Guest guest Posted June 21, 2001 Report Share Posted June 21, 2001 Nomadeva Sharma wrote: I know that > the thing on 'namaH' and 'namo' is not correct (Also, > the way Mani has produced is wrong). Dear nomadeva, thanks for correction etc. 1. Tradititions are different and as I said in my letter, we are all taught different things in our provinces. I have only given a romanized version of my pronunciation, but have not voiced it! So it may sound different when I say it aloud. 2. I was also referring to a very remote past, before sanskrit became a language. The vedic proto-sanskrit, the "indo-European" language that was the mother of sanskrit, Persian, greek, latin etc. had rules which we can only guess.The "s" is the masculine ending in the nominative form in all these languages. "Su2 is more a prefix, meaning "good" or "agreeable". as in "sweet". in greek the "su2 became "eu": the name "europa" = "Surupa" and "Eugene" = "Sujata". 3. mantras etc. should be recited in the vibration that the Rg and Samaveda - also Atharvaveda - prescribe, but NOBODY knows the correct form. Even Panini lived much much later, at a time when various dialects were in vogue. He did not actually compile the grammar, but tried to standardize. One of his earliest aphorisms shows his despair: "Every word can be used to mean any other word!" This statement is not "revelation" but a concession to existing circumstances. The same word meant so many different things in the various dialects and according to context. Classical Sanskrit, as written by say Kalidasa, was perhaps never really spoken. Prakrit and Pali were the dialects mostly used. Even today English is not English. In england one would say, "I´ll meet you on Monday." but in the US many would say, "I´ll meet you at monday." Sometimes the same word has very drastically different meanings: a serious problem in Anglo-US contracts! So I think we cannot be dogmatic about a language that is so remote from our times. regards Mani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2001 Report Share Posted June 21, 2001 Dear Mani, After reading your mail one might decide not to chant Mantras since one would probably pronounce them wrongly anyway. HERE IS MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE: allthough I know nothing about Sanskrt, I have achieved mirracles by chanting Mantras. Perhaps less knowledge and therefore LESS INSECURITY in this case is a blessing. Regards and love, Liliana >subra >gjlist >gjlist >Re: [gjlist] Planetary Mantras-1 >Thu, 21 Jun 2001 23:17:31 +0200 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [64.211.240.236] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBCFBAE9B002E400438A140D3F0EC9B2F84; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 14:20:09 -0700 >Received: from [10.1.4.53] by ho. with NNFMP; 21 Jun 2001 >21:17:43 -0000 >Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 21 Jun 2001 21:17:42 -0000 >Received: (qmail 82296 invoked from network); 21 Jun 2001 21:17:41 -0000 >Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7. with QMQP; 21 Jun >2001 21:17:41 -0000 >Received: from unknown (HELO mailout04.sul.t-online.de) (194.25.134.18) by >mta3 with SMTP; 21 Jun 2001 21:17:41 -0000 >Received: from fwd03.sul.t-online.de by mailout04.sul.t-online.de with >smtp id 15DBpc-000665-06; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 23:17:40 +0200 >Received: from (0209349698-0001@[217.1.162.149]) by fwd03.sul.t-online.com >with smtp id 15DBpT-2I0w0uC; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 23:17:31 +0200 >From sentto-490438-5976-993158262-astrolila Thu, 21 Jun 2001 14:21:07 -0700 >X-eGroups-Return: >sentto-490438-5976-993158262-astrolila=hotmail.com (AT) returns (DOT) >X-Sender: subra >X-Apparently-gjlist >References: <20010621125624.12069.qmail >X-Mailer: T-Online eMail 2.33 >Message-ID: <15DBpT-2I0w0uC >X-Sender: 0209349698-0001 >X-eGroups-subra (mani) >Mailing-List: list gjlist; contact >gjlist-owner >Delivered-mailing list gjlist >Precedence: bulk >List-Un: <gjlist> > >Nomadeva Sharma wrote: > I know that > > the thing on 'namaH' and 'namo' is not correct (Also, > > the way Mani has produced is wrong). > >Dear nomadeva, > >thanks for correction etc. > >1. Tradititions are different and as I said in my letter, we are all taught >different things in our provinces. I have only given a romanized version of >my >pronunciation, but have not voiced it! So it may sound different when I say >it >aloud. > >2. I was also referring to a very remote past, before sanskrit became a >language. The vedic proto-sanskrit, the "indo-European" language that was >the >mother of sanskrit, Persian, greek, latin etc. had rules which we can only >guess.The "s" is the masculine ending in the nominative form in all these >languages. "Su2 is more a prefix, meaning "good" or "agreeable". as in >"sweet". >in greek the "su2 became "eu": the name "europa" = "Surupa" and "Eugene" >= >"Sujata". > >3. mantras etc. should be recited in the vibration that the Rg and Samaveda >- >also Atharvaveda - prescribe, but NOBODY knows the correct form. Even >Panini >lived much much later, at a time when various dialects were in vogue. He >did not >actually compile the grammar, but tried to standardize. One of his earliest >aphorisms shows his despair: "Every word can be used to mean any other >word!" >This statement is not "revelation" but a concession to existing >circumstances. >The same word meant so many different things in the various dialects and >according to context. Classical Sanskrit, as written by say Kalidasa, was >perhaps never really spoken. Prakrit and Pali were the dialects mostly >used. >Even today English is not English. In england one would say, "I´ll meet you >on >Monday." but in the US many would say, "I´ll meet you at monday." Sometimes >the >same word has very drastically different meanings: a serious problem in >Anglo-US >contracts! > >So I think we cannot be dogmatic about a language that is so remote from >our >times. > >regards > >Mani > > > > > > > > > > > >gjlist- > > > >Your use of is subject to > > _______________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2001 Report Share Posted June 22, 2001 I apologize to the list members for yet another digression. I felt that there was a serious gap in understanding of Sanskrit and its history. I'd actually prefer a private discussion on this mail in future. For people not interested in knowing about sanskrit but are interested in chanting some mantras as a remedial measures the gist is this. Till now, if you haven't used the actual pronunciation of any vedic mantra, but have obtained its benefits, it is purely because of divinity's benevolence. But one should aspire to know the accents and related dicta of any vedic mantra, which applies with more force to all bIjAxara mantras like, 'OM KrishnAya namaH', 'Om namaH shivAya' (Languistic changes do not apply here. period). Such is the opinion not just of a layman like me, but of many vedic pandits. So many mechanisms to store the accents were developed then; all without a purpose? Btw, all the mantrAs for the planets that are usually chanted (japA kusuma ...) are not vedic mantras. They are based on purANAs. Ofcourse, there are vedic mantras for these planets, but are not used by many people. --- subra wrote: > > Nomadeva Sharma wrote: > I know that > > the thing on 'namaH' and 'namo' is not correct (Also, > > the way Mani has produced is wrong). > > Dear nomadeva, > > thanks for correction etc. > > 1. Tradititions are different and as I said in my letter, we > are all taught > different things in our provinces. I have only given a > romanized version of my > pronunciation, but have not voiced it! So it may sound > different when I say it > aloud. Dear Mani, True that you did not voice it, but I guess you realize that 'shivaye' and 'shivAya' cannot be two different romanizations of the same word. Actually, these differences that you are talking in regard to sanskrit is not much as what it is with other languages and their dialects. The Sanskrit langugage's pronunciation is guided by one pure phonetics science - sikshA. The pronunciation rules are codified to such an extent that a person not knowing sanskrit can learn it. See R.G.Bhandarkar's first book of sanskrit for instance. The author gives quotations of how 'dhIrga', 'hrasva' and 'pluta' svarAs have to be spoken, the time duration et al. There is hardly any subjectivity there. I haven't noticed the differences in chanting of 'dharmakshetre kurukshetre' by people from different mother-tongues. While the way, pronunciation of the word, say, 'chitrAngada' might differ within North Indians and South Indians in normal interactions, the moment they switch to sanskrit, the pronunciation is just around the same. I have attended debates on Indian Philosophy where people from various parts of the country participate. You really can't make out who is from which place till they all speak in sanskrit. Admitted that there are very minor differences, but such differences are very recent in origin and can be attributed to excessive importance on local languages. > > 2. I was also referring to a very remote past, before > sanskrit became a > language. The vedic proto-sanskrit, the "indo-European" > language that was the > mother of sanskrit, Persian, greek, latin etc. had rules That itself is rather questionable and is the topic of a different forum. While I do think that family of languages is an admissible concept, it is only hypothetical if one decides a language to be the mother of some other language. Indology and liguistics do use some methods to determine, but the 'scientificness' of such is not something an outsider can admire. Here's a place where Panini's words that you have quoted fit in. > which we can only > guess.The "s" is the masculine ending in the nominative form > in all these > languages. "Su2 is more a prefix, meaning "good" or > "agreeable". as in "sweet". > in greek the "su2 became "eu": the name "europa" = "Surupa" > and "Eugene" = > "Sujata". I'd rather say you are mistaken here. I was not referring to 'su' the prefix. I was referring to 'sup' the pratyaya. As I pointed out earlier, all nouns+pronouns are called 'subanta' (sup + anta) -- ending with sup (While verbs are called 'tiDanta' for ending with 'tiNg' (the last 'g' should not be pronunced completely), like karoti (does)). Why is that 'p' is not shown when written or even said? Again Panini's rule (tasya lopaH) that it should be removed is the reason. > > 3. mantras etc. should be recited in the vibration that the > Rg and Samaveda - > also Atharvaveda - prescribe, but NOBODY knows the correct > form. Even Panini That is an assumption, sir. I got to know recently that one Samaveda pandit reconstructed the whole accents based on his excellent knowledge of grammar. Yes, grammar and chandas are interlinked to each other. > lived much much later, at a time when various dialects were > in vogue. He did not > actually compile the grammar, but tried to standardize. One That also is not true, because the vedas themselves talk of 6-7 different grammars (standardized ones) existing. It talks of 'aindryam... ' and even lists pANini's grammar (Gita press has published 'laghusiddhAntakaumudi' of varadaraja. Have a look at the preface) at the end. Why, even Valmiki, who preceeded Panini, praises Hanuman as possessing knowledge of 9 kinds of grammar! > > So I think we cannot be dogmatic about a language that is so > remote from our > times. However, the mantras in question here are not based on languistics and stuff like that. They are vedic in nature, which fixes their time frame. So, there is nothing wrong in being dogmatic about them. Regards, NDS. Get personalized email addresses from Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2001 Report Share Posted June 22, 2001 Liliana Sucur Perisic wrote: > Dear Mani, > After reading your mail one might decide not to chant Mantras since one > would probably pronounce them wrongly anyway. HERE IS MY PERSONAL > EXPERIENCE: allthough I know nothing about Sanskrt, I have achieved > mirracles by chanting Mantras. Dear Liliana, I did not mean hat mantras are ineffective if pronounced wrong, but that their effectiveness could be reduced. You are not likely to mis-pronounce ALL the names or words! But the devotion aspect also counts and the concentration on the mantra would, I think, bring results. regards Mani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2001 Report Share Posted June 22, 2001 Dear Nomadeva, Would it be possible to make a web-site where anybody could HEAR the right pronunciation of the vedic mantras, and from which one could download them? That would be great help! You seem to be capable of pronouncing them properly, please make such a web-site, I would support you financially. Regards and love, Liliana P.S. What is the difference between vedic mantras and the ones from the puranas? What are puranas? What are these mantras ment for, if not for propitiating malefic planets? >Nomadeva Sharma <nomadeva >gjlist >gjlist >Re: [gjlist] Planetary Mantras-1 >Thu, 21 Jun 2001 23:01:38 -0700 (PDT) >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [64.211.240.236] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBCFC295100CA4004379C40D3F0EC8BAF159; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 23:05:06 >-0700 >Received: from [10.1.4.56] by ho. with NNFMP; 22 Jun 2001 >06:01:42 -0000 >Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 22 Jun 2001 06:01:41 -0000 >Received: (qmail 96978 invoked from network); 22 Jun 2001 06:01:40 -0000 >Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10. with QMQP; 22 Jun >2001 06:01:40 -0000 >Received: from unknown (HELO web14809.mail.) (216.136.224.230) by >mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jun 2001 06:01:40 -0000 >Received: from [164.164.86.86] by web14809.mail.; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 >23:01:38 PDT >From sentto-490438-5991-993189702-astrolila Thu, 21 Jun 2001 23:05:55 -0700 >X-eGroups-Return: >sentto-490438-5991-993189702-astrolila=hotmail.com (AT) returns (DOT) >X-Sender: nomadeva >X-Apparently-gjlist >Message-ID: <20010622060138.95997.qmail >In-<15DBpT-2I0w0uC >Mailing-List: list gjlist; contact >gjlist-owner >Delivered-mailing list gjlist >Precedence: bulk >List-Un: <gjlist> > >I apologize to the list members for yet another >digression. I felt that there was a serious gap in >understanding of Sanskrit and its history. I'd >actually prefer a private discussion on this mail in >future. >For people not interested in knowing about sanskrit >but are interested in chanting some mantras as a >remedial measures the gist is this. Till now, if you >haven't used the actual pronunciation of any vedic >mantra, but have obtained its benefits, it is purely >because of divinity's benevolence. But one should >aspire to know the accents and related dicta of any >vedic mantra, which applies with more force to all >bIjAxara mantras like, 'OM KrishnAya namaH', 'Om namaH >shivAya' (Languistic changes do not apply here. >period). Such is the opinion not just of a layman like >me, but of many vedic pandits. So many mechanisms to >store the accents were developed then; all without a >purpose? >Btw, all the mantrAs for the planets that are usually >chanted (japA kusuma ...) are not vedic mantras. They >are based on purANAs. Ofcourse, there are vedic >mantras for these planets, but are not used by many >people. > >--- subra wrote: > > > > Nomadeva Sharma wrote: > > I know that > > > the thing on 'namaH' and 'namo' is not correct >(Also, > > > the way Mani has produced is wrong). > > > > Dear nomadeva, > > > > thanks for correction etc. > > > > 1. Tradititions are different and as I said in my >letter, we > > are all taught > > different things in our provinces. I have only given >a > > romanized version of my > > pronunciation, but have not voiced it! So it may >sound > > different when I say it > > aloud. > >Dear Mani, > >True that you did not voice it, but I guess you >realize that 'shivaye' and 'shivAya' cannot be two >different romanizations of the same word. > >Actually, these differences that you are talking in >regard to sanskrit is not much as what it is with >other languages and their dialects. The Sanskrit >langugage's pronunciation is guided by one pure >phonetics science - sikshA. The pronunciation rules >are codified to such an extent that a person not >knowing sanskrit can learn it. See R.G.Bhandarkar's >first book of sanskrit for instance. The author gives >quotations of how 'dhIrga', 'hrasva' and 'pluta' >svarAs have to be spoken, the time duration et al. >There is hardly any subjectivity there. > >I haven't noticed the differences in chanting of >'dharmakshetre kurukshetre' by people from different >mother-tongues. While the way, pronunciation of the >word, say, 'chitrAngada' might differ within North >Indians and South Indians in normal interactions, the >moment they switch to sanskrit, the pronunciation is >just around the same. I have attended debates on >Indian Philosophy where people from various parts of >the country participate. You really can't make out who >is from which place till they all speak in sanskrit. >Admitted that there are very minor differences, but >such differences are very recent in origin and can be >attributed to excessive importance on local languages. > > > > > 2. I was also referring to a very remote past, >before > > sanskrit became a > > language. The vedic proto-sanskrit, the >"indo-European" > > language that was the > > mother of sanskrit, Persian, greek, latin etc. had >rules > >That itself is rather questionable and is the topic of >a different forum. While I do think that family of >languages is an admissible concept, it is only >hypothetical if one decides a language to be the >mother of some other language. Indology and liguistics >do use some methods to determine, but the >'scientificness' of such is not something an outsider >can admire. Here's a place where Panini's words that >you have quoted fit in. > > > which we can only > > guess.The "s" is the masculine ending in the >nominative form > > in all these > > languages. "Su2 is more a prefix, meaning "good" or > > "agreeable". as in "sweet". > > in greek the "su2 became "eu": the name "europa" = >"Surupa" > > and "Eugene" = > > "Sujata". > >I'd rather say you are mistaken here. I was not >referring to 'su' the prefix. I was referring to 'sup' >the pratyaya. As I pointed out earlier, all >nouns+pronouns are called 'subanta' (sup + anta) -- >ending with sup (While verbs are called 'tiDanta' for >ending with 'tiNg' (the last 'g' should not be >pronunced completely), like karoti (does)). Why is >that 'p' is not shown when written or even said? Again >Panini's rule (tasya lopaH) that it should be removed >is the reason. > > > > > 3. mantras etc. should be recited in the vibration >that the > > Rg and Samaveda - > > also Atharvaveda - prescribe, but NOBODY knows the >correct > > form. Even Panini > >That is an assumption, sir. I got to know recently >that one Samaveda pandit reconstructed the whole >accents based on his excellent knowledge of grammar. >Yes, grammar and chandas are interlinked to each >other. > > > lived much much later, at a time when various >dialects were > > in vogue. He did not > > actually compile the grammar, but tried to >standardize. One > >That also is not true, because the vedas themselves >talk of 6-7 different grammars (standardized ones) >existing. It talks of 'aindryam... ' and even lists >pANini's grammar (Gita press has published >'laghusiddhAntakaumudi' of varadaraja. Have a look at >the preface) at the end. Why, even Valmiki, who >preceeded Panini, praises Hanuman as possessing >knowledge of 9 kinds of grammar! > > > > > So I think we cannot be dogmatic about a language >that is so > > remote from our > > times. > >However, the mantras in question here are not based on >languistics and stuff like that. They are vedic in >nature, which fixes their time frame. So, there is >nothing wrong in being dogmatic about them. > >Regards, >NDS. > > > > >Get personalized email addresses from Mail - only $35 >a year! http://personal.mail./ > > >gjlist- > > > >Your use of is subject to > > _______________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. 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.