This section of the Rāmāyana was incredibly confusing for me to read. I felt like I had a grasp on dharma and who Rama was prior to reading this section which is basically introducing an entirely different character. You go from Rāma being a character who would never do anything unethical because of his belief in dharma to a Rāma that would consume someone with his fiery eyes (272, 355). Which of these two characters is Rāma? He cannot be both. Hanumān describes Rāma as someone with innate virtues which he says is an accurate description, but that is not the Rāma seen in other parts of the Rāmāyana (360). Why would a Rāma with such innate virtues who cares about his dharma kill the rāksasas or even present the danger that's claimed? (353). Hopefully, these questions will be answered, or at least clarified, in the last section of the Rāmāyana.
I think you make some really good points, Olivia! I also was more confused by Rāma's character in this section. I also was more aware of just how often he is described as being virtuous or having "his virtues unrivalled" (284). And we see that at times, but also, it seems like this is just an accepted fact about him that doesn't have to be verified? Because there are also times where he acts in a way that seems contradictory to a character who is supposed to be the best example of a righteous man.
95 words
Olivia, I wrote about this same thing. I don't understand how Rama is this perfect embodiment of dharma when he dent seem to be as great as the introduction lead on him to be. He doesn't seem to treat everyone like this perfect son and ideal king would. He just seems like a guy after his own interests. I thought I had a pretty good idea of what dharma was until I started to read this section. It seem much more murky than what I thought, just based on Rama's actions.
91 words
Olivia,
Some good stuff here! I felt much of the same confusion that you describe when I was reading as well, the danger that Rama presents in this section of the text seems to come from nowhere at times. I think it may be fleshed out further as we continue to read, but I like what you have to say about it!
Some good stuff here! I felt much of the same confusion that you describe when I was reading as well, the danger that Rama presents in this section of the text seems to come from nowhere at times. I think it may be fleshed out further as we continue to read, but I like what you have to say about it!
62 words
One thing is that Rāma is a kṣatriya, thus his dharma is to fight and kill enemies. It is his proper role. Also, he is restoring dharma to the world (as an avatar of Viṣṇu), which Rāvaṇa is upsetting (even if Rāvaṇa also has some good qualities). Part of the issue is that "dharma" has multiple meanings and cannot be adequately conveyed in one word or even several words.
*However,* I agree that Rāma does not seem as perfect as is so often proclaimed.
84 words