• Lord Ram exiled Mother Sita to follow his Raja Dharma as his peoples doubted Mother Sita's Purity.
  • Many of the people other than Lord Ram and Lakshmana witnessed Mother Sita's Agni Pariksha
  • King Sugreeva,King Vibishana and Entire Vanara army witnessed the Agni Pariksha or Agni Pariksha can be again performed.
  • Those people's can be used to Prove Mother Sita's Purity.
  • Banning a women who didn't commit any Sin is Adharma.


  • Why didn't Lord Ram try to prove Mother Sita's Purity rather exiled her ?

  • Why Lord Ram accepted and followed People's doubt as it was not True and was Adharma ?

  • Think it that way proving Maa Sita's chastity includes questioning her chastity first.
    – Yogi
    Aug 5, 2017 at 14:29
  • "Banning a women who didn't commit any Sin is Adharma". You are directly saying it is Adharma. Adharma according to whom? You should say that also. Who banned? He was following Raja Dharma. As a king people's wish comes first and then himself or the family. "Agni Pariksha can be again performed." Who performed Agni Pariksha? Rama didn't order Sita to perform her chastity. There was no need to prove anything to the people. Eama never had doubts on Sita. Aug 6, 2017 at 12:22
  • @SreeCharan friend if you blame your classmate that he stole your money(your doubt ) and if your teacher punish him accepting your doubt and one day you find that it is wrong then is it dharma or adharma ? To say simply punishing one who didn't commit sin is what dharma or adharma?
    – Sakthi
    Aug 6, 2017 at 16:04
  • This is actually duplicate of Why did Sri Rama banish Lady Sita when he was a witness of her fire-test himself?. Padma Purana mentions the story behind that act.
    – The Destroyer
    Aug 25, 2017 at 9:49
  • @TheDestroyer friend it has many personal opinions and One or Two scriptural answers but they are also explaining why did he banished her and my question is very different from it if you compare both of them you can see it
    – Sakthi
    Aug 27, 2017 at 13:29

5 Answers 5


Why-didnt-lord-ram-try-to-prove-mother-sitas-purity-but-rather-chose-to-exile her? was Adharma ?

The exact answer why shree Rama sent Sita on exile in the forest and not again took her Agni Pariksha is given in Padma Purana Volume 5- PATALAKHANDA - Chapter No. 57 -The Washerman's Former Birth . Page no. 1879 –Motilal _Banasirdass version. The whole chapter is fully dedicated just for answering this question.

According to Padma Purana once when Sita was young and still unmarried was playing in the grove of her garden .She heard the discussion of two parrots. about her and Shree Rama.

3-11 That pair, enjoying (each other's company), quickly flew in the sky, settled on the lap of a mountain, and spoke (to each other): and spoke (to each other): "On the earth, charming Rama will be the king. His wife will be (a woman) by name Sita. The intelligent, powerful king, vanquishing (his enemies), will rule (over eleven thousand years. Blessed is that queen Janaki, and blessed the earth) along with her for is he, named Rama, who having approached each other, will gladly enjoy.

When the couple of parrots was conversing in this way, Sita understood that they are talking about her and realized that this is a divine couple. She then said to her friends: ''Slowly catch this charming pair of the birds." The friends just then went to the mountain, and caught the excellent pair of the birds. Then Sita asked them about what they were discussing. Who are they and two where they came from? Who is Rama, and who is Sita? From where did they got the information about them!! ? The pair of birds said:

19-26. There is a very great sage Valmiki who is the best among those who know dharma. That sage made his disciples sing the future adventures of Rama. He, engrossed in the wellbeing of all beings, everyday remembered its words. All those future adventures of Rama, being sung repeatedly, were heard by both of us; they came to us (i.e. were mastered by us) due to repetition. Listen to them. In the end we shall tell who that Rama is and who that Janaki is and what will happen to her with Rama of a playful nature. Glorious Visnu, good stories about whom are sung by celestial women, will, having divided himself into four, come up at the sacrifice performed by Rsyasrnga. He, having a bow in his hand, will come along with Visvamitra and his own brothers to Mithila. Then there seeing a bow difficult to be taken (i.e. wielded) by other kings, he will break it, and will obtain the very charming daughter of Janaka. O excellent one, we have heard that with her he will rule over a large kingdom. O you of a beautiful body, we who had flown there, heard this and other (things) about you, told by those who lived there.

Then the pair of birds asked Sita to let them go where they are living. Hearing these words, Janaki reveled her identity and said to them: I am that Janaki. the daughter of Janaka, which you are menrioning. And told them that shall truly release you when that very charming Rama comes to me; not otherwise

41-53 Hearing these words they trembled and were frightened. They were mutually (i.e. both) afraid; (and) said this to Janakt: "O good lady, we are birds, living in forests and resorting to trees. We wander everywhere. We would not get happiness (merely by staying) at home. I am pregnant. Having gone to my place and having given birth to sons (i.e. young ones) I shall come (back). I have told you the truth."

(Though) thus addressed by the female parrot, Sita did not release her. Then her husband (i.e. the male parrot), eager, and with his face hung down spoke to her: "Sita, release my wife. My charming wife would be (i.e. is) pregnant. Having performed her (i.e. after her) delivery I shall come to you, .Thus,, addressed, Sita said to male parrot "O you very intelligent one, you can gladly go. I shall keep this happy one, doing what is dear to me,' near me.

57-66. Though admonished with various words, she did not release her. The (parrot's) wife, who was angry, and miserable, then cursed Janaka's daughter: "As you are separating me from my husband, in the same way you will be, when pregnant, separated from Rama." When she, the afflicted one, was repeatedly saying like this, her life departed due to misery, full of the distress of her husband. For her who was repeatedly remembering Rama and uttering (the name) Rama, a divine car properly arrived. The female parrot became luminous when she had gone to heaven. When she died, her husband, that lord of birds, was extremely angry, and being distressed, fell into Gariga: ''In Rama's city, full of people, I will be born as (a sjjdra so) that due to my words she will be dejected, and extremely unhappy due to separation (from her husband)." Saying so, he who was distressed, angry, frightened and shaking due to separation from her, fell into the water of Ganga graced with eddies. Due to his being angry, due to his being distressed, and due to his having insulted SIta, he obtained very (mean) sudrahood (as he was born as) a washerman named Krodhana. That best bird (or best brahmana) who, doing ill to the great, abandons his life through anger, obtains sudrahood after he dies. That took place. Due to the words of the washerman she was censured and separated. On account of the curse of the washerman, she was separated (from Rama), and she went to the forest.

Conclusion – So from this story of Padama Purana ,we come to know that Sita faced exile in the forest and separated from Shree Rama while she was pregnant because of curse of divine Parrots. And just because of the curse Lord Ram didn’t try to prove Mother Sita's Purity again by Agani–Pariksha but rather exiled her. And after all this was just divine LEELA of Lord Vishnu’s avatara shree Rama so it’s not considered adharma cause we don’t fully understand divine leelas.

  • 3
    Excellent finding! Never knew this part of Ramayana.
    – TheLittleNaruto
    Oct 9, 2018 at 5:40
  • 2
    @TheLittleNaruto - Yes , Padma purana ,Skanda Purana are large texts also mahabharata and they contain many stories.I also came to know most of the stories after reading :-). Oct 9, 2018 at 6:40

Rama never had any doubt. Even layman's doubt was already long-ago cleared by Agni Pariksha. People thinking it was some easy drama. Just put your hand on top of candle for 5 seconds, and see if you can bear it. Only people who have done agni pariksha themselves have right to comment about Sita devi or Draupadi (who does Agni snanam before entering house of other husband).

People keep on questioning all the time. These people will also question Rama as why he killed Vali from hiding. Vali himself asked Rama 6 questions, and after Rama satisfactorily answered, Vali gave his son Angada to Rama for guardianship. Still, even today, there is debate, because they don't listen to Ramayana upanyasam from elders fully.

Rama wanted his wife who was garbhavati, to be under Rishi's care. Because during garbham, all good things must be heard by embryo/foetus. And who better than Valmiki muni to impart this knowledge. And after they are born, Lava & Kusha learn Ramayana from Valmiki.

Also, as a king, and as Dharma incarnate (ramo vigrahavaan dharmah), he is not supposed to ignore his subjects, however varied their opinions might be.

So, as '2 mango with 1 stone', he sent Sita devi to Valmiki ashrama.


Shri RAma himself was not convinced to accept Sita at first, irrespective of whether she was chaste (pure) or not.

And he was very much right in that. According to the Dharma [at least during RAmAyana times], a wife is not acceptable & ought to set free if another man takes her, for whatever reasons. Shri RAma was aware of this morality. Besides, abduction of Sita happened because of her own mistakes (sending RAma, sending Lakshmana, crossing rekha). Hence, after killing RAvana, he followed the same Dharma towards Sita irrespective of her purity.

This story is described as part of MahAbhArata - Vana Parva by sage Markendeya to Yudhishtira:

And having slain the Ten-necked Rakshasa, the lord Rama of worldwide fame, that conqueror of hostile cities, bestowed Lanka on Vibhishana. Then that old and wise counsellor (of Ravana) known by the name of Avindhya, with Sita walking before him but behind Vibhishana who was at the front, came out of the city. And with great humility Avindhya said unto the illustrious descendant of Kakutstha, 'O illustrious one, accept thou this goddess, Janaka's daughter of excellent conduct!' Hearing these words, the descendant of Ikshwaku's race alighted from his excellent chariot and beheld Sita bathed in tears. And beholding that beautiful lady seated within her vehicle, afflicted with grief, besmeared with filth, with matted locks on head, and attired in dirty robes, Rama, afraid of the loss of his honour, said unto her, 'Daughter of Videha, go withersover thou likest! Thou art now free! What should have been done by me, hath been done! O blessed lady, owning me for thy husband, it is not meet that thou shouldst grow old in the abode of the Rakshasa! It is for this I have slain that wanderer of the night! But how can one like us, acquainted with every truth of morality embrace even for a moment a woman that had fallen into other's hands? O princess of Mithila whether thou art chaste or unchaste, I dare not enjoy thee, now that thou art like sacrificial butter lapped by a dog!'

Hence the discussion of RAma following common people's doubts & asking Sita to perform Agni Pariksha -- becomes moot. The morality of those times were not allowing such act (i.e. accepting Sita after being abducted by RAvana). Shri RAma was conversant with all truths of Morality & hence followed the scripture prescribed path.

The subsequent story states that how Sita, several deities & Brahma-deva himself asked RAma to accept Sita.

Then the divine and pure-souled Brahma of four faces, that Creator of the Universe himself sprung from a lotus, showed himself on his car to Raghu's son. And Sakra and Agni and Vayu, and Yama and Varuna and the illustrious Lord of the Yakshas, and the holy Rishis, and king Dasaratha also in a celestial and effulgent form and on car drawn by swans, showed themselves ...
-- princess of Videha spoke ... 'O prince, I impute no fault to thee, for thou art well acquainted with the behaviour that one should adopt towards both men and women.... have never, even in my dreams, cherished the image of any other person, so be thou my lord as appointed by the gods.'
-- And the Wind-god was heard to say ...
-- And the god of Fire said, ...
-- And Varuna then said, ...
-- And Brahma himself then said, ... 'O son, in thee that art honest and pure and conversant with the duties of royal sages, this conduct is not strange. Listen, however, ... '

However, RAma was finally commanded by the soul of his father Dasaratha & he gladly accepted (again showing the reverence to his father, a proper following Dharma):

-- Dasaratha said, 'I have been gratified with thee, O child! Blessed be thou, I am thy father Dasaratha! I command thee to take back thy wife, and rule thy kingdom, O thou foremost of men!'
-- Rama then replied, 'If thou art my father, I salute thee with reverence, O king of kings! I shall indeed, return, at thy command, to the delightful city of Ayodhya!'

Further story doesn't state of any Agni Pariksha. However, even if that had happened, that was not because RAma earlier thought Sita as chaste and then doubted due to public pressure. But that would have been due to a moral responsibility towards his citizens about proving the chastity of the queen, they revere.

  • I disagree with mistakes of Sita part. I don't think Rama ever blamed Sita for that. So those things should not be mentioned in this scenario.
    – user6990
    Nov 12, 2017 at 16:24

In the 45th Chapter of Uttara Khanda Sri Rama justifies the banishment of Seeta. He mentions that his doubt on Seeta's chastity was cleared, when at the Agni Pariksha all the Devas and Gandharvas came along with Indra to proclaim Seeta's purity and hand her over to him.

The Incarnation of Sri Ramachandra was of Uttam Maryada Purusha - most superior man who follows the path of Dharma. Raja Dharma lays down that the king is not only the sustainer of his people, but is also governed by their desires.

The rumour about Seeta's character was demeaning both of them. No king should live with 'apakirti' - which was what Sri Rama and Seetaa Devi were being subjected to. To escape from 'apakirti' Sri Rama was willing to give up even his own life - so why not Seeta (Uttara Kandha 45:14).

Sri Rama was on the horns of a dilemma - under Raja Dharma he had to satisfy his subject's reasonable demands. He was Maryada Purusha and as a king he could not co-habit with a woman whose chastity was in doubt. But as a husband who knew his wife was chaste and it had been proved to him, he could not forsake his wife at the whims and fancies of the public. [As Shakespeare wrote in 'Julius Ceaeser' Ceaser's wife should not only be pure but should also appear so - of some such words to the same effect]. Sri Rama chose to follow Raja Dharma, rather than give up his throne.

was this right / moral/ etc. is another separate question.

  • friend mother seeta was also a citizen of lord ram's rule and as a citizen of his rule lord ram should have tried to investigate and find the truth and clear the doubt of citizens and as a king lord ram should clear the doubts of citizens and reveal the truth.Isn't this also a duty of a King
    – Sakthi
    Aug 6, 2017 at 7:19
  • Seeta Devi too undoubtedly was a citizen of Sri Rama's kingdom - as I mentioned earlier, whether Sri Rama's decision to follow Raja Dharma instead of Pati Dharma was right / moral is an unanswered question. To the extent I have perused the Puranas and Ramayana in various languages - this aspect has neither been covered nor mentioned. Aug 6, 2017 at 8:02
  • Friend Are you saying that there is NO ANSWER to this question ?
    – Sakthi
    Aug 27, 2017 at 13:34

I feel people have misunderstood role of dhobi in ancient Vedic society. Meaning of agni parixa is not about chastity the way it is understood today but about a tapasvi's test. Ramayan is another version of the more ancient story in which Sati metaphorically burns her gross body desires in agni of tapas. Sita's agni parixa is the same. It is not about actually sitting in a real fire. Sita, like many others was a Mahisi who are main participants in yagyas. They had to do mantra siddhis which involved intense tapasya and so celibacy. Sita and Ram were not 'married' as we understand today. But paired up as ideal Mahisa and Mahisi. Mahisa were also defenders and fought when required. The two were the yin and yang and had to have perfect balance when doing yagyas. Pati meant leader and not husband like it does today. Sita had become highly advanced in tapasya and so it was decided that she would advance as a rushi, which too is for benefit for society. This is why she goes to ashram which was not orphanage. In those days there were no orphans since all children went to residential gurukuls together and were trained by rushis (without any prejudice). Later they were given posting (like in army) and mentored by seniors. Later even adults went for further education. Sita later took samadhi in pruthvi and this is only possible if a person is advanced tapasvi. Story makes sense if read as a case study of Sanatan Dharma and Yoga. Ancient Arya society was cashless and martial. Even dhobis were part of the govt. as mentioned in Mahabharat, and so carried weight. They were not merely servants. Nor was Manthara. Just like how a prime minister will employ highly educated advisors, not illiterate, dumb servants. For example, Asvamedha was not about horses but about being done with the speed of a horse. Asva has been translated as sun, or Asvinau who were scientists and highly knowledgeable. Medha means essence, while Medhaa means wisdom. So yagya was about spreading wisdom and knowledge and entire nation.

  • So you mean that sita was not ever abandoned while pregnant ? I feel this incident is an interpolation in the text Nov 13, 2017 at 0:40
  • The whole premise is wrong because authors didn't understand ancient life style of aryas. They were highly spiritual and this required constant tapasya. Sita was one of the panchkanya (see sloka), so not wife so not pregnant. She was Mahisi who participated in yagyas after attaining mantra siddhis. They were dharmic partners not husband-wife. Nov 13, 2017 at 17:21
  • So who then knows better about rama And seeta ? Further doing tapas has nothing to do with not having kid or getting pregnant. In fact all the rishis were happily married and continued tapas. Please see my answer s on this forum about grihastham. Btw what do you mean by mahisi ? Mahisha means buffalo. Nov 13, 2017 at 18:05
  • Mahisi does not actually mean buffalo (although many think so). Metaphors were used. So it could mean as strong as a buffalo. Mahisi and Mahisa were titles given to those who specialised in yagyas and did intense tapasya to make sure the mantras actually worked. For example, bringing rain etc.Rushis were NOT married, atleast not all the time. The word 'pati' meant leader,i.e.kulapati.Women on his team were not wives but trainees,yagya personell.Yoga+Bhoga can't go together.Sadhna+meditation basic reqd.for siddhi.Logical sequence. Nov 13, 2017 at 18:18
  • I think you are strongly in favor of sanyasa which i strongly reject as a part.of vedic life. I am ready to provide references.for rishi and dAmpatya life if at all you would be interested. Or you can also participate in agama chat room here Nov 13, 2017 at 18:59

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .