Krishna proved his innocence In the following context

Sons of Satwata. Bhoja princes of Mrittikávatí. Súrya the friend of Satrájit: appears to him in a bodily form: gives him the Syamantaka gem: its brilliance and marvellous properties. Satrájit gives it to Prasena, who is killed by a lion: the lion killed by the bear Jámbavat. Krishńa suspected of killing Prasena, goes to look for him in the forests: traces the bear to his cave: fights with him for the jewel: the contest prolonged: supposed by his companions to be slain: he overthrows Jámbavat, and marries his daughter Jámbavatí: returns with her and the jewel to Dwáraká: restores the jewel to Satrájit, and marries his daughter Satyabhámá. Satrájit murdered by Śatadhanwan: avenged by Krishńa. The quarrel between Krishńa and Balaráma. Akrúra possessed of the jewel: leaves Dwáraká. Public calamities. Meeting of the Yádavas. The story of Akrúra's birth: he is invited to return: accused by Krishńa of having the Syamantaka jewel: produces it in full assembly: it remains in his charge: Krishńa acquitted of having purloined it.

Similarly, Rama asked to prove the innocence of Sita.

Why did they even care about others opinions if they are not involved in guilt? Are there any references stating that one should prove innocence or to care others opinion on us? Or is it only valid for Kshatriyas to care what others think about others opinion on them?

closed as primarily opinion-based by YDS, Swami Vishwananda, Suresh Ramaswamy, Chinmay Sarupria, Pratik Bhat Oct 5 '18 at 2:51

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • They want to set examples on how to lead a human life – Parabrahman Jyoti Oct 3 '18 at 13:34
  • Means that they are saying to humans to care about what others think? – hanugm Oct 3 '18 at 13:35
  • 1
    The jewel problem is the time period where Shani dasa was running for Krishna as per some references I've seen! – Parabrahman Jyoti Oct 3 '18 at 13:35
  • Not like that. In Lord Rama case, he was a king and he led by example as king. – Parabrahman Jyoti Oct 3 '18 at 13:37
  • @hanugm "Krishna proved his innocence" - first of all this innocence word is inappropriate...it seems u hv already judged Krishna...and it should be understood that King or his family should clear such doubts...even today if some allegation is there on PM don't u think a idle PM should not clear such doubts? – YDS Oct 4 '18 at 3:23

यद्यदाचरति श्रेष्ठस्तत्तदेवेतरो जन: | स यत्प्रमाणं कुरुते लोकस्तदनुवर्तते || 3-21||

yad yad ācharati śhreṣhṭhas tat tad evetaro janaḥ sa yat pramāṇaṁ kurute lokas tad anuvartate

You should also perform your work to set an example for the good of the world. Whatever actions great persons perform, common people follow. Whatever standards they set, all the world pursues.

Humanity is inspired by the ideals that they see in the lives of great people. Such leaders inspire society by their example and become shining beacons for the masses to follow. Leaders of society thus have a moral responsibility to set lofty examples for inspiring the rest of the population by their words, deeds, and character. When noble leaders are in the forefront, the rest of society naturally gets uplifted in morality, selflessness, and spiritual strength. But in times when there is a vacuum of principled leadership, the rest of society has no standards to pursue and slumps into self-centeredness, moral bankruptcy, and spiritual lassitude. Hence, great personalities should always act in an exemplary manner to set the standard for the world. Even though they themselves may have risen to the transcendental platform, and may not need to perform prescribed Vedic duties, by doing so, they inspire others to perform prescribed Vedic actions.

  • Your quote is fine but as OP says, 'Rama asked to prove the innocence of Sita' - so is that what the masses need to follow? – sv. Oct 4 '18 at 17:02
  • Yes, the problem today is everybody wants to be trustable by belief not by proving/doing things. It is hard to accept that "it is totally fine if people are not trusting and asking for extra actions to prove yourself", it's human nature, Rama gracefully accepted that and did whatever need to be done. – Love Sharma Oct 4 '18 at 21:49
  • 'Rama gracefully accepted that' - ha ha, but for the masses, that's not the issue. Do women (or whoever is on the receiving end) also 'gracefully accept' abandonment by their husbands or take a fire test to prove something or the other? – sv. Oct 5 '18 at 1:01
  • Yes, If she trust and love her husband. – Love Sharma Oct 5 '18 at 1:08
  • 1
    Rama took priksha of Sita not coz he has doubt on Sita. But instead he took so no other can lift finger on Sita. Besides one more reason was there, Rama need to take Sita back from Agni Deva. Actually, only clone of Sita was abducted by Ravana, and original Sita was in protection of Agni Deva. When Laksham came to know Rama was going to take agni priksha then Lakshman started protest against it. Then Rama told him truth that he just wanna his Sita back from Agni deva, that's why this leela is important. – Rishabh Oct 5 '18 at 12:26

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