DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - True history of Dravidians. Rama Krishna Shiva Vishnu are all Dark Dravidian Gods !

**Indian Butt Magic** · 01-05-2012, 12:28 PM

...If Sri Nara is reading this message, he may give some inputs from SV point of view regarding inclusion of Rama into dasha-avatara etc.

Sorry Narayan, I just read this post. I feel a little awkward as it seems I have created an impression of wide and deep knowledge about SV. I can only plead guilty to decent level of knowledge -- I say this as I dislike false modesty more than conceit.

SV tradition as we know it, i.e. one starting from Sriman Nathamunigal and based on equal parts Azhvar Pasurams and Prastana Traiyam and their purported derivatives like Ramayana, Mh.B, and Vishnu Puranam, Rama is very much Vishnu's avathara, and a poorna avathara at that.

Swami Periyavacchan Pillai, commentator par excellence of Dhivya Prabhandam constructed a Ramayanam by using just the verses of Azhvar pasurams, and it is called Pasurappadi Ramayanam.

Even though not much of Sriman Nathamuni's own words survive today, he seems to have had visions of Rama entourage coming to his house. The details are murky as some say it was the local King that he saw as Rama himself gracing his house.

From a briefly later period, we have a poem called Atimanusha Stavam by Swami Koorathazhvan, a disciple of Bhagavat Ramanuja, in which he stresses that even though Rama himself attests to being no more than a son of Dasaratha, his actions betray his divine nature. A sample shloka #19:

अक्षुण्ण योगपथं जटायुं तिर्यञचमेव बत मोक्षपथे नियोक्तुम् ।
शक्नोषि वेत्सि च यदा स तदा कथं त्वं देवीं अवाप्तुं अनलं व्यथित विचिन्वन् ॥

This verse points to Rama granting moksham to Jadayu as an indication that he is more than just a son of Dasaratha. Other verses go on to pointing other instances from Ramayana, like kaakaasura vadam, Ahalya's release from curse, etc.

These verses seem to rebut an implied a poorva paksham that Rama was just a son of Daratha and no more. So in this sense one can see some support that Rama as an avatara was not universally accepted even as late as the time of Bhagavat Ramanuja. However, within SV, there is no question that Rama was revered as a poorna avatara of Lord Sriman Narayana.

Hope this give a glimpse from the SV side.

Cheers!

01-05-2012, 12:28 PM	#29
Indian Butt Magic Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 439 Senior Member	...If Sri Nara is reading this message, he may give some inputs from SV point of view regarding inclusion of Rama into dasha-avatara etc. Sorry Narayan, I just read this post. I feel a little awkward as it seems I have created an impression of wide and deep knowledge about SV. I can only plead guilty to decent level of knowledge -- I say this as I dislike false modesty more than conceit. SV tradition as we know it, i.e. one starting from Sriman Nathamunigal and based on equal parts Azhvar Pasurams and Prastana Traiyam and their purported derivatives like Ramayana, Mh.B, and Vishnu Puranam, Rama is very much Vishnu's avathara, and a poorna avathara at that. Swami Periyavacchan Pillai, commentator par excellence of Dhivya Prabhandam constructed a Ramayanam by using just the verses of Azhvar pasurams, and it is called Pasurappadi Ramayanam. Even though not much of Sriman Nathamuni's own words survive today, he seems to have had visions of Rama entourage coming to his house. The details are murky as some say it was the local King that he saw as Rama himself gracing his house. From a briefly later period, we have a poem called Atimanusha Stavam by Swami Koorathazhvan, a disciple of Bhagavat Ramanuja, in which he stresses that even though Rama himself attests to being no more than a son of Dasaratha, his actions betray his divine nature. A sample shloka #19: अक्षुण्ण योगपथं जटायुं तिर्यञचमेव बत मोक्षपथे नियोक्तुम् । शक्नोषि वेत्सि च यदा स तदा कथं त्वं देवीं अवाप्तुं अनलं व्यथित विचिन्वन् ॥ This verse points to Rama granting moksham to Jadayu as an indication that he is more than just a son of Dasaratha. Other verses go on to pointing other instances from Ramayana, like kaakaasura vadam, Ahalya's release from curse, etc. These verses seem to rebut an implied a poorva paksham that Rama was just a son of Daratha and no more. So in this sense one can see some support that Rama as an avatara was not universally accepted even as late as the time of Bhagavat Ramanuja. However, within SV, there is no question that Rama was revered as a poorna avatara of Lord Sriman Narayana. Hope this give a glimpse from the SV side. Cheers!
	Quote