lord rama and shambuk story

The killing of Shambuka appears in the Valmiki Ramayana, Book 7, the 'Uttarakanda' [Final Chapter], sargas 73-76, in theAdhyatma Ramayana version of Ramayana, also in the padma purana.

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 Conquer the heavens with this body. Lord Rama killed him due to his bad intentions and there by giving Shambuka his Moksha.

its confirmed in bhagwad gita that lord never do bhed bhava. so this story from padma purana is wrong ? but also in maharaas chapter of bhagwatam shri shukdeva said -

SB 10.33.29 — Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: The status of powerful controllers is not harmed by any apparently audacious transgression of morality we may see in them, for they are just like fire, which devours everything fed into it and remains unpolluted.

SB 10.33.30 — One who is not a great controller should never imitate the behavior of ruling personalities, even mentally. If out of foolishness an ordinary person does imitate such behavior, he will simply destroy himself, just as a person who is not Rudra would destroy himself if he tried to drink an ocean of poison.

but still confused about this as lord cannot do bhed bhava..

Uttarakanda is part of every Ramayana version.

There is no doubt that scriptures had been changed and edited during long period of this age of Kali, especially historical ones like Mahabaharata and Ramayana.

Considering that story of killing Shambuka didnt mentioned in Srimad Bhagavatam 9.10 and 9.11, where the pastimes of Lord Rama were described, its likely to be fiction, as you claim.

On another side, story of exile of mother Sita is bonafide :

SB 9.11.9 — [Speaking to his unchaste wife, the man said] You go to another man’s house, and therefore you are unchaste and polluted. I shall not maintain you any more. A henpecked husband like Lord Rāma may accept a wife like Sītā, who went to another man’s house, but I am not henpecked like Him, and therefore I shall not accept you again.

SB 9.11.10 — Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: Men with a poor fund of knowledge and a heinous character speak nonsensically. Fearing such rascals, Lord Rāmacandra abandoned His wife, Sītādevī, although she was pregnant. Thus Sītādevī went to the āśrama of Vālmīki Muni.

SB 9.11.11 — When the time came, the pregnant mother Sītādevī gave birth to twin sons, later celebrated as Lava and Kuśa. The ritualistic ceremonies for their birth were performed by Vālmīki Muni.

डॉ विवेक आर्य मर्यादापुरुषोतम श्री रामचंद्र जी महाराज के जीवन को सदियों से आदर्श और पवित्र माना जाता हैं। कुछ विधर्मी और नास्तिकों द्वारा श्री रामचन्…

Replies

umang October 5, 2015 at 9:14pm

UTTARA Kanda is not reliable enough! The orginal ramayana ,written by sri valmiki doesn't include uttar ramayana.
This khand contains several questionable and polished content.
- 3ruf705dlznca > umang October 6, 2015 at 3:34am
  
  Uttarakanda is part of every Ramayana version.
  
  There is no doubt that scriptures had been changed and edited during long period of this age of Kali, especially historical ones like Mahabaharata and Ramayana.
  
  Considering that story of killing Shambuka didnt mentioned in Srimad Bhagavatam 9.10 and 9.11, where the pastimes of Lord Rama were described, its likely to be fiction, as you claim.
  
  On another side, story of exile of mother Sita is bonafide :
  
  SB 9.11.9 — [Speaking to his unchaste wife, the man said] You go to another man’s house, and therefore you are unchaste and polluted. I shall not maintain you any more. A henpecked husband like Lord Rāma may accept a wife like Sītā, who went to another man’s house, but I am not henpecked like Him, and therefore I shall not accept you again.
  
  SB 9.11.10 — Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: Men with a poor fund of knowledge and a heinous character speak nonsensically. Fearing such rascals, Lord Rāmacandra abandoned His wife, Sītādevī, although she was pregnant. Thus Sītādevī went to the āśrama of Vālmīki Muni.
  
  SB 9.11.11 — When the time came, the pregnant mother Sītādevī gave birth to twin sons, later celebrated as Lava and Kuśa. The ritualistic ceremonies for their birth were performed by Vālmīki Muni.
  - Manohar Patil > 3ruf705dlznca October 20, 2015 at 5:44pm
    
    yes story of exile of mother Sita is bonafide. also every story of uttar-kanda are not unreal..but shambuka story is maybe fake..we cannot directly say rama gives him moksha as we should think about the rest part of shambuka story..please see - https://agniveerfan.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/shambuk/ (in this link most of the proofs are from shastras)
    
    sorry for bad english.
    
    hare rama !!
    
    शम्बूक वध का सत्य
    
    डॉ विवेक आर्य मर्यादापुरुषोतम श्री रामचंद्र जी महाराज के जीवन को सदियों से आदर्श और पवित्र माना जाता हैं। कुछ विधर्मी और नास्तिकों द्वारा श्री रामचन्…
    - 3ruf705dlznca > Manohar Patil October 21, 2015 at 1:29am
      
      I i already said, Shabuk story didnt mentioned in srimad bhagavatam at all , therefore its likely to be fake. But someone can say that neither other details are mentioned .
      
      The answer on that is this:
      
      -When personally Lord kill someone, thats a main thing in His past times, especially if the killed one has a name.
      
      -Because of that reason Sri Vyasa muni would for sore mention this story in bhagavatam,
      
      in the part where past times of lord Ramacandra were described.
- umang > umang October 5, 2015 at 9:15pm
  
  Like exile of devi sita and shambhuk story!! The way it is written,it is something else.This editing of religious texts has been done later in medievel ages.
Manohar Patil October 3, 2015 at 4:35pm

thank you both prabhujis. actually there is a little but confusion in my mind about this story..but now its gone. i read somewhere that after hearing from shambuk that he is shudra then lord asks his desire that what you want..he says i want indra pada but he is not at all capable of indra pada..also there is a mention that after killing/liberating shambuka indra came there.
thanks for you reply prabhujis. hari evening.
3ruf705dlznca October 3, 2015 at 2:02pm

Hariiii booool.

SB 7.1.25 — Because of the bodily conception of life, the conditioned soul thinks that when the body is annihilated the living being is annihilated. Lord Viṣṇu, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is the supreme controller, the Supersoul of all living entities. Because He has no material body, He has no false conception of “I and mine.” It is therefore incorrect to think that He feels pleasure or pain when blasphemed or offered prayers. This is impossible for Him. Thus He has no enemy and no friend. When He chastises the demons it is for their good, and when He accepts the prayers of the devotees it is for their good. He is affected neither by prayers nor by blasphemy.

--Whatever Lord do its transcendental, above dualities of material world.

--That shudra is blessed being killed (touched) by Lord, there is no doubt.
Bhanu Krishna Das October 3, 2015 at 1:00pm

Hare Krishna,PAMHO

The lord gave Shambuk moksha when all he was aspiring for is to conquer the heavens he gave him Ram Vainkunta ,There is no bhaed bhav here. The lord shovered his mercy onto him

This reply was deleted.