Rama's journey or Rama's way was originally told to the world by sage Valmiki. Valmiki is revered as Adi Kavi, i.e. world's first poet, for he wrote Sanskrit's first shloka. Valmiki authored Ramayana which is called Valmiki Ramayana, one of the two greatest epics of Bharat (India). In Valmiki Ramayan, Rama is not referred to as God but is called 'The Supreme Man' (narapungav). Valmiki tells the story of Prince Rama of Ayodhya, who leaves claim on the throne in order to obey his father and goes to live inside the forest where his wife is abducted by mighty king of Lanka, Ravana. Rama raises an army consisting of monkeys (Vanara Sena) and other animals of the forest, invades Ravana's Lanka and brings his wife back after killing Ravana in a battle. Valmiki Ramayana does not tell anything like Ram abandoning his wife Sita later in his life. 

It is said that Great Sage (Maharishi) Valmiki was contemporary to Rama. It is said that his original name was Ratnakara who was reformed and did great penances taking Lord's name. He was lost in such deep penance that an anthill grew around him and hence he is called as 'Valmiki', literally meaning 'one who sits in an anthill' in Sanskrit. Rama met Valmiki during his period of exile and had interaction with him. Later on, Valmiki taught Ramayana to Lava and Kusa, Ram and Sita's sons. 

There is a popular perception that Rama abandoned Sita and sent her to live in the forest because people had started to put doubts on her purity since she had stayed for many years in a faraway land of Lanka inside captivity of Rakshanas King Ravana. But the matter of fact is that Valmiki does not tell anything like this. Also, great scholars have called this perception of exile a piece of imagination. 

I would quote noted scholar and freedom fighter C. Rajgopalachari in his book 'Ramayana'; Epilogue; from Pages 475-476:

“I have followed the story of the Price of Ayodhya as told by Vaalmeeki. There was a legend current among people that after recovering Seeta, for fear of scandal, Raama sent her away to live in the forest. This pathetic episode must have sprung from the sorrow-laden imagination of our women. It has taken shape as the Uttarkaanda of Raamaayana... how can we comment on a work composed thousands of years ago and coming down to us in palm-leaf manuscripts subject to corruption?"

K. R. Sundararajan, professor of theology at St.Bonaventure University in New York, writes in his book "Hindu Spirituality: Vedas Through Vedanta, Volume 1", Page 106-107 [here]:

"Uttara Kaanda is considered by scholars to be a larger addition to the orignial story of Valmiki, possibly added during the third century AD. many scholars also believe that there are interpolations in the first book, especially those passages which depict Raama as a human manifestation of the god Vishnu, which could be assigned to the first century AD. It is generally held that Ram in the "original" Valmiki epic was depicted only as a human hero and that those passages, mainly in the Baal Kaanda, where his divine roots are traced and his links with Vishnu emphasized, are to be considered later additions to the story. However, these interpolations, which were made shortly after the period of Valmiki, show us something signigicant about the Hindu perception on Rama. Ram is no ordinary hero; rather he is superhuman and his story, the Ramayana, is a sacred story."

Several versions of Ramayana exist because characters of Ramayana became part of people's life and consciousness and all creative writers, poets, and artisans tried to present the characterizations in different shades and forms using their creativity. During the 12th century AD, Kamban wrote Ramavataram in Tamil basing his text on Valmiki Ramayana. During early 14th century Saptakanda Ramayana was written in Assamese by Madhava Kandali. Valmiki's Ramayana also inspired the Sri Ramacharit Manas by Tulasidas in 1576, an Awadhi language epic written in Bhakti tradition. Gujarati poet Premanand wrote a version of Ramayana in the 17th century and Ramayana was also written in Marathi by Sridhara in the 18th century. Not even Hindus, but Muslims have 'Mappila Ramayana' which deals with the story of Sri Rama, part of Mappillapattu, a genre of songs popular amongst the Muslims in Kerala and Lakshadweep. Buddhist have their own variant of Ramayana, which perhaps was used to propagate their own ideas like celibacy and denouncing marriage. There is also a Jain Ramayana. But the fact remains that all others were written after Valmiki Ramayana. Some authors and poets only elaborated and developed the characters from Valmiki's epic, while some totally changed the story or added completely new portions, which were at times not much appreciated by some others. 

The following is mentioned on HARE KRISHNA-HARE RAM [website] and also [here]: 

Many Hindus, like the followers of Vaishnavism, consider the entire section of Uttar Kand in Ramayana to be interpolated, and thus they do not accept the authenticity of the story claiming that Sita was banished. A general narration of Ramayana does not state it so. It says that Sita later lived in her father's kingdom of Mithila with her sons Lava and Kusha as per the North Indian (especially in present day Uttar Pradesh and Bihar) custom that children be brought up in their nanihaal, or maternal grandmother's place. Sita and her sons later lived at Valmiki's ashram for the boys' education and military training.

The whole of Valmiki Ramayan is presented in translated form at the website: http://www.valmikiramayan.net/ This website also quotes a book by Ramakrishna Mission and mentions: 

While stabilizing the original text of Ramayana, historians surmised that portions of two Books [Kaandas], namely Book I, Bala Kaanda and Book VII, Uttara Ramayana (not listed above) are later additions - "The first and the last Books of the Ramayana are later additions. The bulk, consisting of Books II--VI, represents Rama as an ideal hero. In Books I and VII, however Rama is made an avatara or incarnation of Vishnu, and the epic poem is transformed into a Vaishnava text. The reference to the Greeks, Parthians, and Sakas show that these Books cannot be earlier than the second century B.C......" [The cultural Heritage of India, Vol. IV, The Religions, The Ramakrishna Mission, Institute of Culture]

Two other very good points are mentioned at this [blog]: 

There are two proofs that Uttar Kand in Valmiki Ramayan is not the original part of Ramayan and it has been added later:  

1) Fal-Shruti evidence: Fal-shruti of a book (of religious importance) describes that what spiritual or other benefits one can get after reading that book or chapter. Exactly fal-shruti is either given at the end of a book or at the end of each chapter in some books. In valmiki Ramayan we can see that fal-shruti is given at the end of yuddh kand and not after each chapter. And that also describes the importance of reading whole RAMAYAN not yuddh kand alone. It means that the whole book ends with the end of yuddh-kand. But when the fal-shruti describes the benefits of reading RAMAYAN and Ramayan ends with it, why would the book proceed again with Uttar Kand? 

(2) Difference in language: When linguists tested the language of Valmiki Ramayan, they stated that there is a clear difference in the language of uttar-kand and the language of rest of the Ramayan. It seems that there is a difference of minimum two centuries between them.

While going through many references and texts and reading what great scholars like C. Rajgopalachari have said after having first hand experiences of reading authentic religious and historical texts, I would like to conclude personally that Uttar Kand seems clearly a later addition to the original text and we should not criticize anything basing our arguments on the stories mentioned in it. 

- Rahul Tiwary 

Note: Views expressed are personal and do not represent views of any person or organization associated with the author. Author is not responsible for authenticity of the references and websites mentioned as source. 

Ramayana: A Love Story

Ramayana can be taken in many ways, but I think it’s also a love story. It’s a love story of a prince who had to be separated from his wife when already banished from his kingdom and then he fights with evil forces and hardships to find and regain his love. When Seeta was abducted by Ravana and Ram was gathering army of monkeys and bears, at one point of time he says something like this, “They say that with passage of time our love and pain of separation calms down, but I have not felt any such relief…” How could he, when his love for Seeta was purest and divine? Rishi Valmiki describes it well. At another point, the prince says, “Whenever I see a beautiful thing, I feel how much Seeta would have enjoyed this!” And then he cries… The prince, who could move mountains and dry up oceans by his mighty arrows, cries in the memory of his beloved wife… At many places throughout Ramayana, the distressed Rama is shown to be consoled by his younger brother Lakshamana. Often Rama starts lamenting wondering how princess Seeta, his beloved wife and daughter of the great king Janaka, would be surviving amidst dreadful Rakshashis and demons. He is shown neither be hiding his feelings from his followers, nor letting his sorrow carrying him away from his righteous path. Seeta, on the other side, waits for her love every moment and spends every passing day in hope that that day would end her wait. Her love for Ram is so great and honourable that even for a moment she is not diverted.

Rishi Valmiki who was the first person to write about Rama’s story and to introduce Ramayana to this world, doesn’t mention anything about Sita’s exile to the forest after she and Ram had reunited, so we can take this for granted that once Ram restored Sita, they spent years of happy life together. As they say at the end of love stories: “And they lived happily ever after.”

After Ramayana, so many stories, poems, plays, and movies have been written and made, telling a love story in very similar lines: there are two lovers, and one villain; lovers get separated and hero fights to get back his love. In the end, they are reunited and live happily ever after… But no love story is as powerful, as divine and as elevating as the one between Ram and Seeta… It’s because Ramayana stands as a torch of light showing us the righteous way of life, and reminds us of the very high levels of moral standing that we should practice in life…

- Rahul

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 23

Reproducing a part from the book which I believe all of us should read and understand:

Now, a word to those of our times who read Raamayana and Bhaarata and other Puraanas. In these works, there are frequent references to Devas and Raakshasas. The latter were wicked, had no regard for dharma, and revelled in evil deeds. Asuras were also like Raakshasas. But even among Raakshasas there were a few wise and virtuous people. There spring up bad men even in the best of races and vice versa. On the whole, Asuras and Raakshasas were those who rejoiced in doing wicked deeds. It is a pity that some people in their ignorance identify the Asuras and Raakshasas with ancient Indian tribes and races – a view not supported by any literary work or tradition or recorded history.

The conjencture of foreigners that Raakshasas were the Dravidian race, is not borne out by any authority in Taiml or other literature. The Tamil people are not descendents of the Asuras or Raakshasas.

The Devas were generally upholders of dharma and took on themselves the task of putting down the Raakshasas. According to the Puraanas, they had at times to deviate from dharma in dealing with the Raakshasas, some of whom had attained great power through tapas.

The Devas were generally good; and those among them who swerved form the path of righteousness paid the price for it. There was no separate code of conduct for the Devas; the law of karma admits of no distinction between the Devas and others. The law dealt with the Devas as with others.

Wedded to virtue as the Devas generally were, lapses on their part appear big to us, like stains on white cloth. The Raakshasas’ evil deeds are taken for granted and do not attract much attention, like stains on black cloth.

The honest, when they happen to go astray, should evoke our sympathy. It is however the way of the world – but it is not right – to condemn in strong terms casual lapse on the virtuous, while tolerating habitual wrong-doers.

It should be noted that in the Puranas we see the gods getting entangled in dilemmas of dharma. Indra and other devas are shown often as committing serious sins. Why did the sages who told the Puranas involve themselves in such difficulties? Their aim was to awaken people to a sense of the dangers of adharma. Else, the sages need not have deliberately attributed sinful acts to their own heroes and created difficulties for themselves.

Some persons take pleasure in jumping to wrong conclusions from the incidents in the Puraanas. They argue, “Raavana was a very good king. Vaalmiki has falsely accused him of wicked deeds.” They ask: “Did not Raama act unjustly on a certain occasion? Did not Seeta utter a lie?” and the like.

Valmeeki could well have omitted incidents which are not edifying. Both Raama and Raavana were first presented to us by the poet Vaalmiki. There was no earlier work referring to Raavana that can be quoted to contradict Vaalmiki and stamp him as being partial to Raama, Seeta and the Devas, and twisting facts to deceive people. Vaalmiki’s Raamayana is the fountain source of the story of Raama; in it, one comes across seemingly wrong deeds.

Calm consideration of such situations would show that they are just portrayals of similar difficulties in our day-to-day life. It is for us to benefit from the moral trails contained in them. The lesson of the Ahalya episode is that, however deadly one’s sin, one may hope to be freed from its consequences by penitence and punishment. Instead of condemning others for their sins, we should look within our own hearts and try to purify them of every evil thought. The best of us have need for eternal vigilance, if we would escape sin.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap VIII, Ahalya; P40-42)

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 22

Fate is weird. We would never be able to understand fully, why things happened the way they happened. The author describes it in a wonderful paragraph when Kaikeyi’s mind was changed by evil minded Manthara:

And, yet, as Dasaratha told Raama, even the purest of minds is mutable. When fate conspires with bad counsel, any one of us might be corrupted. And this happened to Kaikeyi. The gods in Heaven had received an assurance, and the sages had performed tapas for the destruction of Raavana. What we call destiny, therefore, ordained that Kaikeyi’s pure heart should be changed by Manthara’s evil counsel. So says Kamban in the Tamil Raamayana in his own inimitable style.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XII, Manthara’s evil counsel; P62)

So true…

- Rahul

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 21

Fate and Karma

Life is weird. At one point, the author describes the unfortunate end of the mighty and righteous king Dashratha:

As described by Valmeeki in the early page of the epic, Dasaratha was one who had mastered all the Vedas and Shaastras, was a farsighted person, the hero of many battles, the performer of many sacrifices, follower of dharma, a far-famed king with many friends and no foes, one who had conquered his senses. His power was like Indra’s. His wealth was like Manu. Fate had ordered that such a one should exile his beloved son and die of a broken heart, with none by him in his last moments but two faithful women stricken by himself with a common sorrow.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XXIII, Last moments; P132-133)

Before his death, King Dashratha recalled an old happening when he had killed a young man (Shravan Kumar) by mistake and his old dependent parents had died learning this, but only after cursing the king of a similar fate. Therefore, we can understand why such an unfortunate fate descended over the righteous king…

- Rahul

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 20

When Hindus die, their children offer shraadha to them and do some rituals for the peace of the departed souls. I found reference to a similar gesture when Raama came to know about Dahsaratha’s death:

The princes, with Seeta and Sumantra went to the river and offered libations for the peace of the departed soul of the king. After other customary ceremonies, the princes returned to the cottage. They help each others’ hands and relieved their sorrow by loud lamentation.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XXVII, The brothers meet; P169)

It means the custom is so very old.

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 19

Leaving the body when purpose is over
At two places in Ramayana, I found instances of rishis entering into fire in order to get them free from their bodies. But in both the cases, they were very sure about their purpose having finished, after years of penances and collecting strength through Yoga. The same is not applicable to people like us.

When the princes came, Sabari produced the fruits she had gathered and kept for them, and described and showed to them the wonders of the Matang aashrama. Then with their leave, she kindled a fire and entering it ascended to heaven.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XL, Left eyelids throbe; P258)

They proceeded to the aashrama of Sarabhanga. Indra was there with other gods, talking to the rishi. Knowing that Raama had arrived, he cut short his talk and went away. Then Raama, with his brother and wife, approached the rishi and humbly saluted him.

The old ascetic said: “It is for you I have been waiting. It is time for me to leave the body but my wish was to see you first. And so I have been waiting. Now my desire is fulfilled, I pass on to you all the merit of my penances.”

Raama answered: “My Lord, should I not earn my own merit? How can I receive what you have earned? I have renounced everything to live in the forest. Advise me where I can best find an abode in the forest and send me forth with your blessing.”

The rishi knew the secret of Raama’s avatar and told him: “Learn from the sage Suteeksha where in the forest you should dwell.”

Then Sarabhanga kindled a fired and entered it. The gross body perished in the flames and a youthful ethereal form rose from the pyre and floated up the heavens.
(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XXIX, Viraadha’s end; P182-183)

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 18

Ram killed the vaanara king Vaali while hiding behind a tree. He had to do so, because Vaali had got a boon from Indra which gave him power to absorb the strength of his opponent when seen in sight. Therefore Raama had no choice but to kill him while not being seen himself. Vaali as such was a good king. But he had ego and his ego made him drive his own brother Sugreeva out of his kingdom. Sugreeva wanted to redeem his honour and his wife which all Vaali had captured, without any real wrong done on the part of Sugreeva. Raama had entered into friendship with Sugreeva and promised Sugreeva to get back his kingdom and wife. Therefore, Vaali had to be killed first. Here is how the author explains this:

Owing to the protective virtue of Indra’s necklace, Raama could not have met Vaali face to face and vanquished him, just as Raavana could not be conquered by the gods. Raama could kill Vaali only when himself unseen. And still the question stands, why should Vaali have been killed at all?

Perhaps the answer is to be found in what Kabandha said to Raama in gratitude for being released from his curse. “Through Sugreeva’s friendship you will recover Seeta” – Sugreeva’s help, not Vaali’s. And so Raama went in search of Sugreeva, found him and pledged his friendship and consecrated by fire. Sugreeva had committed no unforgivable offence against Vaali; yet vaali, with his supernatural strength, persecuted his brother. Hearing the latter’s complaint, Raama had pledged his word to kill Vaali and restore to Sugreeva his wife and make him king as his part of the contract of alliance. Thereafter, Raama had no alternative. To kill Vaali from cover became an inevitable necessity.

Raama erred in running after the magic deer to please his wife. Consequent to this, difficulties and sorrows and conflicts of duty pursued him. If we keep in mind that when God takes a lower and limited form by His own ordinance, limitations follow and we should not be confused thereby. This is my humble view as against other explanations propounded by the pious.


(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XLIII, The slaying of Vaali; P281)

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 17

Diversity

When Hanuman ji went to Lanka, he saw the city and its people. He also checked Raavana’s army. Ramayana describes at one place like this:

All the warriors were clad in armour. Some were handsome, some ugly; complexions varied from fair through brown to black. Some figures were very tall, others very short. Thus Hanumaan saw that the population had been drawn from a wide area with varying climates and that the army had been recruited from the pick of many nations.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XLVIII, The search in Lanka; P317)

It is apparent that there was "diversity" in Lanka. Even in those times, they did not believe in ‘racial supremacy’ or ‘regional chauvinism’, as happens today in many parts of the world (including many states of India).

- Rahul

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 16

Wrong Path is Easier

It is often understood that the wrong path is easier, to attain a short-term goal. Students cheating in exams can pass easily, while those who rely on their own have to give in months of hard labour. One can get his work done by bribing the authorities, but the one who doesn’t give in, has to make lots of efforts in order to get what he wants. Still, there is a greater good in following the path of dharma. This message comes out from the following episode in Ramayana.

Hanuman ji went to Lanka to find the whereabouts of Sita ji. They met and Hanuman ji was to return. Then an idea came to his mind – what if he carries away Sita ji from the sky route, on his back? That would save all the efforts of Ram and Lakshaman and would even prevent a war! But Sita ji didn’t agree. This is what she said, apart from mentioning that it would be dangerous thing to do:

“Apart from that Hanumaan, if you snatch me away stealthily from the Raakshasas it would be no credit to the valour of my lord. The honour of the Kshatriya race demands that he should come and fight and vanquish Raavana and redeem me as the prize of the victory. Would Raama have me stolen back even as Raavana stole me from him? No, my son, return and quickly bring Raama here with Lakshamana and the Vaanara army. Let my lord’s arrows destroy Lanka and send Raavana to Yama’s abode. His victory is certain. Like the fierce sun at the hour of doom, Raama’s arrows will burn the Raakshasa people to ashes.”

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap LIII, Seeta and Hanumaan; P353)

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 2

Hinduism is said not to be a belief but a way of life. Hinduism doesn’t have one single holy book, or one person who started it; or not even one holy place to revere. The set of beliefs practiced by Hindus are diverse. This attitude of Hinduism or Sanatan Dharma as it is also called reflects at many places and times. These days, I am reading ‘Ramayana’ by C. Rajgopalachari who gives wonderful descriptions of the tales fitted to the modern times. He mainly uses descriptions from Valmiki, as well as brings comparative portions from Tulasi Ramcharitmanas and Tamil poet Kamban.

.

When Ram is exiled to forest, King Dashrath dies in grief of Ram’s departure. When prince Bharat returns to Ayodhya and comes to know about all the wrong doings, he becomes wrecked. But in those difficult times, Bharat is quick to make a resolve clinging to Dharma – he decides to go to the forest and persuade Shri Ram to return back to the throne.

.

From the time he arrives in Ayodhya, Bharat is suspected. Even Kaushalya, Ram’s mother suspects him. Then the hunter-king Guha suspects him when he goes seeking way to reach Ram. Even Rishi Bharadwaj suspects him and asks if he intends to do any harm to exiled prince Ram. Grieved each time he is suspected, Bharat often sheds tears and explains that all he wished was to do service to the rightful king Ram and he had no wish for any kingdom.

.

When Bharat arrives and touches Ram’s feet, this is how C.R. describes what Shri Ram saw:

.

Raama saw before him lying on the ground Bharata with hands clasped in supplication, with matted locks and in garments of bark. With grief and fasting, his body had grown lean and he was tanned with fatigue and exposure. Raama embraced him and kissed him on the forehead.

.

(Chap 27, ‘The brothers meet’, Ramayana, C.R., P168)

.

While reading the narrative involving Ram’s exile and Bharat’s return to Ayodhya, I was so touched that tears continuously flowed out of my eyes. I can’t say even an iota of that divine spark reflected in my heart, but surely I was ‘affected’. At another place in the book, C. Rajgopalachari tells first about Bharat’s virtues and also about benefits of reading sacred texts like Ramayana.

.

The story of Bharata in the Ramayana portraying a character of unrivalled purity and sublime selflessness is something more than an episode and stands out by itself even in that noble epic, as holy shrines do on the banks of the Ganga. It uplifts the heart and gives one a glimpse of the heights to which human nature can rise when cleaned by love and devotion.

.

Jnaana and bhakti will automatically grow by a contemplation of the personality of Bharata. In order to recreate the scene and the person in his own mind the reader must bring into play his reverent imagination.

.

We bring with us into this world as our inborn gift some wisdom and reverence. This gift is always in us and though sometimes obscured by prejudice or passion, it keeps alive the divine in man which prevents him from reeling back into the beast.

.

(Chap 26, ‘Bharata suspected’, Ramayana, C.R., P157)

.

The character of Bharat showed us how high our human nature can arise when cleaned by selfless love and devotion. No one needs to preach us to practice these right values – we can only see it in the behaviour of Bharat’s character in Ramayana. No doubt, even without any special formal religious education, most Hindu kids grow up with the right values and moral traits in them, just by reading or listening to texts like Ramayana. Such is the glory of Ramayana.

.

- Rahul

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 1

Hinduism is said not to be a belief but a way of life. Hinduism doesn’t have one single holy book, or one person who started it; or not even one holy place to revere. The set of beliefs practiced by Hindus are diverse. This attitude of Hinduism or Sanatan Dharma as it is also called reflects at many places and times. These days, I am reading ‘Ramayana’ by C. Rajgopalachari who gives wonderful descriptions of the tales fitted to the modern times. He mainly uses descriptions from Valmiki, as well as brings comparative portions from Tulasi Ramcharitmanas and Tamil poet Kamban.

At one stage, he describes the events when Ram’s younger brother Bharat goes to meet and bring exiled prince Ram back to their kingdom of Ayodhya. Bharat himself is grief-stricken and ashamed of the act of his mother. He imagines the hardships that Ram, Seeta and Lakshman had to undergo because of his mother, and breaks down. But the scene on the other side is very different. Here is a portion from the book:

While Bharata was thus engaged in trying to undo the mischief wrought by others, in the forest hut at Chitrakoota, life went on fairly cheerfully. With Lakshmana and Seeta by his side, Raama lacked nothing. The grandeur of the mountain scenery and the forest and the sweet songs and play of the birds pleased his heart. He forgot the sorrow of his exile from kinsfolk and city.

“Look, Seeta, at those birds playing,” he would say. “Look at that rock on the hill with the blue, yellow and red veins shining on it. Look at these plants and creepers with their flowers. We feared life in the forest, not knowing how pleasant it would be. I am so happy here. And I have in addition to this pleasure the feeling that I carry out my father’s promise. We have the joy of duty done besides leading a happy life here. Over and above all this, I am happy that my brother Bharata is ruling the kingdom.” Thus Raama, free from sorrow himself, made Seeta happy.

(Taken from Chapter 27; ‘The Brothers Meet’; Ramayana, P163)

Here, prince Ram shows the way for generations to come. We notice how he is not down but only cheerful even though he was denied his rightful kingdom. He is cheering up his wife and perfectly playing role of an ‘ideal husband’. He embraces the harsh forest life as if it were a bed of roses. I think there is so much to learn from him, not only for Lakshman and Seeta who were at his side, but for all of us who read or listen to Ram’s tale – the Ramayana. Life is full of ups and downs, but those who take it in the right spirits with a positive attitude and keep their heads up, bring glory to their names. Shree Ram showed us this by practicing it.

- Rahul