Shambuka

Originally posted by: Maverick_me

The story of Shambuka has nothing to do with Rama as such ; Shambuka was a contemporary of King Iksvaku, their story is narrated in brahmanda puran

Its also a biggest misconception that shudras were not allowed to study vedas ; In rgveda Shudra king Jansruti is mentioned to be a very knowledgeable person.

Coming to story of Shambuka is that he is engaged in tapas so rigorously that his aura starts pierces the brahma loka and his aura lights up the whole universe and this aura blocks every other tapasvi from reaching the higher plane of spirituality , so Brahma requests Shambuka to ask a boon and he asks that all the power of his austerity should reach king Ikshvaku who was the beloved of all the citizens and he (Ikshvaku) should live a very long life , Brahma is pleased with Shambuka's wish and readily grants it..How the story of Shambuka came to added in Uttarkanda is quite a riddle

The whole of Uttarkanda is not interpolated ; the critical edition of Ramayana has deleted a lot of shlokas which it felt, were spurious.

Whete does Arjuna berate intercaste marriages, is it in from mbh? Please give the citation ..

But what is Shamshepa Ramayana?

This was the most satisfying answer I have understood..

Posting a part of the write up.

People used to know the art of accepting a poet's beliefs
along with their own.

So, then,
what is the poet's belief here? What is the background?

To get to
this, we need to understand one basic fact. Doing penance is not anything
great, in itself. The goal of penance is what is important.

One can do
penance for the good of the world: that is satvik. On the other hand, one can
do it for the well being of the self: that is rajasik. Worst is when the
penance is aimed at the destruction of the world. Now, that is definitely tamasik.

A lot of
sages have performed penance; so have the likes of Ravana and Hiranyakashipu.
The sages got salvation. Ravana and others like him get destroyed. Both are
fruits of penance. A curse can become a boon. And, a boon can become a curse.

Who did it
is not the issue. What they did is not important. Why they did it alone is the
key issue: the differentiator between right and wrong.

So, let us
forget about who Shambuka was, just for a moment. Why did he do penance? What
was his goal? As the ancient teachers say, and as Valmiki briefly points out,
here was his goal: to conquer the world of the Devas. He wanted to be above all
devates. Even beyond Indra. Why be just satisfied with just moving upwards? He
wanted to become Shiva himself. Then, there is no need to meditate on anyone.
Others will have to meditate on him, and ask for boons. Now that is a height
worth aspiring for, thought Shambuka.

So, that was
Shambuka's desire. Anyone who approves of such a penance should be admitted to
a mental hospital!

Gautama too
performed penance for upward mobility. But, there was no desire to knock
someone off their rightful place. That was satvik penance. Even then, he got
punished. Now, Shambuka's is not good for the world. The punishment for this
has to be greater. Death alone is the right punishment.

Even Ravana
had similar desires. At least, he did not want to become Shiva himself. At the
very least, he had respect for Shiva. Now, this fellow has worse desires. Rama
would have made a grave mistake if he killed Ravana, but left Shambuka alone.

So, here,
Shambuka's family origins are not important.

There is
another point to be made here. Ravana was a brahmin. He was the grandson of
Pulastya. He was a descendent of a sage. But, Rama killed him.

A brahmin
who makes a mistake has to be punished. A shudra, if he does not make a
mistake, should not be punished. That is Valmiki's belief; that is Rama's
belief. It would bring discredit to the spirit of the source, if we interject
caste-ism into the mix.

The seeds for
this topic were sown at the start of the Ramayana itself. Dasharatha, who knew
the art of discerning different types of sound, shoots an arrow in the
direction of a water slurping sound far away. He thought it was an elephant
drinking water. But, the arrow actually hit a young mendicant Shravan.

When
Dasharatha gets closer, the youth says: "Oh King! I am not a brahmin. I am a
shudra mendicant. My father is a vyshya and my mother is a shudra. First, go
and take care of them."

So, Ramayana
starts with a curse of a shudra mendicant. If it was the belief of the time
that a shudra should not perform penance, Dasharatha should have been overjoyed
at killing the young man. The question of asking for his forgiveness would not
have arisen. (But we know how King Dasharatha went to his parents and asked for
forgiveness)

So, we can
conclude one thing: It is true that Shambuka was a shudra. But, that is not the
reason Rama killed him. It was Shambuka's base mentality.

Then, what
is the true meaning of the statement: "A brahmin youth died due to a shudra
performing penance. And, when the shudra was killed, a brahmin youth survived?"
Translated to English by P. R. Mukund

What is the
spiritual meaning of these words?

One who
understands the Vedas, a wise one who follows the path of spirituality, is a
brahmin. One who has lost his way, and is immersed in misery, is a shudra.
These are the etymological meaning of the words.

Actually,
Shambuka was not even a shudra. He was an asura by the name of Jambha. True to
his name, he was extremely arrogant. In the past, in his original form, he had
meditated upon Parvati and obtained a boon to live the whole Kalpa. He became
even more arrogant after getting this boon. And then, he was born as a shudra
on earth. And here, he started a penance to surpass Shiva and become Shiva himself and get Parvati.

This is
worse than Bhasmasura wanting to burn Shiva, who gave him a boon in the first
place. A pain to society, with no equals. If this fellow is not killed, who
should be killed?

He is an
asura. Ramachandra puts an end to asuras. So, what had to happen, happened! The
story should not suffer at the hands of those that are suffering from the
disease of caste-ism. One should contemplate on the real meaning of the story.

What to do?
Sometimes, Valmiki creates a problem by not saying everything to be said. To
understand Valmiki, one needs to pay attention not just to his words, but the
silence in between.

So, in the
midst of confusion, Shambuka too plays a part in the portrayal of the greatness
of Rama's character.

Originally posted by: iDea-yeS-viruS

I don't remember Ram ate half berries of Sabari ate. it must be folklores. I too don't believe in Shambuka story. but my point is something may not be acceptable in today's POV.we don't have to give more attention to those.

Originally posted by: Arijit007

ram ate the half-eaten berry of shabari, why the same ram would kill shambuka for just learning the vedas?