You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : February 1997

Re:paasurappadi raamaayaNam (fwd)

From: Vijay Triplicane (
Date: Thu Feb 20 1997 - 11:07:02 PST

This is my response to sri Rengi's personal mail to me. Thought of sharing
this with the group so that i can improve my thamizh vocabulary by the
ongoing discussion...:-)

> >
> Dear Rengi,
> 	Thanks for your response. I just wanted somebody to respond so as to
> 	keep the thread alive..You have done more than that. Thanks..
> > Dear Viji,
> > By and large the trasnlastion is very well done. May i submit some little
> > other interpretations that occur to my limitted tamil knowledge that is
> > combined with the understanding of our sidhdhantham. 
> > uraththaik keeeRi - Uram here is an adjective for valimai or strength
> > and so uraththaik keeRi may be meant as "HE broke down her strength and her"
> > the strength here means the asurar koottam tat was also destroyed in this
> > episode along with thaadaki. This i think is the implied meaning.
> > 
> > mazhuvaaLi - your meaning is correct
> > it is parsurama's weapon
> >
> 	How do u separate this word? mazhu + aaLi? Isn't mazhu some form of
> 	mazhuNGgiya or 'not so sharp' adjective to a weapon? DOes aaLi mean
> 	kOdaali? (tha axe?)
> > 
> > avan thavaththai muRRum cheRRu - I am not sure one can say that Lord parsurama had ego 
> > in the first place so that another avathrama has tro remove it. There was a *tense*
> > debate on this issue of parasurama avatharam an year and a half back in this forum.
> > Since Lord Parsurama is an accepted avathram as per our sidhdhantham and thirumnagi azawar,
> > we must apply the rule that by default any avatharam of lord is void of ego. All the
> > avathramas are sathvik in nature. As per poorvacharyaaL's vyaakyanams Lord Rama
> > quenched parasurAma's anger to kill all the kshathriya kings. Lord Rama proved to be
> > a King worthy of shatriya clan. It is ever said in advaithin editions of bAgavathA
> > too that Beeshma taught a lesson to parasurama and contained his ego etc. I donot think
> > these may be the intrerpretations that we as srivaishnavas may take. So this must
> > be taken as Lord Rama completely quenched Lord Parsuramar's anger.
> >
> 	You are right. It doesn't mean ego. Its some kinda strong belief
> 	against the kshathriyaas...
> > Please forgive me for my mistakes. I simply wrote what appears correct to me
> > as per my limitted tamil knowledge. If you want you can take this to the group
> > as a disuccion between you and me.
> > Regards
> > SR
> > 
> 	Will post this in our net...
> 	-Viji