Was Ram a Castiest? Did Ram Kill Shambuka, the Dalit?

“Uday, how do you people justify Lord Ram killing Shambuka, a Dalit (lower caste as per social hierarchy) who did no sin, but sit in a forest and chant Vedas?” a question from an elderly reader.

“Ram was a Castiest. He killed Shambuka as the latter was Shudra (working class).” Another comment (s) in my articles about Rama.

The Shambuka story goes like this: “When Lord Ram is reigning as a virtuous king, a humble aged Brahmin comes to him with his dead son in his arms. The sages explained to Ram that this unfortunate death must have happened because a Shudra must be practicing Vedic penances. Ram goes on a tour of inspection in his flying chariot (Pushpak Viman) and finds an ascetic doing austerities. The ascetic informed Ram that he is Shambuka, a Shudra, and performing this rigorous penance. Rama kills the Shudra for doing the pious activity of tapasya (penance) and Vedic chanting.”

“There is no such incident in Ram’s history depicted in Valmiki’s Ramayan. Before discussing that, hypothetically, let’s take the story for the face value. Let’s agree that Ram kills Shambuka.”


“Shambuka is a Shudra who is not supposed to do Vedic tapasya (penance). The incident is a black mark and a proof that Ram hated Shudras.”

Ram kills Ravan, who is a Brahmin. Ravan had also performed Vedic penance. So going by the same logic of Shambuka story, Ram hated Brahmins.

What’s more, Ram also fought with Parasuram. Parasuram was also a Brahmin. Hence Ram was a Brahmin hater. He was an anti-Brahmin!

Again, Ram also fought with few Kshatriya Kings. That makes him Kshatriya hater too!

Ram killed the monkey King Vali; hence he is an animal hater… Probably those “intelligent” people should write to Maneka Gandhi to banish Ram as he hurt animals.

“Please don’t try to sell such lousy logics to me. I am not buying…”I replied.

The Shambuka story is illogical and misfit. It lacks clarity and genuinity.

To start with, there are nearly 300 versions of Ramayana. The genuine and authentic Ramayana is written by Valimiki, who incidentally is a Dalit. There is NO mention of Shambuka in Valmiki Ramayana. If Ram was a castiest, why should the Dalit Valmiki hail him as the ONLY perfect man in the earth?

Also, the story of killing Shambuka is NOT mentioned in Srimad Bhagavatam, which again an authentic Purana. Even in the retelling of Ramayana in Mahabharata (which again is an authentic epic) Vanaparva, there is no mention of this incident.

Valmiki Ramayan is history of Ram. Most of other versions of Ramayan are exaggerated, myth-added, unbelievable and art of fiction. Ram was not a superman. Ram is a fact for historians. Since people worship him, lot of myths and legends added to his story.

Yes, the Shambuka story appears in the Uttara Kanda (Sarga 74-78) of Adhyatma Ramayana and not in the original Valmiki Ramayan. Uttara Kanda is not authentic. According to historians the story of Shambuka is added to Ramayana at least after 5th century AD. The content, language and grammar of Uttar Kanda do not sync with Ramayana. This khand contains several questionable and polished content and contradictory with the original Ramayan.

Long ago, my daughter who had read this story asked me: “Appa, it was clearly said in the Ramayana that Lord Ram returned Pushpak Viman to its original owner Kuber after returning to Ayodhya. So how come Ram went for searching of Shambuka by Rama with help of Pushpak Viman?”

Even school kids can see this contradiction. When you add up such castiest stories to provoke and appease, please at least use minimum common sense. The entire Shambuka incident is 100% fake.
It is said by ‘Valmiki’ that in Sri Ram’s reign there were no premature deaths in his kingdom. Then how come a Brahmin kid died prematurely? It’s contradicting Valmiki’s claim, right?

Now, it is time for some logical thinking.

– The Ramayana was written by a Dalit, Valmiki. He was number one devotee of Ram. He proclaims Ram as perfect man in the earth. He addresses Ram ‘Maryada Purushottam’ which means “The Ideal Best Man”. And he clearly says that Ram doesn’t discriminate. Ram was a Sanatan Dharmi, how can he discriminate?
-The entire base of Ramayan is a curse of Shudra. Ram’s father Dasarath kills a Shudra young mendicant named Shravan by mistake. His blind parents cursed Dasaratha that he too would experience “Putrashoka” (grief due to loss of a son). Would Dasarath’s son invite another curse by killing a Shudra again? Is he that stupid and arrogant?

– Ram embraced Nishada King (out caste, lower than the lowest class) Guha. There are only few people that Lord embraced.

– Ram ate the fruits offered by Dalit lady Shabari. Shabri belonged to Bhil/Tribal community. It was not just fruits, but half eaten left overs by Shabari.

– There are many examples from Ramayana which prove that Lord Ram enjoyed a healthy relationship with different members of Shudra community. Rama didn’t kill any pious Shudras whom he came across. So, why only Shambuka? If he were a casteist, why would he take the help of Hanuman, Sugreeva and others?

– In some versions of Ramayan, it is mentioned that Shambuka was not even a shudra. He was an Asura by the name of Jambha. True to his name, he was extremely arrogant. His intention of tapasya was to enjoy Parvathi (Shiva’s consort). So, isn’t killing of Shambuka appropriate?

The testimony of Sage Narada clearly states that Lord Ram is noble, unbiased and affectionate towards everyone.

Truth is that in the Vedic age there was no caste system. Only Varna system was in practice which has nothing to do with today’s social caste system. Caste system came into practice in India, when alien cultures invaded peace-loving Indians and created insecurity among them. Few ignorant priests interpolated the Texts like Ramayana and Manu Smriti with verses supporting caste system. These interpolations were done with vested interests.

An un-biased individual should understand that right and wrong are relative to time, place and situation. These are not absolute thing but depend on personal, social, constitutional right and wrong. Killing cows is illegal in some states in India. But, in states like Kerala, you can kill cow in public and a large chunk of Hindus eat beef. Eating pig meat is banned in many countries. Even the word ‘pig’ is deleted from the dictionaries in some religious countries. You can kiss your wife or girlfriend in public in USA. The same act in Saudi would lend you in jail or even more. Why would you accuse something on Ram without understanding the matter of fact of time, place and situation?

However, anyone is free to believe Shambuka story as true. And they can also believe that Ram killed him. Shambuka wished to go to heaven. And Ram helped him reaching there ASAP, that’s all. Period.

Udaylal Pai
Let’s share and care. Let’s get connected:
Facebook: udaylal.pai
WhatsApp Number: +919447533409
E-mail: uday.pai@hotmail.com
Website: www.udaypai.in
Twitter: Udaylal Pai
Book: Why Am I a Hindu (The Science of Sanatan Dharma). For kindle and international paperback, please visit: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N9PAGLT For Indian paperback (print) edition only: http://prachodayat.org/why-am-i-a-hindu/
© Uday Lal Pai. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing at uday@udaypai.in

You may also like...

31 Responses

  1. Sundararaj says:

    your statement “There is no such incident in Ram’s history depicted in Valmiki’s Ramayan. is false

    Please read the book valmiki ramayan published by Sri ramakrishna Mutt , Mylapore Chennai – 4 Pages 945-966 slogans 71.1 till 76.13-15 ISBN No: 81-7120-575-5 please read and then clarify

  2. Sundararaj says:

    Please read the book valmiki ramayan published by Sri ramakrishna Mutt , Mylapore Chennai – 4

    Pages 945-966 slogans 71.1 till 76.13-15
    ISBN No: 81-7120-575-5
    please read and the clarify

  3. Nivi says:

    Just so you know valmiki wasn’t a dalit but a brahmin.

  4. Radhakrishnan says:

    Living in mars means fool others.

  5. MUTHURAMAN says:


  6. Sam says:

    Like Devdas a story or poem written or filmed again and again by many writers or directors. Like Padmavati, Ramayana is also a story or poem written by many writers. It’s fake approved by supreme court.
    Only to feed ( in temples) or for bhiksha ( Daan or bhikh) brahmins use Ramayana as a tool nothing else.
    Not in past or in future you can create a boy by bodys dead tissue (ganpati).
    No one worships a man who rapes his own sister and daughter (bramha).
    You can’t create humans with non living things ( kauravas in mahabharata).
    If you can answer these questions

    • Vanshika says:

      1Q)you can’t a boy with dead tissues?(Ganesh)
      Ans) You surely can’t but Mata Parvati can and u know, why, well because she is nature, nature created every one of us, so she can even create Sri Ganesh.
      2Q) No one worships a man who rapes his own daughter and sister?(Bramha)
      Ans) When did he do so, who is her sister. U think Mata Saraswati is her daughter well u r wrong. In Sastras it is written that Bramha divided himself in two equal halves Bramha and Saraswati, and when you divide something in half the original form is no longer present its like cutting an apple in two halves and in scriptures it is written that a wife is ardhangini meaning half of her husband and a husband is also called ardhang meaning half of his wife. So by no means did he raped his sister. All his children are mind born, meaning bron by his thought.
      3Q)You can’t creat humans from non living things. (kauravas)
      Ans) Well kauravas weren’t created from non living beings where was this written. Gandhari had a boon that she will give birth to 100 sons and 1 daughter, she was pregnent for about 13 month but still she didn’t deliver, so thinking that it was a fake pregnancy Dritrashtr was about to mary another women. Gandhari, depressed by this thought forced herself to deliver and she gave birth to a lump of flesh, which turned out to be 101 embrios these embrios were place in pots with some chemicals, and the baby grew in the pots. (IVF baiscly)
      Are all your doubts clear.

  7. Kishore swamy says:

    lies being spread by liberals and Ambedkar caravaan Shambuk was a Shudra (Dalit) who did tapasya and Lord Ram killed him to prove lord Ram was a castist person he killed Shambuk on caste lines and gives a silliest explanation saying a Brahmin complained and he did it , lie spread by liberals but Actual truth is

    jaN^ghanAmA.asuraH pUrvaM girijAvaradAnataH | babhUva shUdraH kalpAyuH sa lokaxayakAmyayA | tapashchachAra durbuddhirichchhan.h mAheshvaraM padam.h

    its so FUnny till date no one has spoken this truth out cowards ,
    Means :-
    Shambuk wanted to marry goddess Parvati he was attracted to her Beauty and form and wished to take position of Lord Shiva so which Lord Ram gave him the punishment , which these liars won’t say
    For which he got his Due punishment , please enlighten others with this truth Courtesy Kishore swamy 🙂

  8. pushpendra pushpendra says:

    since you mentioned there is no caste system then why you use dalit words ? please clearly

    • Premnath Duraivelu says:

      Cause these Ambedkarwaadis and Bamcef Rascals use Shambuk SHudra saint killed by Casteist ram thats why
      Blog is clearly written Lord Ram greeted fisherman kewat in Ramayan people hide all truth and spread lies

      If u prove me wrong i shall stop living in this earth and reside in Mars !!!

  9. Shivanand Pandey says:

    I also believed that Ravan was a brahmin and Valmiki Ji was a dalit before reading Valmiki Ramayan and Shrimadbhagavat.
    After reading these books ,I understood the facts.
    Dev, Daitya, Rakshash, Daanav,Asur and Manushya are different.Only Manushya have the Varna Vyavastha.
    Ravan was a Rakshash ,and Rakshash have no Varna Vyavastha.

    • Shashank Gavade says:

      Valmiki was a Dacoit(low caste) earlier, everyone knows that story. After that he became a Brahman by reading Vedas and Upanishads,
      Ravana was a Brahma-Rakshas. He was not a complete Rakshas.

    • Vanshika says:

      Ravan was the son of a Bramhin rishi Vishrava and Kaikesi (a rakshas princess), so he was half human half rakshas so he did belong to the varna vayvastha

  10. Sanam says:

    I m vry thankful to u sir …
    U removed lots of questions marks which trouble me a lot …
    Sir I want to share something …
    Sir there r mny professor Nd scholar who teaches me wrong Nd creates these type of ideology indirectly they criticized Hinduism …why ????????????

  11. Sathya says:

    A very cogently argued and convincingly explained proposition. ? ? The last two paragraphs could, however, have been avoided, I feel.

  12. san says:

    how can u say a dalit is sudra.? dont put your mind. kindly know that at that time no dalits are there. according to Manu, he divided society into 4 varnas ; brahmins, kshtriyas, vysyas and sudras. not casts. kindly get educated and try to share truth in society.

  13. K NARASIMHA says:

    Excellent sir clarify my doubts very neatly

  14. Sekar R says:

    You say “Shambuka wished to go to Heaven. And Ram helped him reaching there ASAP, that’s all. Period.” What arrogance!! Almost every believer in any religion wishes to go to Heaven (probably including you). Why don’t you help them reaching there ASAP? I really pity the Shudras who were living in the kingdom of Ram. They would have been happier living in Ravana’s Kingdom. One question. In Ramayana, we, the south Indians were depicted as monkeys with tails and all. Are we the descendents of Hanumanji? Did our ancestors evolve as the present day Humans in South India? In India, Hinduism is getting eroded continuously due to conversion of Dalits and backward classes to other religions. Start genuinely accepting all the things that were wrong in Hinduism. Treat all Human beings as equal. No one is superior or inferior by Birth. Do not damage what is left of Hinduism.

    • Shashank Gavade says:

      Yeah I don’t agree with him the way he expressed himself in the last two paras.
      There is nothing wrong with Hinduism and I don’t remember reading anything related to oppressed castes and untouchables during Rama’s reign, because all these things were not there in Varnas. You must accept the fact that a lot of the texts have got distorted with time because of some ambitious manipulation of the scriptures but It doesn’t mean that you can’t make out what’s the truth with some research and your logical mindset.
      Ramayana is at least 10,000 years old, you really believe people resided in all the corners of India during that time as well. It was a total forest area not much population like nowadays. It didn’t ever occur to your mind that people might have migrated later to those places.

  15. Arti says:

    You are Great, how easily you make the things clear to everyone.

  16. Dharma Dhwaja says:

    Namaskaar Uday Sir

    We need to understand how Valmiki Ramayana was written. Ramayana is dictated to none other than Rama himself. Rama’s son Luv Kush did that. This formed the beginning of Valmiki Ramayana. Luv Kush ended Ramayana on 6th Kanda 128 Chapter.

    Valmiki doesn’t approve Ramayana after Yuddha Kaanda Chapter 128 (Rama pattabhishekam)

    This hints that Uttarakandam is much later addition and hence disputed.

    Infact you are not the only person who is countered with such questions. I was also asked once – why Rama banished Sita?

    I told him to read Valmiki Ramayana 6.128.1 onwards which explains where Ramayana officially ended.

    But then he took over Kambha Ramayana to explain his point. I told him to research on history. Kambha was told to rewrite Ramayana in Tamil. A fellow sage was jealous of him. Hence tried to test Kambha’s knowledge. After noticing Kambha’s patience (he did not offer dismay due to tests) , that poet apologized. As an act of kindness, Kambha used his Uttara Kandam in his own Ramayana. While Kambha’s Uttara Kandam mentions Rama exiling Sita, it is not written by Kambha himself. He only included that as an act of Kindness.

    He asked – there must be Puranik reference. Yes, it is – Padma Puraana Paataala Khand.

    But that explains why Sita was banished. As per that, Sita insulted a parrot duo in her childhood and tried to put them in castles. The female parrot cursed her to be separated from husband during pregnancy. Sita accepted that as a punishment. So, her exile is approved by Sita herself.

    Nevertheless, my purpose of writing this was: people have only half knowledge. They prefer to cherry pick without proper research. Hence myths become widespread.

    Sita’s exile became famous due to this half baked research and so is Shambuk’s story. Glad to know that avid researchers like you exists.

    May GOD bless you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *