Our immediate purpose is not to go into that question. This is not the time to study the mind of Raghava as shown by the Poet nor to seek an answer for the whys and hows of the existence of grief in him, and how and why he appeared differently et al. As I had occasion to mention in the last post, it would be nothing less than sheer arrogance to question the sincerity of Sri Rama. We will take this up later. But grief was there in his heart. Of this, the Poet does not mince words. He is so plain, straight and simple.
Just two Slokas preceding the address of Sita, that is in the sixth and seventh Slokas of the same Canto (Canto XXVI of Ayodhya Kanda) Valmiki says, "Forthwith springing up from her seat, Sita tremblingly saw her celebrated husband stricken with grief, his mind perplexed with anxiety. Seeing her the said Sri Rama (a scion of Raghu), whose mind was given to righteousness could not contain that grief existing in his mind; hence it became manifest.
'tam shokam raghavaha sodum tato vivrutataam gataha."
There was grief in his mind. That could not be contained any longer, in the presence of his wife. A grief that he could stoically not show before Kaikeyi, a grief that did not manifest itself before Lakshmana, who is nothing other than his own mind and his own soul, whom he held above everything else, a grief that could not be read by his very own mother Kausalya, could not be kept under check any longer before Sita!
That shows Rama so human, so close to us. Not a single one of us could resist himself from taking delight in the thought, 'O was that so! Was he like me!' The greatness of the Poet lies in the fact that he has not sieved the character of Rama through a filter of so-many-microns and presented only the super-human qualities of him. Rama displayed many a human quality very much like us in many respects. When the Lord chose to take a human form, he lived as a human being after all!
"Then when he went before Sita, it was still worse," says Right Hon'ble Srinivasa Sastriyar referring to this scene. He continues, "Natural. We like to feel that Rama behaved as you and I would have behaved in similar circumstances. Probably we should have wept and rolled on the floor. Rama too was susceptible to some extent. Instead of coming back rejoicing and jumping, he wore a sad and thoughtful countenance, and Sita was struck with grief to see him."
I am not able to see another scene in the entire Valmiki Ramayana that comes close to this one, where Rama has such a private feeling that he does not let even Lakshmana know of it. This even appears to shake the belief that Lakshmana was dearer to him than Sita, though it cannot in any way be denied that between the two of the most endeared, Rama held his brother dearer than Sita in many respects.
It was not a question of trust. Who else could he have trusted other than Lakshmana! But the point is, he could not let him know his feelings at this point of time, as Lakshmana was agitated already. That would have intensified Lakshmana's feelings, aggravated the Whatever it is, the fact remains that Janaki is the only one to whom he opened his heart out. And also the fact that when the heart melts at the sight of the loved one, it is not stout enough to hold a secret, a secret any more!
Our immediate purpose is not to go into that question. This is not the time to study the mind of Raghava as shown by the Poet nor to seek an answer for the whys and hows of the existence of grief in him, and how and why he appeared differently et al. As I had occasion to mention in the last post, it would be nothing less than sheer arrogance to question the sincerity of Sri Rama. We will take this up later. But grief was there in his heart. Of this, the Poet does not mince words. He is so plain, straight and simple. 
That shows Rama so human, so close to us. Not a single one of us could resist himself from taking delight in the thought, 'O was that so! Was he like me!' The greatness of the Poet lies in the fact that he has not sieved the character of Rama through a filter of so-many-microns and presented only the super-human qualities of him. Rama displayed many a human quality very much like us in many respects. When the Lord chose to take a human form, he lived as a human being after all!
I am not able to see another scene in the entire Valmiki Ramayana that comes close to this one, where Rama has such a private feeling that he does not let even Lakshmana know of it. This even appears to shake the belief that Lakshmana was dearer to him than Sita, though it cannot in any way be denied that between the two of the most endeared, Rama held his brother dearer than Sita in many respects. 
