Khara Dushana Vadham

Did not the killing of Khara, Dushana and their armies occur in the presence of Piratti? The answer is no. At Janasthana, when the huge rakshasa armies came to attack Sri Rama, He told Lakshmana "O! Lakshmana. Take your weapons and move away with Sita. Go to the cave in that dense forest and protect Her there. Do not hesitate. Even though you are capable of killing all of these rakshasas by yourself, I intend to do that. As such, leave now with Sita" - "tasmAt gruhItvA vaidehIm sharapANir dhanurdhara:, guhAmAshraya shailasya durgAm pAdapasankulAm", "tasmin pravishTe tu guhAm lakshmaNe saha sItayA". Only after they left, did Rama wear His armor and went to battle by Himself. It is on this account that Swami Desikan calls Him "asahAya shUra!" in Raghuveera Gadyam. Thus, it is clear that the Khara Dushana vadham occured only in the absence of Sita.

Maricha Vadham

Next occured the killing of Maricha. It is well known that Rama killed Maricha only after following him a long way away from Sita. Since he had to be killed and that could not happen near Sita, it was Sri Rama who took him a long distance away.

Shurpanakha Bhangam

In between the Viradha vadham and Khara Dushana vadham, the incident with Shurpanakha had occured. Just as He had killed Thataka, He could have killed Shurpanakha. Had He done that, a lot of calamities that occured later could have been avoided. Only because she was left alive (while losing her nose and ears), was she able to go to Ravana and become responsible for the carrying away of Sita. Why did He not kill her in Panchavati itself? The primary reason for that is the presence of Sita.

If that was the primary reason, was there a secondary reason? The killing of Thataka occured because He had been commanded to do so by the sage Vishvamitra. Since no one commanded the killing of Shurpanakha, it did not occur. This is the secondary reason.

Vali Vadham

After Sita was taken away to Lanka, the killing of Vali occured. Even today, there are discussions about whether this was fair or not. No matter how many reasons are shown by learned people and elders for this act, it still seems to be unacceptable to many.

Kambar writes that Vali himself found a reason for why Rama killed him the way He did - "dhEviyaip pirindha pinnai thigaiththanai pOlum seygai". He says that it was because He was separated from Sita that He did this act; had She been with Him, He would not have done that. This may seem like a fanciful interpretation, but it should be considered as the most important of meanings.

Thus far, we have examined the events that occured in Her absence. Next we will look at what happened when She was with Him.