Guest guest Posted February 20, 1997 Report Share Posted February 20, 1997 > 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...:-) Thanks -Viji > > > 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 > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.