Many critiques of Hinduism, especially the ones belonging to other religions state that Sītā Devī married Śrī Rāma at the age of 6. This topic is a hot topic of religious debate and in this “debate”, many people have made derogatory and vitriolic statements about Śrī Rāma, up to the point of labelling him as a ‘paedophile’.
Let’s take a closer look at this.
The full narrative revolves around the verse from Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa, Araṇya-Kāṇḍa, Sarga 47, Śloka 4 [1]. The context is that Rāvaṇa disguised as a brahmana is demanding bhikṣā with the intent of abducting Sītā Devī and asks her to tell him about herself.
उषित्वा द्वादश समा इक्ष्वाकुणां निवेशने।
भुञ्जाना मानुषान्भोगान्सर्वकामसमृद्धिनी।।3.47.4।।“I lived in the house of the Ikshvakus for twelve years and enjoyed all kinds of pleasures meant for mortals.”
Further when talking about vanavāsa she says,
मम भर्तामहातेजा वयसा पञ्चविंशकः।।3.47.10।।
अष्टादश हि वर्षाणि मम जन्मनि गण्यते।My husband who was very bold was twenty five years and I had completed eighteen years since my birth.
This implies Śrī Rāma was 25 and Sītā Devī was 18 when they left for vanavāsa and in the previous verse (3.47.4) she says she enjoyed Ayodhyā for 12 years. using simple subtraction we can easily deduce that she was
18 – 12 = 6 years old when they got married. And Śrī Rāma was 25 – 12 = 13.
Well, that’s kinda disappointing, right? But wait, Rāmāyaṇa has over 300 recensions, Vālmīki has been attributed with Rāmāyaṇa and Adbhuta
Rāmāyaṇa…so which one is authentic?
There are 42 found manuscripts of Araṇya-Kāṇḍa. The critical edition of Rāmāyaṇa [2] uses 29 of these.
Why is the critical edition important?
Critical editions are highly academic, and authentic because they represent an extensive study of the scripture from different languages and recensions.
So what does the critical edition say?
The critical edition has mentioned the same as most southern recensions (better preserved) including one of the oldest being the Bengal recension saying Sītā Devī stayed one year in Ayodhyā before the exile and not twelve.
The verse is as follows:
संवत्सरं चाध्युषिता राघवस्य निवेशने |
भुञ्जाना मानुषान्भोगान्सर्वकामसमृद्धिनी ||
“संवत्सरं राघवस्य निवेशने” means according to Sītā Devī she stayed for just one year at Ayodhyā.
This completely changes the equation. This means Sītā Devī was 18 – 1 = 17 and Śrī Rāma was 25-1 = 24 years old.
Let's see more references.
When Sītā Devī was talking to Anasūyā she said
पतिसंयोगसुलभं वयो दृष्ट्वा तु मे पिता।
चिन्तामभ्यगमद्धीनो वित्तनाशादिवाधनः।।
It means Janaka was anxious when he saw Sītā Devī had attained the “pati-saṃyoga” age. According to Vedic texts that would be 16 and so is Manusmṛiti.
Conclusion:
The most authentic version of Rāmāyaṇa to refer to is the critical edition because it is based on the academic study of multiple recensions of multiple languages and interpretations. 29 out of the 42 available manuscripts of Araṇya-Kāṇḍa are used in the critical edition. According to the critical edition, Sītā Devī stayed at Ayodhyā for one year before the exile. Hence, Sītā Devī was 17 when she got married to Śrī Rāma and not 6.
Sources:
[1] Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa, Araṇya-Kāṇḍa, Sarga 47
[2] Rāmāyaṇa Araṇya-Kāṇḍa Critical Edition
