Bhagavan as per Gita

*Please Read the Complete Verse* Verse of the Day : Bhagavad-gita As It Is -- 2.2 Chapter 2: Contents of the Gita Summarized . . श्रीभगवानुवाच . कुतस्त्वा कश्मलमिदं विषमे समुपस्थितम् | . अनार्यजुष्टमस्वर्ग्यमकीर्तिकरमर्जुन || २ || . . . śrī-bhagavān uvāca . kutas tvā kaśmalam idaṁ . viṣame samupasthitam . anārya-juṣṭam asvargyam . akīrti-karam arjuna . . . . SYNONYMS . . śrī bhagavān uvāca—the Supreme Personality of Godhead said; kutaḥ—wherefrom; tvā—unto you; kaśmalam—dirtiness; idam—this lamentation; viṣame—this hour of crisis; samupasthitam—arrived; anārya—persons who do not know the value of life; juṣṭam—practiced by; asvargyam—that which does not lead to higher planets; akīrti—infamy; karam—the cause of; arjuna—O Arjuna. . . . . TRANSLATION . . The Supreme Person [Bhagavān] said: My dear Arjuna, how have these impurities come upon you? They are not at all befitting a man who knows the progressive values of life. They do not lead to higher planets, but to infamy. . . . . PURPORT . . Kṛṣṇa and the Supreme Personality of Godhead are identical. Therefore Lord Kṛṣṇa is referred to as "Bhagavān" throughout the Gītā. Bhagavān is the ultimate in the Absolute Truth. Absolute Truth is realized in three phases of understanding, namely Brahman or the impersonal all-pervasive spirit; Paramātmā, or the localized aspect of the Supreme within the heart of all living entities; and Bhagavān, or the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Kṛṣṇa. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam this conception of the Absolute Truth is explained thus: . vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayambrahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate. . "The Absolute Truth is realized in three phases of understanding by the knower of the Absolute Truth, and all of them are identical. Such phases of the Absolute Truth are expressed as Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavān." (Bhāg. 1.2.11) These three divine aspects can be explained by the example of the sun, which also has three different aspects, namely the sunshine, the sun's surface and the sun planet itself. One who studies the sunshine only is the preliminary student. One who understands the sun's surface is further advanced. And one who can enter into the sun planet is the highest. Ordinary students who are satisfied by simply understanding the sunshine—its universal pervasiveness and the glaring effulgence of its impersonal nature—may be compared to those who can realize only the Brahman feature of the Absolute Truth. The student who has advanced still further can know the sun disc, which is compared to knowledge of the Paramātmā feature of the Absolute Truth. And the student who can enter into the heart of the sun planet is compared to those who realize the personal features of the Supreme Absolute Truth. Therefore, the bhaktas, or the transcendentalists who have realized the Bhagavān feature of the Absolute Truth, are the topmost transcendentalists, although all students who are engaged in the study of the Absolute Truth are engaged in the same subject matter. The sunshine, the sun disc and the inner affairs of the sun planet cannot be separated from one another, and yet the students of the three different phases are not in the same category. . The Sanskrit word Bhagavān is explained by the great authority, Parāśara Muni, the father of Vyāsadeva. The Supreme Personality who possesses all riches, all strength, all fame, all beauty, all knowledge and all renunciation is called Bhagavān. There are many persons who are very rich, very powerful, very beautiful, very famous, very learned, and very much detached, but no one can claim that he possesses all riches, all strength, etc., entirely. Only Kṛṣṇa can claim this because He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. No living entity, including Brahmā, Lord Śiva, or Nārāyaṇa, can possess opulences as fully as Kṛṣṇa. Therefore it is concluded in the Brahma-saṁhitā by Lord Brahmā himself that Lord Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. No one is equal to or above Him. He is the primeval Lord, or Bhagavān, known as Govinda, and He is the supreme cause of all causes. . īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥanādir ādir govindaḥ sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam . "There are many personalities possessing the qualities of Bhagavān, but Kṛṣṇa is the supreme because none can excel Him. He is the Supreme Person, and His body is eternal, full of knowledge and bliss. He is the primeval Lord Govinda and the cause of all causes." (Brahma-saṁhitā 5.1) . In the Bhāgavatam also there is a list of many incarnations of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but Kṛṣṇa is described as the original Personality of Godhead, from whom many, many incarnations and Personalities of Godhead expand: . ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayamindrāri-vyākulaṁ lokaṁ mṛḍayanti yuge yuge . "All the lists of the incarnations of Godhead submitted herewith are either plenary expansions or parts of the plenary expansions of the Supreme Godhead, but Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself." (Bhag. 1.3.28) . Therefore, Kṛṣṇa is the original Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Absolute Truth, the source of both the Supersoul and the impersonal Brahman. . In the presence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Arjuna's lamentation for his kinsmen is certainly unbecoming, and therefore Kṛṣṇa expressed His surprise with the word kutas, "wherefrom." Such unmanly sentiments were never expected from a person belonging to the civilized class of men known as Āryans. The word āryan is applicable to persons who know the value of life and have a civilization based on spiritual realization. Persons who are led by the material conception of life do not know that the aim of life is realization of the Absolute Truth, Viṣṇu, or Bhagavān, and they are captivated by the external features of the material world, and therefore they do not know what liberation is. Persons who have no knowledge of liberation from material bondage are called non-Āryans. Although Arjuna was a kṣatriya, he was deviating from his prescribed duties by declining to fight. This act of cowardice is described as befitting the non-Āryans. Such deviation from duty does not help one in the progress of spiritual life, nor does it even give one the opportunity to become famous in this world. Lord Kṛṣṇa did not approve of the so-called compassion of Arjuna for his kinsmen. . Question 1 : How Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam explains the conception of the Absolute Truth ? How can it be exemplified ? . Question 2 : What does this verse : . īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥanādir ādir govindaḥ sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam . from Brahma-saṁhitā means ?

Chaturmas

14 गिरिराज डागा published a note. July 17, 2012 at 1:37pm · “Chatur Maas - the four holy months” (Shraavan, Bhaadrapad, Ashwin & Kartik) The first month in Chaturmaas, Shraavan is dedicated to God Shiv, especially the Mondays. The next month is Bhaadrapad, the month of festivals including the Ganesh Chaturthi and Krishna Janmashtami. Then comes Ashwin month and the important festivals include, Durga Puja, Navratri, Dussehra etc. Finally comes the Kartik month, which has the bouquet of Diwali festivals – Dhanteras, Deepavali, Bhai Dooj, Govardhan Puja, etc. The scriptures recommend the following for good health during Chaturmaas: Green leafy vegetables should be avoided in the Shraavan month. Curd (or yoghurt) is avoided in Bhaadrapad, while milk is avoided in Ashwin month. Pulses (the split variety) and rice are avoided in the Kartik month. Chaturmasa is an excellent period imbued with all virtues. One should earnestly devote oneself to garnering religious merit during this period. If one doesn’t take up the practice of yog with faith and earnestness in Chaturmasa, one has virtually let go of a pot of nectar. One with a wiser sense should try always to keep his mind under control, for mind control is a pre-requisite for attainment of Supreme Knowledge. Acts like misappropriation and adultery are always forbidden but should be particularly eschewed in Chaturmasa. Compassion to living beings is particularly recommended in Chaturmasa and the giving of food, water and cows etc. reading of scriptures and fire sacrifices afford immense religious merit. Giving food bestows the highest religious merit. It can be given at any time of the day; it can be given even to one’s enemies. It is a rare virtue to have the inclination to abide by dharma, to serve the saints, have darshana and satsang of saints, to worship Lord Vishnu and practice almsgiving in Chaturmasa. If one, for the sake of the Lord’s pleasure, voluntarily forswears sense-enjoyments dear to one’s heart in Chaturmasa, one gets those sense-enjoyments in unlimited quantity. One doing so with full faith gets immense religious merit. One not using metal utensils and taking food on Palasha leaves in Chaturmasa attains to Brahma Bhava (God-consciousness). One should particularly refrain from taking food in copper utensils during Chaturmasa. Wearing black and blue is harmful in Chaturmasa. One, who refrains from shaving in Chaturmasa, saves himself from the three - fold afflictions (tritapa). Sleeping on the ground, observing brahmacharya, eating on leaves, fasting, Mauna (silence), Jap, meditation and charities in Chaturmasa are especially beneficial. Slandering others should be particularly avoided in Chaturmasa. Even listening to slander regarding anybody is sinful. Paraninda mahapapam parninda mahabhhayam | Paraninda mahadukham na tasyaa: patakam Param || ‘Slander is a huge sin; it is great fear; it is highly distressing; there is no sin more heinous than slander.’ (Skanda Purana, Brahma Khand, Chaturmasa Mahatmya 4.25) Observing brahmacharya is the greatest among the pious vows. Brahmacharya is the essence of all penance and bestows the highest merit. Therefore, take recourse to brahmacharya in all manners. Brahmacharya leads to the highest in austerity. There is no greater means of dharma than brahmacharya. The vow of brahmacharya is particularly more rewarding in Chaturmasa. If one remains steadfast and takes moderate quantities of food only once in a day throughout Chaturmasa, he gets absolved of all sins and goes to Lord Vishnu’s abode. One eating only a single cereal throughout Chaturmasa is saved from diseases. One taking only one meal in a day in Chaturmasa attains religious merit of performing twelve fire sacrifices. One living on milk or fruit alone gets thousands of his sins destroyed. Complete fasting on one out of fifteen days destroys all ailments of the body and converts all the food taken in past fourteen days into ojas. That is why fasting on Ekadashi is so highly celebrated. One living a married life can do with fasting only on the Ekadashi falling in the bright fortnight but one should fast on both Ekadashis in Chaturmasa. Sri Vishnu sleeps in yoganidra during Chaturmasa; therefore, no marriages or other ceremonies or sacrifices with desire of future reward should be performed in Chaturmasa. This four month period is for austerities. Like Comment Share 7 people like this. गिरिराज डागा ॐ Like ✔ Comment ✔ Tag ✔ Share ✔ॐ Edited · Like · More · Jul 28 Santosh Sharma ॥श्री गिरिराज धरण कि जय॥ बहुत सुन्दर जानकारी के लिए Like · 1 · More · Jul 28 Santosh Sharma आज का विचार बहुत आसान होता है "कोई उदाहरण पेश करना" लेकिन....बहुत कठिन. होता है "खुद कोई उदाहरण बनना" ----------- ☆ शुभ प्रभात ☆ ----------- Like · 1 · More · Jul 31 Write a comment... Post  

Why Gandhari blind

Aug 20, 2015 Why did Gandhari blindfold herself?  Blog by Radhika Ravi Rajan 7153 VIEWS 9 COMMENTS  If this question were posed, the most common answer would be: that Gandhari's love for her husband coupled with her sense of sacrifice, or in other words, her empathy for him, to feel one as him, to be in his shoes, was what made her choose that extreme step... But here's another interesting theory: In a discusiion on this topic on Quora, one participant quoted Irawati Karve to bring forth another aspect: According to Karve, apparently, Gandhari's act of blindfolding had nothing to do with either sacrifice or love. It was quite the opposite, actually, according to her. Karwe says Gandhari belonged to Gandhar, or present-day Afghanistan. In other words, she was as far away from Hastinapur as one could imagine. To make matters worse, she was not told that her prospective groom was blind. Consequently, she was shocked to learn of his blindness after marriage. Thus, her deciding to blindfold herself was more of an act of defiance than loyalty. She vowed that she would end the main reason why Dhritarashtra had married her - to make her act as his guide and companion in the absence of his vision. So, in fact, it was a move to pounish him rather than herself. Of course, you could also describe it as the proverbial cutting off one's nose to spite one's face! What do you think?

What is Mahabharata biggest lesson

Aug 12, 2015 What is The Mahabharata's biggest lesson?  Blog by Radhika Ravi Rajan 11678 VIEWS 85 COMMENTS  If one were asked to zero-in on The Mahabharata's biggest question, it may well be: "Does the end justify the means?" The question, posed on Quora, elicited an intellectually stimulating response from Tejasvita Apte, one of its leading writers...I share it here for Speaking Tree readers... Apte says: "This question is fantastic. And The Mahabharata is truly an ocean of wisdom if we wish to ask such a question. The end may or may not justify the means. The best approach, therefore, is to analyse for yourself and decide. In each situation. There is no one answer that will fit every situation! Therefore, I am going to try and make arguments from both sides. Let's see! Let us take a few instances from the epic: The first example: Trying to avoid the war as far as possible: Pandavas do all they can, to avoid the war. Yudhishthir is very pragmatic. He knows that as per dharma (morality/righteousness), he should be the king. Yet, his first reaction is not to go to war for the same. He negotiates, understands, talks, argues and tries everything else. As a last resort, Pandavas send Krishna to negotiate. They are now willing to take just five villages. That was all they asked for, in the end. But when Duryodhana, in his arrogance, claimed that he wouldn't part with even a needle-prick's land, is when they know that war is inevitable. If the end were to justify the means, war in the first instance wouldn't have looked ridiculous. For, Yudhishthir is older and therefore, the rightful heir to the throne. Here, we can say that the Mahabharata tells us that ends do not justify the means." Looking at this very same instance from another perspective: Pandavas do everything they can to avoid the war. But at end of the day, they too know that war is inevitable. They know they are going to be forced to kill their own kith and kin, including their teachers. Despite that, they decide that the cause is too big to let go of. So, in one respect, the end does justify the means - which in this case is a war with your own blood relations! So, the very fact that the Pandavas chose to wage war (even if that was as a last resort), kill their own kith and kin, and cause misery to everyone involved, itself shows that sometimes, ends do justify the means. A second example: Arjuna's dilemma in Kurukshetra When Arjuna feels dejected in the war to kill his own teachers and brothers, Krishna shows his virat swaroop (cosmic form) and convinces Arjuna to fight, as that is his dharma (duty). He uses a number of arguments which encompass all aspects of human nature. He uses philosophy in which he explains that all of us are souls. Nothing is permanent in this world except the self/soul. The soul always remains untouched and unharmed as it is a part of the eternal Brahman (cosmic spirit or oneness). He then talks from the material sense in which Arjuna is a kshatriya (warrior) and his foremost dharma (duty) is to fight. When Arjuna is feeling guilty for having to take arms against his own brothers and teachers, Krishna contends that it is not he, Arjuna, who is killing them. It is prakriti (nature) which does it through him. In essence, he is saying that certain things are meant to be. That the war was inevitable, as its seeds were planted a few generations ago. Using arguments like the above, Krishna convinces Arjuna to fight, as that is all he can do. It is Krishna who directs Arjuna to kill Karna when he is unarmed, unethically. It is Krishna who uses his 'Sudarshan Chakra' to make it look like it's evening and kill Jaydrath. Unethical, again. All these unethical things for what? A larger cause, of course! Krishna, therefore, convinces Arjuna that the end does justify the means. And Arjuna fights, knowing well that the means, (war and killing) however unpleasant, justify a larger cause. Had he not believed in it, he wouldn't have picked up arms. We also have to consider the fact that the Mahabharata is not at all ambiguous about the fact that Krishna is, indeed, God. So, it's god himself who convinces Arjuna that the ends justify the means. Mahabharata is unequivocal about it. On the other hand, even though Krishna uses all of these arguments to convince Arjuna to fight, Arjuna cannot bring himself to fight. It requires Krishna's arguments from every angle, including reminding of the unethical killing of his son Abhimanyu to make Arjuna pick up arms. Even then, at every instance, he requires Krishna's assistance. Despite winning the war, the Pandavas are unhappy. Krishna is cursed by Gandhari and the curse comes to fruition. All of this can also be interpreted as the end not necessarily justifying the means. Or to pin-point, the end may justify the means technically, but that still may not bring an end to human dilemma and unhappiness. And dharma may still be elusive! Third example: Bheeshma and Shikhandi Bheeshma captures three princesses - Amba, Ambika and Ambalika - to marry Vichitraveerya, in order to make sure that the throne has an heir. And this mess is now because it is Bheeshma's oath of celibacy itself that has become a hindrance in the throne being without an heir. Had Bheeshma not stuck to his oath (even when Satyavati herself requested him), there wouldn't be any need to kidnap the princesses and there wouldn't be any disputes at all. But Bheeshma chose his oath and kidnapped the princesses, convincing himself that the end justifes the means! What followed, of course, was the pathetic situation of Amba, who ended up killing herself to be reborn as Shikhandini, who becomes responsible to bring about Bheeshma's death. So, all in all, had Bheeshma just given up his oath and married, none of this would have happened. A terrible war would have been prevented. But, arguing that the ends justified the means and kidnapping the princesses sowed the seeds of his own end. Could the real question possibly be: When Krishna (God) stands behind you, do ends justify the means? All of the Kaurava commanders are killed unethically. Krishna is the master strategist behind that. Krishna convinces Arjuna to take up arms. It is Krishna's strategy that helps the Pandavas win the war, despite their inferior military power. It is Krishna who says he is God and it is he who is performing all the actions. Arjuna is merely a channel. The result of all this is that the Pandavas win the war and seemingly, the end justifies the means! Could it be as simple as this: that God stood behind the Pandavas and therefore, their ends justified the means? We don't know! This gives birth to a scarier question. If I believe that my God is behind me, then does my end justify my means? In short, this is the whole argument behind any religious violence that happens in the world. Can this be true? I don't think so. And I suppose Vyaasa would agree! Because there are other facts too: The Mahabharata acknowledges that in spite of the victory of the Pandavas, it was an unfair war. It does not say that the heroes won and end of story! It punishes them as much as the others. They will now have to face the fruits of their karma. Therefore, in spite of the victory, they were never able to live happily. Gandhari curses Krishna and it comes true. Krishna himself dies of a misfired arrow. The Pandavas, despite winning the war, renounce everything. The leave for the Himalayas clad in rags. The Kauravas and Karna end up in heaven! So, now that this is the conclusion, does the end justify the means? Dharma is truly elusive. So, I don't know! 85 COMMENTS Read Write  popular  Trees are yogis  Khwaja Mere Khwaja  Remain a servant  La Tomatina: Spain paints its town red today  Dialogue with Universe  Appeal of a spooky house  Song of the reed  How a man won a million hearts  Prayers for peace  We need nature more ALL SPEAKING TREE MY PROFILE Today Last 7 Days Last 30 Days  Anushka Goyal PLATINUM 1 Rank84668 Points  Bipin Patel PLATINUM 2 Rank168879 Points  Babai Dey PLATINUM 3 Rank38409 Points  Aravind SILVER 4 Rank792 Points  Arun Hardia SILVER 5 Rank792 Points  Sujay Ghosh PLATINUM 6 Rank76155 Points  Jafa PLATINUM 7 Rank35308 Points  Tanzi Fatma PLATINUM 8 Rank100566 Points  Naveen Sinha SILVER 9 Rank664 Points  Adhyatm PLATINUM 10 Rank75931 Points Times Point Know more STORIES YOU MAY WANT TO READ  Why did Gandhari blindfold herself? India: A constantly changing matrix Does wildlife have to pay the price for humans eating meat? Why did Krishna kill Ekalavya? Spiritual Journey Through Religious Path Nuclear war wiped out Ancient Civilizations on Mars? Comments Comments Via Facebook  85 Comments Via ST   Dilip Modhawadiya Ok 9 hrs ago  Avinash Sorty There is nothing like papa/punya. & every thing has it's reason to happen. So whatever happens is justified as every result is the fruit of one's own karma which is without doubt is appropriate. As you think so you become &as you sow so you reap. That is law of nature which is beyond our comprehension as God is.Our whole life is like Mahabharata. 1 day ago  Ashish Kumar Here, we can say that the Mahabharata tells us that ends do not justify the means." 2 days ago  Kishore Kumar Burra Good 2 days ago  Ritu Raj All the leading characters of Mahabharat, except Yudhishthir, took recourse to various stratagems to achieve their ends. 4 days ago Load More © 2015 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved

There was a king who was a great devotee of God. He used to secretly pray and worship the Lord. The queen too was a great devotee of the Lord. From childhood she was engaged in devotion and worship. After marrying the king, even in her new home, she celebrated many festivals of the Lord, served the Brahmins, served the poor and grieving. 

 She was immersed in worship and meditating on the Lord and celebrating the various festivities. The king never objected to all these activities. At times the queen used to say Maharaj ! You too sometimes chant the Divine Name of the Lord - Ram ! ’He used to smile it off. The queen was quite unhappy about this, as to what to do about it, but the rest of her life was very good. He never objects to my doing satsang, bhajan, meditation etc; but the king himself never did any bhajan. One day, the queen saw that the king was in deep sleep. He was tossing and turning and in his sleep he uttered the Divine Name “Ram”. As the morning arrived, the queen began to prepare to celebrate the incident. She invited a lot of Brahmins, children, young girls, and celebrated. The king asked “what is the occasion for the celebration today. Today there is no special festive day of the Lord ? ‒ The queen said ‒‘Today it is a very joyous day in our lives.’ What is the joyous occasion ? ‘Maharaj! for many years I was hoping that you would say the Lord’s Name. At night, in your sleep, from your mouth came out the Name of the Lord.’ The king said ‘It slipped out? ‘Yes’ on saying so, the King breathed his last breath. ‘Oh ! all my life I kept this in secrecy, now that the secret is out, what is the point of living ?’ गुप्त अकाम निरन्तर ध्यान सहित सानन्द । आदर जुत जपसे तुरत पावत परमानन्द ॥ These six points, when present in your japa, that japa is instantly and exceptionally glorious. Repeating the Lord’s Name in secrecy, is great. People do not see the japa taking place, rather one can’t even tell - this is great point, but minimally, there should be no pretentiousness whatsoever. By this the real “naam japa” does not take place. Rather it is disrespect o “naam japa”. In place of “naam japa” you are buying honor-greatness, respect, you are drawing people towards you. This is a business dealing with naam japa. It is not some merchandize that needs to be sold ! What wealth is there like “naam japa” to show for? People do not even reveal the worldly wealth, they keep it most hidden. This is the real wealth that needs to be kept inside. माई मेरे निरधनको धन राम । रामनाम मेरे हृदयमें राखूं ज्यूं लोभी राखे दाम ॥ दिन दिन सूरज सवायो उगे, घटत न एक छदाम । सूरदास के इतनी पूँजी, रतन मणि से नहीं काम ॥ From Book in Hindi “Manas Mein Naam Vandana” by Swami RRamsukhds

Why Shri Rama is Maryada

Rama called Maryada Purushottam. why? Ramayana is invested with many episodes.

Each contributed to the smooth run of the plot of the text. Birds and animals are also major characters in this epic.

Nature, in general, supported the cause and purpose of Rama, the chief character about whom the whole story is narrated. Sage Valmiki wrote this kavya with some sorrows because of his witness of male bird's death. so, the full Ramayana was covered more sorrows and less happiness. Birth of Rama, Rama was taken by Vishwamitra, swayamvara, coronation stopped and banishment, lose of sita, war, difficulties in crossing the ocean, vali vadham, then washerman report, sita sent to forest, fight with own sons etc.,this goes more. In this juncture, sage valmiki took the Episode carefully. Returning back to Ayodhya after killing Ravana, Ram was coroneted as king of Ayodhya.

They had an efficient system of obtaining feedback from the public on the basis of which laws were made for the welfare of the public. Some of these feedbacks were very disturbing. They were all about Sita and how she could not be accepted back as queen after staying with Ravan. Initially these feedbacks were ignored. Slowly these feedbacks started increasing and dissatisfaction became much more apparent.

But Ram is not called Maryada Purushottam just as a mark of respect. He always respected the existing tradition (Maryada) of that time.

Shri Rama respected the citizens. He respected the people's talks. He declared that Sita had to pass the Agni Pariksha test so that he could accept her back. Laxman strongly opposed this. Yet the victorious army chief insisted that Agni Pariksha was the only thing which could make him accept her. Sita agreed and after the satisfactory completion of the ritual ‘Agni Pariksha’, Shri Ram gladly accepted her back as his wife.

Ram did it not because he personally doubted Sita but because of the demands of his dharma as a king; he knew she was innocent but he had to show his praja (subject) that unlike his father, he was not a slave to a woman, that as a just raja he was willing to make any amount of personal sacrifices for them. It was an act of sacrifice for him as well. He suffered no less, and lived an ascetic life thereafter.

Lord Rama: An ideal son to the parents. An ideal husband to His wife. A Good brother to his young brothers. A Good and Ideal king to the people of His kingdom. A good and ideal protector of Dharma. A Good and Ideal ruler. A good and ideal friend to vanaras. An Ideal son in obeying the parents. An example for morality. So, Shri Rama is called Maryada purushottam Ram. What about Krishna? Krishna established dharma. He showed miracles in his life. His life was happy. He behaved many times cunningly though it was for good. He got rivalary from many circles. Krishna Avatar is entirely different from Rama Avatar. Rama from the beginning to end behaved like a human whereas Krishna several times showed he is an avatar of mahavishnu like showing Vishwarupa Darshan etc., Maryada generally relates to humans and not Gods. The God is away from human natures. Because Rama behaved like a human and never showed his avatar rahashya, he was treated fully as a respectful human and hence Rama was called Maryada Purushottam. @Edit: Thank you ji for your kind remarks. My namskaram to you. @Edit: why Rama killed Bali(Vali)? Rama and sugreeva entered into an understanding to help each other in their misery and Rama had to fulfil his promise of killing vali. Besides, there is also more reasons. Raj dharma, and Raj neeti not protected by Vaali. how? as a king, he failed to protect dharma. vali not learnt lesson from a bird which fought with ravana when ravana took sita. When ravana passes through his kingdom, it is the duty of vali to fight with ravana and save dharma. He knew that sita has been abducted. He knew the one who abducted sita was once defeated. vali could have over powered him easily if he made an attempt. sita was carried across his kingdom.sugreeva had seen the abduction. so did vali. but vali could have stopped it, because he was capable and in capacity as a king of that territory/land/area/kingdom.vali failed to stop the crimes in his lands.vali failed to punish the offenders. Killing Ravana was to protect Dharma. All of a sudden Rama did not kill Ravana. He sent Hanuman. He gave one day time during the war. He gave many opportunities. Sita tells dharma. Ravana brother Vibhishana give suggestions. pl read my answer in this question under source where i gave answer why Rama sent sita to jungles. If you come with a question, i can give elaborate answer. Due to space problems i conclude my answer please. Thanks for the opportunity!!!