It's difficult to date a super hero. They're busy, unreliable, moody. Most make promises they can't keep. But that's the hegemony of promises: AKA well-intentioned resolutions reliant on the notion of life in a permanent external honeymoon state rather than a journey towards internal, self-sufficient bliss. Think of Superman and Lois Lane, Aeneas and Dido, Ram and Sita. Now, as adults, we all know the honeymoon stage is just that: a stage, even if we're blindly standing smack-dab in the middle of it. And yet, save deep suffering, we cling to the idea of perfection and permanence in all external states of being, especially where relationships are concerned. Meantime, we're so busy polishing the pedestal of what was and what could or should be that we not only don't notice the man behind the maya--illusion-- we also strive to maintain the maya like there's no manana.
Take Ram and Sita. Star-crossed lovers whose tempestuous honeymoon is the divine equivalent of Groucho Marx's Hello, I Must be Going. Sita loves Ram so much she follows him into exile only to be kidnapped soon after by his rival. As if that weren't enough, after Hanuman rescues her from Lanka, Ram's peeps cast aspersions on Sita's fidelity. After all that time in captivity how could sexy Sita not have canoodled with the dashingly villainous king? In order to test her purity, the people of Ayodhya make Sita walk through fire. Which she does. Willingly. In fact, sister jumps right in. Luckily, she manages to escape unscathed. That said, you can't go home again. Even after a visit to the proverbial burn unit. Or rather, you can but somebody moved all the furniture around and changed the wall paper and you liked it better the old way. IE the honeymoon stage. Prithee go back, you cry nostalgically. Remember the time? Remember?
Next thing you know, the good people of Ayodhya starting trash-talking Ram. "If it were my wife, I wouldn't take that Sita back," they say. "Not after all that time with another man who's been dishing out the jewelry like there's no Ramayana." So what's the seventh incarnation of Vishnu to do? He's made a promise to his public. In other words, it doesn't matter what quality sirloin Lois Lane's got frying in her pan, when Superman's gotta go, he's gotta go. Only this time, it's Sita who's gotta go. Into exile. And she's pregnant. With Ram's twins. Don't worry, Valmiki saves her and she raises her kiddies in his hermitage where they sing songs of praise to Ram all day. One afternoon, Ram happens by the forest and hears the chanting. At last Sita is both expiated and manumitted. So what happens? Mother Earth swallows her up. As she is interred, Ram realizes his mistakes. Thus the relationship actually evolves. End of honeymoon. Or shall I say beginning? Middle? Life is in a permanent state of transition with nostalgia as its bellows and clinging as its camouflage. Meanwhile, somewhere between the first kiss and the funeral is the rising and dying fire. It may be a slower burn than you thought you wanted, but you can walk through it. In fact, not only are you walking through it right now, you are it. For the love of Ram.
Ram exemplifies moving through life royally. Even when he is unjustly exiled by Queen Kaikeyi’s whims Ram doesn’t rebel against his Step-Queen's impulsive trip to the dark side. Instead, Ram sips the lemonade of the wilderness retreat and lets time heal the broken promises of his political career. He doesn't pull a Romeo and Juliet double suicide drama. I heard Manorama once say: Drop the D in your DRAMA and get with the RAMA!
Often twists in the plot are caused by mind-trips: that's Valmiki's version of 'the dark-side"-- falling from the grace of clarity. In our own journeys the only thing that is certain is developing contact with our inner essence that brings clarity and perspective, the outside drama will always be spin-cycling us. Like you say dear Em: "that's the hegemony of promises: AKA well-intentioned resolutions reliant on the notion of life in a permanent external honeymoon state rather than a journey towards internal, self-sufficient bliss."
One break down of the meaning of the leads of the Ramayana is Ram=our higher self, the sweet soul. Sita is the mind, and Ravana the reckless urges of ego.
Ram was a King inside and out—he knew he could enjoy any walk of life—be it behind the velvet ropes of Ayodha or the roped sandals of the forest. Ram was a King on the inside, he trusted the outer political power would happen when it the timing was ripe. First and foremost he kept the inner Kingdom ruled well.
It’s when Sita and Ram separate (she begs him to hunt the dazzling Golden Deer for her) that she is vulnerable to the ravages of the 10 headed Ravana. E.G. Don't let monkey mind take charge --chant the name of Rama and sing along with Mary J Blige, hoping for "No More Drama".
Maybe if Sita had stayed with Ram, like Eve staying simply satisfied with Adam in Eden, everything would have stayed in balance. …? Who can really say what balance is though. Look at Shiva who balances in the fire of change, telling us change is the constant we have to learn to abide in.
But sweet Sita! Ma carries the real burden of the Ramayana (what is it with women always bearing the labors?!) And all she gets to do in the end is Praise her Ex?! Thank Ram for the further incarnations; the next yuga cast the eternal couple as Radha & Krishna in their blissful, and free-loving relationship (read between the lines of “Dancing with the Gopis”..!) xom