Lord Rama’s love for his wife and, at the same time, sense of duty towards his family are exemplary. To take a little moment from his life and personality and give it an importance in reference to our own state that is far from Rama would be a grave error. Rama came to show by example what is meant by filial love and duty towards parents and the kingdom. It was a limited ideal that he came to establish in the animal-like humanity. The crux of it was to think less and less about oneself and more and more about those whom we care for. His crying for Janaki when she is forcibly taken away by Ravana is not because he is missing her romantically but out of a deep sense of care and responsibility that sattvic natures feel towards those whom they care and are responsible for. She was forcibly taken away against her will rather than walking out of her own choice in a relationship.
Call it attachment if you like but this attachment carries the fragrance of the soul and the grace and charm of a dignified being. Besides absence of attachment is not synonyms with indifference. It is rather a high impersonal state that few can arrive at. For the rest an unegoistic attachment that is full of sympathy kindness and care for those whom we love is best. At the same time Rama did not come to show the highest possibility of a human being. He came to humanise the animal rather than divinise the human.
Affectionately
Alok Da
Reference:
Life, Death and Immortality (TE 442)
YT Link: https://youtu.be/BHSvseCrKXI
