0

Ram Rahasya Upanishad:

Lord Ganesha, Goddess Saraswati, Goddess Durga.... Lord Narayana, Lord Narasimha, Lord Vasudeva, Lord Varaha, Lord Lakshmana.... are the angas of Lord Rama.

So Lord Ram is definitely not from Narayana or Vasudeva, both of which are commonly considered Vishnu, but other way around. Now as per Krishna Upanishad, Lord Ram said:

When I reincarnate as Lord Krishna, you will be born as Gopis

Doesn't Krishanji in BG Ch. 10 says he is Vishnu only among Adityas? Now as per Ram Tapaniya Upanishad:

The word ‘Rama’... indicates Para Brahman itself.

The body has been ascribed to Para Brahman... the entire world exists in the seed “Rama”

‘O Rama, you are the supreme being, of the nature of Sat, Chid and Ananda.

I don't think any Upanishad has called Vishnu Satchitanand. And Narayana Upanishad says Vishnu was born from Narayana:

nā̱rā̱ya̱ṇāddvādaśādityā rudrā vasavassarvāṇi ca cha̍ndāg̱ṃsi | From Narayana, the twelve Adityas, eleven Rudras, Eight Vasus and all those meters (for writing) were born.

The twelve Adithyas are... Vishnu

Narayana (anga of Ramji) also seems somewhat equated with Vishnu here. So it Ramji an avatar of Vishnu as per any Upanishads? This could be from 108 Muktika Canon, Shaiv or Shaakt Upanishads... or even others like Allah Upanishad?

Or is it clear Vishnu is only one part of Lord Ram?

Improve this question
1
  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    – TheLittleNaruto ♦
    Commented Aug 9, 2022 at 2:43

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
1

As per atharvavediya ram rahasya upanishad , yes narayan is Anga of Bhagwan Shri Ramchandra. Only in puranas, it's said that shri Ram is avtar of vishnu(mahavishnu) but thats also case of kalpa bhed.

Going through ramcharitmanas (since it's quoted in shri ramananda sampradaya as most authentic scripture) Ramcharitmanas kiskindha kand

की तुम्ह तीनि देव महँ कोऊ। नर नारायन की तुम्ह दोऊ।।

Hanumanji says :- whether you two(shri ram and younger brother laxman) are avtar of brahma, vishnu and Mahesh, Or avtar of nar- narayan.

जग कारन तारन भव भंजन धरनी भार। की तुम्ह अकिल भुवन पति लीन्ह मनुज अवतार।।1।।

Or, saket lok (centre core of vaikunth )adhipati has himself incarnate on the surface of earth as human avtar.

As far as my thinking goes, i don't think vedas have never said that shri Ram is avtar of Vishnu

Improve this answer
1

You don't have to go anywhere just check the Krisha Upanishad only.

Krishna Upanishad.:

श्रीमहाविष्णुं सच्चिदानन्दलक्षणं रामचन्द्रं

दृष्ट्वा सर्वाङ्गसुन्दरं मुनयो वनवासिनो विस्मिता बभूवुः ।

When the sages living in the forest visited Sri Ramachandra who was the incarnation of the ever joyful Maha Vishnu and who was extremely handsome, they became amazed.

I hope this clarifies all your queries. Prd..

Improve this answer
4
  • Where did you get the word incarnation here? I don't see any Sanskrit word for the same. [Translation doubt]. Thank You.
    – user29449
    Commented Oct 6, 2023 at 16:05
  • You see, the word, "लक्षणं" can mean form/attribute/sign etc. Plus, P.R.Ramachander had also translated it as incarnation only (avatar/form/have same attributes, etc). The Link of which you can see in the question itself given by OP himself. I hope this clarifies all your queries. N u r Welcome. Prd..
    – Viṣṇu _Deva _Śrī.
    Commented Oct 6, 2023 at 17:06
  • The proper word for incarnation is अवतार:. While लक्षणं, doesn't even roughly translate to it. Later can be used to define as guru-shishya relationship as much as ansha to it. Various sampradayas have their own interpretation of their own metaphysical system, so it is often corrupted in their translations too. I'll consider an upvote if you acknowledge that and what various sampradayas interpret the verse above independently. Thank You.
    – user29449
    Commented Oct 7, 2023 at 5:19
  • Well i dont care about your or any one else's upvote to be honest. What actually is corrupting is the understanding of the Sanskrit due to favourism and biasness. I don't like sampradaya things i only follow what i understand is right after comparing various texts. So, it doesn't matter for me roughly also. U can check dictionary lakshanam can be translated into form which can mean incarnation (murti/avatar) also. If u understand this thn i may consider to greenlight the talk n U cn either jst acknowledge it or u cn move on. Tbh, It vl change nothing. Anyways we are done. Welcome. Goodbye. Tc.
    – Viṣṇu _Deva _Śrī.
    Commented Oct 7, 2023 at 7:40
0

What I believe is that the formless supreme Lord takes different forms to give the spiritual pleasure to his devotees. These forms shouldn't be compared as higher and lower ones. Every god and goddess has been originated from only one param tatva.

We know that it is very difficult for us to meditate on the formless supreme Lord, since he has no form. But when the same supreme Lord appears in some form to his devotees, for eg., Vishnu, Ram, Krishna, Shiva, Ganesha, Durga etc., it becomes very easy for the devotees to meditate on that form and qualities of Lord and the devotees get very easily freed from this material world.

Now, coming to why different scriptures are comparing the different forms of supreme Lord. See, if you find different Puranas, you will find that every Purana places that form of lord as supreme lord which it is dedicated to.

This is because we as devotees can choose any personality of lord as our supreme lord in order to meditate on him lifetime. The different scriptures glorify different forms of god and place them as supreme godhead so that devotees enjoy hearing the glories of their supreme lord. That is the reason behind this.

The summary is that Lord Rama, Lord Vishnu and all others as well are one and the same supreme godhead. For Rama devotees, Lord Rama becomes supreme and for vishnu devotees, Lord Vishnu becomes supreme.

Improve this answer
3
  • As it’s currently written, your answer is unclear. Please edit to add additional details that will help others understand how this addresses the question asked. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center.
    – Community Bot
    Commented Aug 8, 2022 at 14:44
  • Raam is not Vishnu as per Ramayan or any Upanishad to my knowledge.... Narayan is just small part of Raam- I am asking what vedas say not what devotees believe?
    – R. Kaushik
    Commented Aug 8, 2022 at 17:39
  • 1
    Have you been to different Puranas such as bhagvata purana, vishnu purana, shiv purana, etc? These all tell different god as originator of all the forms of lord
    – Aayush
    Commented Aug 9, 2022 at 0:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .