Shambuka (Sanskrit śambūka) is, in Hindu mythology, a character in the Ramayana.
Contents |
'Shambuka, is one of the Chapter in the book "Ramayan Ambedkar to answer many enigmatic problems in Indian History. He narrates the story as follows:
One citizen of the Republic of Kosalas, an old Brahmin, is wailing in front of the gate of the Rama's palace cuddling the dead body of his fourteen-year-old only son. He is cursing Rama and Rama-Rajya and threatening to kill himself if Rama did not bring back to life his son, and thus emburden Rama with the sin of 'brahma-hatya'. This causes Rama great worry.
Rama asked his 'mantrik' rishis the cause of this untimely death. He neither asks the cause of death to the father of child nor examines the body of the child. The cause of death told to Rama was something like this:
"Rajan, during the Krita yuga only the Brahmins used to do 'tapa'. During Treta yuga the Ksatriyas started doing it along with the Brahmins. In the present Dwapar yuga even the Vaishyas are also doing the 'tapascharya'. But it is great 'adharma' - sacrilege - when the Shudras start doing it. In your kingdom some unwise Shudra is doing 'tapascharya'. That is the reason of this 'baal-vadha'. You remove this misdeed. Then the religion and the 'dwija--varna' would progress, and this Brahmin child will become alive again". [Uttar-kand, sarga 74]
Thus the maha-brahmanas in Rama's court, like Vashishtha etc. indicted the Shudra 'tapaswi' - very much like the blind faith of Adivasis today indict a woman as a witch for any misfortune. Chanyakaya's Arthashastra advises that the blind faith of the subjects is a necessity for the rulers.
A Tapas is a person renounced the world, 'gone forth'. In the system of castes or varnas, there was a method of rebellion. That was to renounce the earthly things and become a Tapas or a Yati or a Shraman. These people renouncing family life were highly respected by the Shudras but despised by the upper castes. The Shudras were the contributors of wealth to the yajnyas. If a Shudra renounces family life, it was a direct loss the Brahmins. So to nip the desire of Shudras in bud, it was necessary to punish these people.
Rama calls the "Pushpak viman, who comes, salutes and stands aside. Rama rides on his shoulder and goes alone in search of the Shudra Tapas. He goes towards the South, the direction of death or of Shudras, who are called as 'cremation ground' by the Dharma-shastras. To the south, on the bank of a lake on the mount of 'Shaivala', there was found a Tapasi hanging himself up side down and performing deep 'tapascharya'.
Rama got down from Pushpaka and went near him. He praised the 'tapashya' of the Tapas and asked him his 'varna'. The Tapas replied that to obtain god-hood and enter heaven with the body, he is doing the tapascharya and that he was a Shudra and his name was Shambuka. That was enough inquiry for Rama. He removed his 'Vimal' sword from the scabbard and separated the hanging head of the Tapas from his body. All the devas in the heaven applauded with cheers and flowers. Why were the gods happy? They said to Rama, "Raghunandana, it is because of you that this Shudra who was entitled for heaven, is prevented from coming here." [7.76.8] The rebel Shudra was unwanted even for the devas, who themselves had the system of 'chaurvarna' among them.
Rama asks a boon from the devas to make alive the son of the Brahmin. They tell him that the moment you killed the Shudra Tapas, the boy has become alive. Ramayana does not say whether actually the son of the Brahmin became alive or not. It also does not mention the names of the Brahmin son and father for whom all these events took place
Ramayana does not say whether actually the son of the Brahmin became alive or not. It also does not mention the names of the Brahmin son and father for whom all these events took place4http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rys/rys7067.htm The Imperial Gazetteer emphasizes the religious influence of the two great epics; in addition, the Imperial Gazetteer provides a summary discussion of the Ramayana's plot. Ralph Griffith's translation (1870-74) of the Valmiki Ramayana is now available online, but it doesn't include the final book that contains the story of the killing of Shambuka. The killing of Shambuka appears in the Valmiki Ramayana, Book 7, the 'Uttarakanda' [Final Chapter], sargas 73-76. Three scene-setting sargas are paraphrased, and then the crucial one is presented in full: (73) When Rama is reigning as a virtuous king, a humble aged Brahmin comes to him, weeping, with his dead son in his arms. He says that Rama must have committed some sin, or else his son would not have died. (74) The sage Narada explains to Rama that a Shudra is practicing penances, and this is the cause of the child's death. (75) Rama goes on a tour of inspection in his flying chariot, and finds an ascetic doing austerities, and asks who he is. "(76) Hearing the [inquiring] words of Rama of imperishable exploits, that ascetic, his head still hanging downwards [as part of his austerities] answered:— 'O Rama, I was born of a Shudra alliance and I am performing this rigorous penance in order to acquire the status of a God in this body. I am not telling a lie, O Rama, I wish to attain the Celestial Region. Know that I am a Shudra and my name is Shambuka.' As he was yet speaking, Raghava [Rama], drawing his brilliant and stainless sword from its scabbard, cut off his head. The Shudra being slain, all the Gods and their leaders with Agni's followers, cried out, 'Well done! Well done!' overwhelming Rama with praise, and a rain of celestial flowers of divine fragrance fell on all sides, scattered by Vayu. In their supreme satisfaction, the Gods said to that hero, Rama:— 'Thou hast protected the interests of the Gods, O Highly Intelligent Prince, now ask a boon, O beloved Offspring of Raghu, Destroyer of Thy Foes. By thy grace, this Shudra will not be able to attain heaven!'" (583-84) The Ramayana of Valmiki trans.
The place where Shambuka was beheaded is identified as the hill of Ramtek, near Nagpur in Maharashtra.[1]
In the modern context, this incident is quoted often to condemn Rama, the varna system, or both. E.V. Ramasami used this episode to argue that Rama as depicted in the Ramayana was clearly not the benevolent king devotees claimed him to be, and often used depictions of the scene of Shambuka's beheading at rallies.[2] Ambedkar, in contrast, said that to condemn Rama based on this incident was to miss the point. The true point of the story of Shambuka was that it demonstrated the unsustainability of the varna system, and the extent to which its existence depended on the harsh punishment of those who sought to transgress it.[3]
The story of Shambuka was problematic for early Hindu authors. Bhavabhuti (c. 7th century) is clearly uncomfortable with the story in his Uttara Rama Charita,[4] while Kalidasa (c. 4th century) mentions the incident of Shambuka without any comment in his Raghuvamsa.
Later Hindu authors adopt various means to explain the reason behind Rama's killing of Shambuka. The Pushtimarg Vaishnavite tradition of Gujarat points out that the Ramayana refers to other Shudras, such as Shabari, who lived in the forest. Shambuka therefore deliberately violated dharma in order to get Rama's attention, and attained salvation when he was beheaded.[5] The celebrated Kannada poet Kuvempu, in his play Shudra Tapasvi shows Rama as having to both carry out his duty by punishing Shambuka, and simultaneously protect Shambuka, as a pious and devout sage, from persecution, and thereby turns the story into a critique of Brahminical attitudes and a defence of Rama.[6]
this is true story why they threats to the upper caste for what? Many scholars believe that this story was made up to eliminate any threats to the upper-castes.
Some authors also argue that this story of Shamnuka seems false as Lord Rama cared for all human beings and was around peoples from all castes. For example, Maharishi Valmiki, the composer of the original Ramayana is a Shudra he hide himself when he was forest he did all everything hiden. Maharishi also was away from the kingdom of Rama. Bhil Adivasi.[7] Also, Lord Rama, while searching for Sita Devi together with His brother Laxmana was offered half-eaten 'ber' from a Bhil tribal devotee - only Rama accepted and ate her remnants because Rama wanted information from Shabri Bhilni. Rama also away from in his kingdom And how can he killed the a woman that time Rama Just focused on searching the Sita his wife. Maharishi Narada was a great devotee of Shri Rama and came from a Shudra caste and himself taught Ratnakar or Vailya Maharishi Vashista was reborn of Urvasi, an Apsara. He was a guru of Lord Rama.[8] Maharishi Parashara, son of a fisherwoman (Matsyakanya-Satyavathi Devi) and narrated the stories of the 10 avatars of Vishnu. Shri Rama and Shri Laxmana also . Lord Rama after all was the "noble that cared for the equality of all."
Scholar Purushottama Candra Jaina writes that this story "is of late origin".[9]
Even many Harijans themselves reject the claim that Rama ever killed any Shambuka. For example, Harijan members of the Ramnami Vaishnava sect claim that this was a later insertion for the upper-castes to assert their superiority.[10] After all, Rama Himself slayed Ravana (a Brahmin). However, Dravidian movements hold the position that Lord Rama murdered shambuka to reinstate the apartheid varna system, which is an important feature of Hindu Dharma.
|
|||||||||||||||||