Did Sita Actually Went to the Forest/Authenticity of Uttara Kand?

This particular incident of Sending a pregnant Sita to forest, is used widely to rile the character of the Maryada Purushottam, and the Hindu System in general. This has been used for political gains by so called Dalit leaders to separate an important part of serving people in society, and by christian missionaries to convert more and more people, besides the general leftist propaganda to demean anything related to greatness of Hinduism.

Multiple sources exist which prove that the entire addendum of Uttara Kand is a fake one, created probably for malicious intent. The Valmiki Ramayan is true to its meaning, and to save its sanctity, we investigate the lies propagated by Uttara Kandam.

1. The Valmiki Ramayana ends with Sri Rama's coronation as the King of Kosala Kingdom.

सर्वे लक्षणसम्पन्नाः सर्वे धर्मपरायणाः ||
दशवर्षसहस्राणि रामो राज्यमकारयत् | (Yuddha Kanda 128 Sarga 106 Sloka)

"All the people were endowed with excellent characteristics. All were engaged in virtue. Rama was engaged in the kingship thus for Ten thousand years."

2. This was followed by Phala Shruti at the end slokas of Yuddha Kanda, 

धर्मयं यशस्यमायुष्यं राज्ञां च विजाअवहम् ||
आदिकाव्यमिदं चार्षं पुरा वाल्मीकिना कृतम् |
पठेद्यः शृणुयाल्लोके नरः पापात्प्रमुच्यते || (Yuddha Kanda 128 Sarga 107-108 Slokas)

"In this world, whoever person reads and listens to this foremost lyric derived from the speech of a sage, which is endowed with righteousness, conferring fame and longevity, fetching victory to kings and as written at first by Valmiki, that person is delivered from all misfortune."

श्रुत्वा रामायणमिदं दीर्घमायिश्च विन्दति |
रामस्य विजयं चैव सर्वमक्लिष्ठकर्मणः || (Yuddha Kanda 128 Sarga 112 Sloka)

"On hearing this epic of Ramayana and all the episode of victory of Rama, and his detatched karmas, a person gets longevity to life."

विनायकाश्च शाम्यन्ति गृहे तिष्ठन्ति यस्य वै |
विजयेत महीं राजा प्रवासि स्वस्तिमान् भवेत् || (Yuddha Kanda 128 Sarga 116 Sloka)

"Whoever carefully listens to the epic in his house, all obstacles come to an end. A king conquers the earth. A person staying away from home, fares well."

In all Hindu Paraayana or Stotra texts it is a tradition to incorporate the Phala Shruti, the result of reading a Sacred Text, in the end of any recital but never in the middle.

It clearly indicates that Sage Valmiki in fact closed his writing on Srimad Ramayana. Consequently, Uttara Kand can be concluded to be a later addition, with malicious intent.

3. While trying to stop Ravana in ordering killing of Sri Hanuman, Vibhishana says there was no precedence, of killing messenger (Sundar Kanda).

वैरूप्याम् अन्गेषु कश अभिघातो |
मौण्ड्यम् तथा लक्ष्मण सम्निपातः |
एतान् हि दूते प्रवदन्ति दण्डान् |
वधः तु दूतस्य न नः श्रुतो अपि || (Sundara Kanda 52 Sarga 15 Sloka)

"Some of the punishments to an envoy are-deforming the limbs, striking with a whip, shaving the head and impressing marks on the body. Indeed, we have not heard at any time of killing a messenger."

Vibhishana was saying just One month before Great Battle that took place in Lanka. He was saying that till then there was no precedence of Killing a messenger.

However, it was narrated in the 13 th Sarga of Uttara Kanda about killing of the messenger of Kubera by Ravana. This incident stated to had been took place at the time of Ravana's commencement of wars on Devatas, Yakshas, Gandharvas, etc, at his younger age.

Had Ravana really killed a messenger of Kubera, Vibhishana might not had said that there was no precedence of Killing a messenger.

Hence, the authenticity of Uttara Kanda is objectionable.

4. In the end slokas of Yuddha Kanda it was described that While Rama was ruling the kingdom, people survived for thousands of years, with thousands of their progeny, all free of illness and grief. And, old people did not perform obsequies concerning youngsters.

निर्दस्युरभवल्लोको नानर्थः कन् चिदस्पृशत् |
न च स्म वृद्धा बालानां प्रेतकार्याणि कुर्वते || (Yuddha Kanda 128 Sarga 100 Sloka)

"The world was bereft of thieves and robberies. No one felt worthless nor did old people perform obsequies concerning youngsters."

It is said by 'Valmiki' that in Sri Rama's reign there were no premature deaths in his kingdom. It would be unbearable to a father, if his son dies before him. Any father wishes to die in the hands of his son. It was stated in above sloka that while Sri Rama was ruling the kingdom of Kosala, no youngster died before his father died consequently old people did not perform obsequies concerning youngsters. .

However, a premature death of a son of a Brahmin was described in the 73 - 76 Sargas of Uttara Kanda.

5. Ramayana was written much earlier to Mahabharata. In the 272-289 Sections of Vana Parva of Mahabharata, the story of Sri Rama was narrated to Yuddhistara by Sage Markandeya. Though the story contains minor variations compared to the story told in the Srimad Ramayana, those episodes describe the story of Sri Rama in full.

However, the sage Markandeya ends the story of Sri Rama in 289 Section of Vana Parva of Mahabharata with the coronation of Sri Rama as the king of Kosala Kingdom. No mention was made therein the story of Uttara kand.

6. If Narada muni would have narrated the Ramayana along with the Uttara Kanda, would it have portrayed Shri Ram as the maryada purshottam? The mention of 'modern' cities such as Taxila (built around 6th - 5th century BCE) clearly rules out Maharshi Valmiki writing it, as the Ramayana is a story of the Treta Yuga.  

We can quote many such contradictions. Hence, the Uttara Kanda is not worthy to be considered authentic reference, and is discardable in its entirety.

it may also be noted that the episode of Sri Rama Beheading a Shudra "Shambhuka" for doing penance only appears in the manufactured " Uttara Kanda" . This has no ideological correspondence with vedic system, which is filled with stories of lower Varna people getting to become Rishis and warriors through their inner spirit. Valmiki was a shudra himself, Karna was accepted by Parshurama, Jabala was accepted by Upanishad Rishis, VedVyasa, the creator of Mahabharata was a lower varna, and numerous other examples.

It is also seen that some Jain Monk published a book in 70s, highlighting this very episode. I suggest all Jain friends to please note that the entire story of Sita Ji going to forest is fake and do not create bad rapport with Sanatan Panthis on this basis.