Avataaraas

[Guest guest]

Reply to the following question:

 

Among the south Indian 10, I am more puzzled with

Parasu Raamar than some of the others. 1. Is the concept of implicit

obedience to father the main contribution of this avatharam? 2. Was he

an avaathaaram only until his encounter with Sri Raamar? This must be

so as he was unable to defeat Bheeshmar later. 3. Would that not make

him less than the other avathaarams?

 

1. Not at all. Even though there is a tamil film song in the film

"Thirumaal Perumai" that goes,

 

Thaai thandhai sollE uyar vEdam

EnRu kaattiyadhinnumoru avadhaaram

Parasuraama avadhaaram.... Kannadaasan?

 

that was not the chief reason behind the avathaaram. This avathaaram

became a necessity in order to offset the chaos and confusion that

reined on the earth due to Kshattriyaas becoming adhaarmic and failing

in their duties. This was also the reason behind Lord Parasuraamar

slaying 21 (or 22?) generations of kings. Also his mission was to

alleviate the suffering of Braahmanaas at the hands of tyrant kings.

The sheer violent nature of this avathaaram must have forced our

forebearers to stop worshipping him as an avathaaram of Lord Vishnu

and instead choose Lord Raama and Krishnaa for daily worship. But it

is sad that the very braahmanaas and other pious/gentle people that he

so conscientously protected, failed to reciprocate the generosity by

not even remembering his contribution.

 

 

2. No. He is blessed (or cursed?) to be a Chiranjeevi (not the

actor!). He is believed to exist as a formless force (or being) in the

verdant land of KEraLam. He is generally attributed as the original

sthaapaka (installer?) of the Ayyappa shrine.

 

 

3. Unacceptable. If you agree with the fact that he is an avathaaram

of Lord Vishnu as a brahmin warrior, he can in no way be considered

inferior to Lord Vishnu's Kshattriya forms of Sri Rama and Sri

Krishna.

 

I have tried to answer the questions based on whatever knowledge I

have on this subject. Other learned members of our group would know

more. Pardon me if I have inadvertantly written anything offensive.

 

Dilipan.

[Guest guest]

On Jan 3, 5:03pm, D2C30T8 wrote:

> Re: Avataaraas

But it

> is sad that the very braahmanaas and other pious/gentle people that he

> so conscientously protected, failed to reciprocate the generosity by

> not even remembering his contribution.

 

Last year in India Parasuraama jayanthi was celebrated with record particpation

in the capital. It was well attended by prominent mutts representativ es and

also by religious organisations. Prime Minister PVN Rao has sent his

representative too. The Hindu organisations in fact declared that they would

want to make this day as a National Hoilday and would lobby for the same.

 

>

>

> 2. No. He is blessed (or cursed?) to be a Chiranjeevi (not the

> actor!). He is believed to exist as a formless force (or being) in the

> verdant land of KEraLam. He is generally attributed as the original

> sthaapaka (installer?) of the Ayyappa shrine.

>

This doenot seem to be the answer for the second question Mr, Dileepan had

asked. However, you have mentioned these things in response to my thoughts.

When this general belief is hanging around that he exist in KEralam I wanna

know from you or anyother who is from kerala, if there is any citation

available for this in any of the malayaalam scripts. If so please post it also.

I am not sure if traditional srivaishnavas accept Ayyappa worship, leave alone

muruga or shiva. This is a new thread I am hearing for the first time that an

avathaaram of Sriman Naraaryana was the sthaapaka for Ayyappa shrine. Though

one can argue the case of Lord Rama installing the shivalingam at rameswaram,

Aiyappan is believed to be the son of Mohini avathaaram and hence a section of

core sriviashnavas consider Swamy Aiyyappan as demigod and it is

(srivaishnavaas) believed that that some people worship aiyappa for pursuit of

materialistic needs only, without realisng the fact the same can be obtained by

sriman naaraayana worship alone. (Sriman Naaraayana provides all support for

our materialistic pursuits, protects us and as well as grant saranaagathi for

us ) . This is not to undermine the sentiments of Aiyappa followers in this

group but only to state the position of srivaishnava sampradaayam. It is

surprising and misleading to note that increasing number of sriviashnavas

visit this shrine in contrary to our principles on saranaagathi and

baranyaasam. Can you substantiate the claim that parasuraama established this

shrine for ayyappa.

>

> 3. Unacceptable. If you agree with the fact that he is an avathaaram

> of Lord Vishnu as a brahmin warrior, he can in no way be considered

> inferior to Lord Vishnu's Kshattriya forms of Sri Rama and Sri

> Krishna.

>

> I have tried to answer the questions based on whatever knowledge I

> have on this subject. Other learned members of our group would know

> more. Pardon me if I have inadvertantly written anything offensive.

>

> Dilipan.

>-- End of excerpt from D2C30T8

 

The integrity of the avathaaram as a warrior was not questioned in my opinion

by Mr. Dileepan. When Ramaa avathaarm [not the actor ramaa (rao) ] (two

saranaagathi's demonstrated) and krishnaa avatharam [not the actor krishna and

naagaarjuna] (Srimath bagawath geetha) has unique lessons for us, Does

Parasuraama avathaaram has any such lessons to offer. Your contention and the

quote from the movie Tamil song ...

>

> 1. Not at all. Even though there is a tamil film song in the film

> "Thirumaal Perumai" that goes,

>

> Thaai thandhai sollE uyar vEdam

> EnRu kaattiyadhinnumoru avadhaaram

> Parasuraama avadhaaram.... Kannadaasan?

>

 

is not a main contribution, may be right. But winning all the shaktriyaas is

also not a major contribution, in light of the fact that he is ever existing

and is contributing for ever. But what are the lessons he has to offer for us ?

I believe his penance is one.

 

 

For those who are still disputing this avathaaram, I wanna quote from the

aazhwaar who requested Lord Arangan for the dasaavathaaram sannithi moorthis

(Arangan blessed the moorthis to appear as suyambu and you can have the darshan

of them at dasaavathaara sannithi in Srirangam. Thanks to the heroic efforts of

Mr. Jagannath in arranging a one year support for the nitya kainkaryam of this

sannithi recently) has this to say.

 

Thirumangai aazhwaar in Periya thirumozhi, ainthaam paththu, lists 8 of the

lords avathaarams in praise of "THiruveLLaRai perumaaL". Incidentally the first

avathaaram he referred was parasuraama avathaaram.

 

venRi maamazhu vEnthi mun MaNmisai

mannaRai moovEzhukaal

konRa thEva, nin kuraikazhal thozhuvathOr

vagaiyenak karuL puriyE

manRil maampozhil nuzhai thanthu malligai

meLavalin pOthalarththi

thenRal maamaNam kamazh thara varuthiru

veLLaRai ninRaanE.

 

SOme one else passionately appealed to have universal pursuit of avathaarams

taking into consideration all the other religions. In Veda, it is said that

every one is "Vasudeva kudumbam". There is no contradiction to this, and

nammaazhwaar's quote on "avaraavar thaam thamthu vazhi vazhi .."for several

schools of thoughts,supports this. The various prophets of the world are

respected. But we as Srivaishnava has to worship Sriman naraayana only and

follow the footsteps of our poorvaachaaryaas who have contributed tons and tons

of sthothrams, research and analysis for sri vishitadthvaidam and Sriman

Naaraaynan worship. If every one in the world is considered his family

(vasudeva kudumbam) ,Srivaishnavaas will acccept Budhdha as a creation of

sriman naaraayanaa . However, the question is whether budhdhaa is one of the

selected ten avathaarams ? The answer is NO. I donot see any more argument

necessary on this when We trust our aazhwaar and Swamy Desikan.

Sampath Rengi

[Guest guest]

Regarding Parasuraama:

 

I also do not feel comfortable honoring this

avataaram, considering how much violence he is

said to have caused. I fully realize this may

be ignorance on my part, considering Sri Vedanta

Desikan composed a slokam on him. However,

it is important to point out that none of the

Azhvaars have sung on Parasuraama avataaram,

while they have mentioned all the others now

considered part of the canonical 10. There is

also not a single divya desam dedicated to him.

 

If he truly was an avataaram, it was only

temporarily taken, as there are statements that

the once Sri Raama met Parasuraama, what

remaining strength the latter had was completely

gone. Parasuraama did lose to Bheeshma in

battle, and it is quite clear in the account

in the Mahabharata that this was not due to

any self-imposed limitation on his part.

 

Is rOsham (anger) a kalyaaNa guNa? I do not know,

and I tend to think not, but this quality

pervades the being of Parasuraama.

 

Mani