Was Ram really an Avataar?

January 20, 2007

Namaste,

I have serious doubts Ram was really an Avataar:

1. His wife was kidnapped, & he went around crying like an ordinary

man. Would an Avataar cry like an ordinary lover?

2. He killed Bali by deceit- breaking his so called Kshatriya Dharam.

3. He also killed Ravan by deceit, which shows he didnt really have

any super powers(like Ravan did), but had to resort to tricks.

4. Finally, he never said he was God. Like Krishna, he didnt give any

guidelines on how to live, or any scriptures(Ramayana wasnt written or

spoken by him).

So he was just an ordinary King, although he was a very Good person of

high character, that doesnt make him an Avataar.

Tatwamasi

January 22, 2007

, tat_wa_masi <no_reply wrote:

First, you have to understand the meaning and symbolism of avatar and

the types of avatars and their purpose. Avatar is an incarnation of

God into lowerrealms (earth etc.) for special purposes. Many are in a

HUMAN form. The types of avatars are Purusha avatars, Guna avatars,

Lila avatars, Manvantara avatars, Shaktyavesa avatars..

The avatar of Lord Rama is a Lila Avatar. Lila Avatars are

incarnations of God(Brahman)at regular intervals throughout time to

perform a particular series of events in order to instruct others in

the paths of dharma, bhakti or moksha.

Each avatar, of any type, has a special symbolism. For eg: Matsya

avatar, the fish, represents life in water. Kurma, the tortoise,

represents the next stage, amphibianism. The third animal, the boar

Varaha, symbolizes life on land. Narasimha, the Man-Lion, symbolizes

the commencement development of mammals. Vamana, the dwarf, symbolizes

this incomplete development of human. Then, Parashurama, the

forest-dwelling hermit armed with an axe, connotes completion of the

basic development of humankind. King Rama signals man's ability to

govern nations. Krishna indicates man's advancement in culture and

civilization. Buddha, the enlightened one, symbolizes social

advancement of man.

The time of the avatars also has significance: Kings rule reached its

ideal state in Treta Yuga with Rama Avatar and social justice and

Dharma were protected in Dwapar Yuga with the avatar of Krishna. Thus

the avatars represent the evolution of life and society with changing

epoch from Krita Yuga to Kali yuga.

Now for your main question.

1. Rama was an avatar of Vishnu in HUMAN form. If you know the meaning

of the word HUMAN and the associated qualities and emotions etc., I

don't need to elaborate further. He went through all the trials of

life as a human being who is often faced with moral dilemmas. Rama's

life and journey symbolizes how a MAN (HUMAN) should have perfect

adherence of dharma despite harsh tests of life and time. He is the

embodiment of truth, of morality, the ideal son, and above all, the

ideal king. Rama is Maryada Purushottama, or The Perfect Man.

2. Kishkindha kaand: Bali

Bali was very powerful and cruel king of Kishkindha. He had once

defeated the mighty Ravana also. Bali had also forcefully taken

Sugreeva's wife as the new queen. Sugreeva and Hanuman pleaded to Rama

that Bali was unjust and cruel king and his rule was causing immense

hardship and suffering to the people of Kishkindha. Rama came to know

that he was wronged against. The issue now is that Bali used his

physical might against Sugriva. Even if that could be understood, the

fact that he took possession of the wife of his younger brother

because he was stronger of the two and because Sugriva - apart from

not in a position to protect himself - could not protect her was too

much and was unacceptable. Hence, Rama must put an end to his life and

make Sugreeva the king again. During a battle between Sugriva and

Bali, Rama shoots Bali with a bow that pierces seven trees and went

through his chest.

For your point on deceit: Bali asked a few questions that what was his

crime and why did Rama killed him from behind the trees and not in a

straight fight? Rama answered that his first crime was he tried to

continually kill his younger brother at every chance and did not take

any mercy on him. Sugriva had surrendered to Bali and pleaded

forgiveness for any inadvertent wrongs but Bali did not listen to him.

But the most important crime was that Bali unjustly took possession

of his younger brothers wife when it was his duty to protect them. A

younger brother is regarded as a son, and his wife as a

daughter-in-law. Rama said that Bali was a very cruel and pitiless

ruler who did not stand for dharma.

Bali said that he is just a animal and human laws don't apply, Rama

replied that animals were exempted from human laws because they are

those who cannot see the difference between what is right and what is

not. But Bali did not fall under that category. Being of very high

parentage (son of Indra) and studying all the sacred scriptures there

was no excuse for not standing up to righteousness. The stature goes

by the kind of education a person receives and not by the body of his

birth. Rama said, Education makes all the difference. It empowers one

to see things in the right perspective. It enables one to know and

understand his society, his people, the principles and ideals that are

to govern one's life. Bali was given the opportunity to learn, to

understand the high values and without doubt he come from a highly

accomplished parent who could have - and had - guided him, imbued him

with values. After learning all the scriptures and values, how do Bali

claim exemption under a law that did not take animals into account,

just because they do not have the opportunity to undergo a study under

an able teacher and understand righteousness?

Lakshmana answered the next question of "hiding behind the trees" and

said had Rama and Bali had a straight fight, Bali would inevitably be

pushed towards defeat and would fall at Rama's feet and ask for refuge

which would put him in a moral dilemma (Rama would not be able to say

no to a sharanarthi and if he accepted Bali, he would be failing in

his words given to Sugriva already. Sugriva had sought Rama's

protection against Bali).

Bali was then satisfied with the answers and even apologized for

raising the questions. He was happy that all his past misdeeds were

wiped off by the punishment of Rama and the doors of moksha were now

open for him as he was liberated by the lord himself. He looked upon

Sugriva as one who helped him attain moksha. (Anyone killed by the

lord attains moksha)

3. Killing of Ravana

Rama on many occasions had sent a peace message to Ravana but that was

rejected.

In the grand finale of the battle, Rama engages Ravana, who through

the devastation of losing his sons, his brothers and friends and

millions of his warriors, arouses his awesome and magical powers and

makes full use of the boons of Siva and Brahma, and the magical

knowledge of warfare possessed by the greatest of rakshasas. Rama and

Ravana compete fiercely, inflicting severe injuries on one another

with the most powerful weapons that could destroy the universe. After

a long and arduous battle, Rama successfully decapitates Ravana's

central head, but an ugly head, symbolic of all of Ravana's evil

powers arises in its place. After another long battle, Rama

decapitates it, only to find another growing in its place. This cycle

continues, and as darkness approaches, Ravana's magical powers

increase in force.

>From Vibhishana, Rama came to know that Ravana had obtained amrit

(nectar of immortality) from the Gods. Though he could not consume it,

he nevertheless stored a vessel of it in his stomach. This amrit was

causing his heads to regenerate as soon as they were cut off. Rama

then prayed to the Sun (through Aditya Hridayam prayer) and invoked

the most powerful weapon, Brahmastra and fired it at Ravanas stomach,

destroying the amrit and thus killing Ravana. Ravana was happy that he

is being liberated by the lord himself.

Which part of this is deceit?

4. Is Rama God, Lessons from Lord Rama

Rama is a manifestation of God to teach us how to stay on the part of

Dharma in spite of harsh tests and trials of life. He is the perfect

man. From the life of Lord Ram we learn that hedonistic (philosophy

that focuses on increasing pleasure) approach to life does not have

much meaning. Dharma should be followed irrespective of pleasure, pain

or hardships. Doing so will ensure ones welfare. From the life of Rama

we learn to reinforce the need for thinking about the consequences

before making promises, for if you make them you must keep them, no

matter how hard it may be.

Dharma Artha Kama are defined through the life of Rama. When Bharat

came to forest (Chitrakoot) to meet Rama. Rama asked him whether he

followed the rules of Dharma, Artha and Kaama properly. As per Rama it

is defined as: Artha should not interfere with Dharma and vice versa.

Similarly Kaama should not interfere with either Dharma or with Artha.

Dharma here means the duties and welfare one does for the society.

Making wells, for example, is part of the dharma of a king. Arth means

earnings. The king has to see that there is enough income from taxes,

the salaries of the employees are given at proper time and the tax

should not be more than 1/6 th (as far as I remember) of a person's

income. Kaama means pleasure here. One is allowed to have pleasure but

without affecting the duties and earnings.

Hence Rama is considered to be one of the most important

manifestations of God. He is worshiped and also propitiated in times

of need. But all the avatars, devas have their origin in the one

supreme lord. Only one God is worshiped but in different forms, as

Ram, Krishna, Shiva, Durga etc. but all mean the one supreme lord.

January 22, 2007

, tat_wa_masi <no_reply wrote:

>

> Namaste,

>

> I have serious doubts Ram was really an Avataar:

>

> 1. His wife was kidnapped, & he went around crying like an ordinary

> man. Would an Avataar cry like an ordinary lover?

>

> 2. He killed Bali by deceit- breaking his so called Kshatriya

Dharam.

>

> 3. He also killed Ravan by deceit, which shows he didnt really have

> any super powers(like Ravan did), but had to resort to tricks.

>

> 4. Finally, he never said he was God. Like Krishna, he didnt give

any

> guidelines on how to live, or any scriptures(Ramayana wasnt

written or

> spoken by him).

>

> So he was just an ordinary King, although he was a very Good

person of

> high character, that doesnt make him an Avataar.

>

> Tatwamasi

---

--

Thanks Ravi. This was really an eye opening explanation of the

questions about Lord Rama.

I would like to add my 2 cents. Ravan had taken a blessings from

Shiva that no gods, no asuras no Shakti could kill him. He

intentionally did not mention human beings as he thought he was

beyond the reach of humans.

So to kill Ravan, God incarnated as a human being, intentionally

forgetting about his real powers. Since Rama had to be a human to

kill Ravan, he had to show all the traits of a human being...viz

weeping for his wife, brother and like. Had he remembered and

behaved like God, he could not kill Ravana due to the blessings of

Shiva.

And where it is mentioned that an Avtaar should be moral ?

Morality is a limitation fixed by humans and has no value on lower

and higher spiritual grounds. Morality is a transition for a

particular era....particular society.

Hence, we can not expect God to follow the morals fixed by us.

Avtaar has to do his job irrespective of moral limitations. Hence

killing of Bali has no lacuna of morality.

In Krishan Avtaar God clearly confirmed this point that the

morals and rituals fixed by humans do not have any place in God's

life. He is beyond all moral values. Stopping of Indra's yagya...

taking away clothes of Gopis, stealing butter, killing of Kansa,

Shishupal, Jarasandha, Bhishma, Duryodhana... no where the human

morality was taken into account.

with love

baba

January 22, 2007

As Raj has so wonderfully explained, Rams job in the evolutionary

scale was to bring Satogun down to Earth. He was replacing Parshuram,

the Rajoguni, violent man. Ram was imperfect because Satogun is

imperfect- to become enlightened one has to go beyond all the gunas,

which Krishna did. However, this doesnt mean Krishna was a greater

Avataar. Both Ram & Krishna were here to play a role, & they did so

with great passion. When their role was over, they bowed & left. Even

though Ram himself was beyond the Gunas, in the role he played, he had

to act like an ordinary man, as Babaji pointed out.

Now to answer your questions:

> 1. His wife was kidnapped, & he went around crying like an ordinary

> man. Would an Avataar cry like an ordinary lover?

So what is wrong with this? Valmiki was a poet, & poets usually

describe everything in poetic language. Maybe the real Ram didnt cry.

Besides, showing your emotions was considered good in the ancient

worlds. The Greek Superheros Achilles & Ulysses often cried, as well

as Roman heroes. It is only in modern times that crying is considered

a cowardly thing.

> 2. He killed Bali by deceit- breaking his so called Kshatriya >Dharam.

Rams job was to bring Satogun- to do that we have to defeat our animal

nature(which he did by killing Bali), & conquer our lower, demonic

ego, which he did by killing Ravan. Ram was making a point about

Sadhna- our lower animal nature wants to jump about & make mischief.

We shouldnt argue with it, but kill it with extreme prejudice. Thats

how you control animals, which is what Bali was, not dicuss Vedant

with them. In sadhna, the animal our lower nature, has to be

similarly brought under control.

> 3. He also killed Ravan by deceit, which shows he didnt really have

> any super powers(like Ravan did), but had to resort to tricks.

Ravan is the demonic ego, which also has to be killed to get moksha.

Again, there is no need to be nice about it- the inner demon has to be

killed by any way possible.

In mythology, super beings with super powers can usually only be

killed/defeated with deceit. Vishnu did same as Vaman avataar, then

as Mohini to defeat the 2 demons who had vardaan of Shivji they could

kill anyone who head they touched. Since these evil beings dont follow

the rules, we have to play in the same way with them. Theres nothing

deceitful, thats the only way to kill Asuras.

> 4. Finally, he never said he was God. Like Krishna, he didnt give

>any guidelines on how to live, or any scriptures(Ramayana wasnt

>written or spoken by him).

He didnt have to. He inspires us with his life, not what he said.

For that matter, Krishna didnt go around boasting he was God either.

He only told Arjuna once, under very exceptional circumstances. At

that time, the full force of the Divine entered Krishna, & he showed

Arjuna his full form.

Our idiotic concepts of what is moral & what is not dont apply to

Divine beings. These concepts are mentally created, & since God is far

beyond the mind, there is no reason why he should try to confirm with

our petty beliefs. If you dont believe in him, thats fine. The game

goes on anyway.

January 22, 2007

I like the way this question was handled.

I was tempted to post a reply on my first reading of it to the

questioner that - "Is anyone forcing you to worship Lord Rama ? Why do

u worry ? etc etc....."

In the question I can smell the Anti Hindu feelings of a Non hindu but

again i get reminded that Hindu and Non hindu are only our labels and

what really exists is ONE.

Anyway I learnt a lesson too to not to get agitated on such

meaningless questions from ignorant guys.

Thank you for your blessings

_/\_ Hari Aum

Ashutosh

January 22, 2007

>

> As Raj has so wonderfully explained, Rams job in the evolutionary

Turning out a pregnant wife, on blames by an ordinary washerman, is

right with which standards ? Avtar or human?

also why did Rama asked Sita to prove her character by fire ? why

Sita could not have asked same test for Rama? Is it not gender

prejudice?

Hope I do not offend, just curious

January 23, 2007

> Turning out a pregnant wife, on blames by an ordinary washerman, is

> right with which standards ? Avtar or human?

Very true. If Ram had been a "Satoguni" avataar, he wouldnt have let

idle chatter distract him.

> also why did Rama asked Sita to prove her character by fire ? why

> Sita could not have asked same test for Rama? Is it not gender

> prejudice?

Yes it is. If Ram had Satogun, so did Sita. Why didnt he trust her?

Maybe because he was just an ordinary man, & not a Avtaar?

January 24, 2007

>

> > Turning out a pregnant wife, on blames by an ordinary

washerman, is

> > right with which standards ? Avtar or human?

--

Since Ram incarnated as Maryada Purushottam, he had to prove the

Maryada. He showed that the first duty of the King is to sarisfy the

public ... even at the expense of his personal losses.

Also since Sita was not a human in flesh but with a divine body

(See Sita's birth by ploughing the land)....she had to return to the

earth, after her job was over. This seen was set up to enable her do

so after she had brought up her children

---

> > also why did Rama asked Sita to prove her character by fire ?

why

> > Sita could not have asked same test for Rama? Is it not gender

> > prejudice?

>

--------------------------------

Ram never asked Sita to prove her character. It was Sita

herself, who wished to remove doubts from the world's mind about her

sanctity, offered to undergo the fire Test.

In esoteric meaning this actually signifies that Kundalini

shakti before her meeting with the supreme, has to pass through

Fire... the place of Manipur Chakra. If Kundalini still has

attachments to lower instincst, she may not rise above Manipur Chakra

and would return back to Muladhaara.

You are free to agree not to agree !!

with love

baba

January 24, 2007

Good explanation Babaji, I agree completely.

It all comes down to this: This whole world is a stage, where everyone

plays their role. Like Krishna said to Arjun, how will you not do your

duty? Who are you to refuse your Dharma? If Nature wants you to do

something, she will grab you by the throat, & force you. The better

way(for us) is to willingly surrender.

Avtaars like Ram, Sita, Hanuman, knew they were a part of a big game,

they were just actors in a script that had been written 1000's of

years ago. They didnt care 2 pence what people in different

generations would think of them, using their own cultural prejudice to

judge people of a different times.

Like Babaji said, the Rishis had hidden hints for Yoga & Kundalini in

these stories, so Ram & Sita had to behave in a certain way. It didnt

matter to them, as they knew they were just actors in a vast, never

ending play.

Also, in those times the society was more important than the person.

This notion that indivdual is more important than society is fairly

recent, developed mainly by modern Americans. It has led to the worst

kind of materialism, greediness, & in India, corruption & general apathy.

The fact that we can enjoy modern society & its benefits is due to

people like Ram, who sacrificed their own for the benefit of society.

Compare this with today in India, where the mantra is "Get rich,

screw the country/society".

Such people as Ram/Krishna cant be judged by our mental standards. To

understand them, you have to rise above the mind, & see from the heart.

January 25, 2007

I have following this line of dicsussion with interest. I have a

question as well.

When Lord Hanuman went to Lanka to meet Sita, why didnt he just pick

her up, & fly off, in what would nowdays be called a Commando operation

After all, we know how strong he was- when the Demon King kidnapped

Ram & Laskman, Lord Hanuman went into his kingdom alone, beat everyone

up, & rescued Ram. So how difficult would it have been for him to

simply pick Sita up, & fly out?

But he didnt- whats the mythological & hidden meaning behind this?

January 26, 2007

Hanuman is the Servent of Ram and he canot touch the wife of his lord, with that devotion he never took her and fly off.