BOOK 2 (FORESTS)
vana vaasam vasann evam
s`ucir niyata bhojanaha
muulaih puhpai phalai pun`yaih
pitrairain devaamha ca tarpayan.
Sita, Rama and Lakshmana entered the forests. His brother Bharata, accompanied by citizens, ministers, mothers, sages and soldiers visited Rama to persuade him to return to Ayodhya.
Apart from Bharata, Sage Jabali also advised Rama to return to Ayodhya. Rama was replying Jabali. This verse is a part of rAma's reply to jAbAli.
I shall live in the forests with clean and regulated diet. I shall offer virtuous roots, flowers and fruits to Gods and my ancestors.
Compare this to 2-52-102
tau tatra hatvaa
caturah mahaa mrigaan
yayatur vanah patim.
Rama, Sita and Lakshmana ate four deer and devoured on the very second day of entering the forest.
Is this the way of regulating diet?
Rama wanted to offer pure and sacred fruits to Gods and Ancestors. Do they not deserve some meat of deer?
Vol. 3, Book of Forests - AraNya kAnDa,
Chapter i.e.sarga 44, verse 27.
nihatya priSatam ca anyam
maamsam aadaaya raaghavaH
sasAra abhimukhaH tadA.
rAma killed the fake-deer mArIca. He realised that the fake-deer was a demon. He was apprehensive of danger to Sita at home. He should have immediately rushed to the cottage to check up what happened. Instead, he preferred to hunt another deer, extract its meat, and then hurried to the cottage carrying it. Imagine our muni rAma with the bundle of the deer's meat on his shoulders! Were there no fruits at his hermitage?
Husbands going to markets coming back home 'empty-handed' may not be appreciated by wives. Would SIta not have appreciated rAma, returning empty-handed?
He told everybody (kausalya, guha, bharadwaja, jabali) that he would live on fruits.
Yet, I do not want to find fault with rAma, because he was acting under cicumstances of his own era and period. We do not know the problems associated with living in forests of those days.
Instead of calling rAma a lier, we can say that he might have felt from his own forest experience that wild fruits are not as tasty as meat.
A person acting according to his circumstances, will be an average human and not an ideal human or God.
It is the deification of humans as Gods, which can lead to pitfalls of ignorance.
E.g.: Shirdi Saibaba lived just 100 years back. People have already woven hundreds of stories around him, befitting him as a God. People built temples. Satya Sai Baba of Puttaparti lived and died before our eyes. How many stories are in circulation deifying him? We have one 'kalki bhagavAn' of 'varadAyapalem' in Andhra Pradesh, who is building mansions, claiming himself to be God. We have another imposter in Visakhapatnam who makes money in the name of worshipping Shirdi Sai Baba.
If 'exaggerations and magnifications' of Shirdi Sai and Puttaparti Sai can take place in just a hundred years, what will be the degree of 'magnification' which can take place for rAma, Mohammed, Jesus or Buddha over thousands of years of history?
Religions = exaggerations.