Gayatri Mantra: Text with Very Bad (to Sanjay)

[Guest guest]

Dear Sanjay,

 

> Then why is it that you are humming something and calling it gayatri mantra

> and not recording the gayatri mantra. What you are humming is NOT gayatri

> mantra. If you want, then record the Gayatri mantra but don;t do such things

> as after 100 years, people will say that this hamm-hum-heem-haam is the

> *real gayatri mantra* as Narasimha said so. So throw this out right now.

 

Of course, what I hummed is not "real Gayatri mantra". It was the naada/tune of reading the Gayatri mantra with intonation. One would have to apply the ups, downs and stresses in that humming to the text in the JPG I gave, add the Om's at the beginning and end and construct the "real Gayatri mantra". Anybody who read my mail fully would have known this.

 

I am not spoon-feeding and not giving the Gayatri itself in audio form directly due to certain beliefs of our tradition, which apparently you cannot respect. Unfortunate.

 

When a father gives Gayatri mantra to son in Upanayanam ceremony, they make him whisper it in his ears so that other people in the audience cannot hear it. Why don't they make him say it loud so that everyone hears? This tradition is not without a reason.

 

Though I did not spoon-feed, what I provided (mantra text and intonation markings in JPEG form, instructions on prefixes, suffixes and repetition in TEXT form and humming in MP3 form) is sufficient for anyone interested to reconstruct everything and get going.

 

* * *

 

> Did you ask him about the reason as to why he has asked you to use rudraksha

> mala for the gayatri when it is well known that this is for Shiva mantra.

 

Let me throw the question back at you: Which scripture says that Rudraksha mala should be used only for Shiva mantras?

 

According to my guru, Gayatri mantra can be read using several kinds of malas. Based on the mala used, the experience obtained varies according to him.

 

In any case, Savitri Gayatri is a mantra that is for a form of Sun and Shiva is associated with Sun. Speaking at a different level, Savitri Gayatri mantra is for realizing the all pervading Atman. If I consider Shiva as Satya or all-pervading Brahman and Shakti as the manifestation into various forms, Savitri Gayatri mantra IS a Shiva mantra, of the highest form of Shiva.

 

When one finds who one considers to be a Sadguru and starts experiencing indescribable ananda in his sadhana, one stops being pedantic and leaves it to Guru. If my spiritual guru blesses a mala made of haystackballs or mudballs or stones and gives it to me to use in my sadhana, I will gladly use it.

 

Of course, one can ask me why I am being pedantic about intonation then. Well, if you are happy with the way you are reading it, I always said to please ignore my writings in this matter! I am writing for those who were taught Gayatri long back and forgot because they stopped practicing it and are looking for some guidance to restart. I can only give guidance based on my own practice.

 

> 1. You are aware that the Gayatri chandah has 24 syllables or sounds?

 

Of course.

 

> 2. That Maharishi Vishwamitra informed the world about this mantra with the

> 24 sounds that is recorded exactly in the Rig Veda Mandala III.62.10

 

Yes, it starts with "tatsaviturvarenyam" and ends with "prachodayaat".

 

The intonation markings (horizontal lines under letters and single/double vertical lines above letters) are also part of the Vedic text.

 

> 3. That if you add any other sound to this mantra, then the total number

> would increase beyond the 24 sound. Would it still be Gayatri chandah after

> you add two sounds before and after the mantra? If yes then what is the

> meaning of gayatri chandah? If not then what are you supposed to do to

> ensure that the 24 sound scheme does not break? Have you done that?

 

It is simply your assumption that Om at the beginning and/or end of a mantra increases the number of letters in the mantra. Om at the beginning and Om at the end are not part of the mantra. They are like a preface and conclusion to the mantra.

 

Swami Vivekananda also taught to say Om, then the Gayatri mantra and then Om again, in his book "Rajayoga".

 

"Om Namassivaaya" may be considered a 6-lettered mantra by you because of Om, but we consider it a 5-lettered mantra (Panchakshari - Na Ma Ssi Vaa Ya)

 

When they do homam, they add "swaha" to the mantras. But, again, that does not change the chhandas. For example, there are shlokas in Gayatri, Ushnik and Anushtup metres in Durga Saptashati. Before "Chandi homam", the above list of metres is read out. When the shlokas are read later, 2 letters "Swaha" are added to several shlokas. If you consider them to be a part of the shlokas, the metres are all broken due to 2 extra letters. But that is not how it works.

 

Certain prefixes and suffixes added to mantras remain as prefixes and suffixes and do not become part of the mantra.

 

> 4. Which mala is to be used for the gayatri? Why is the Rudraksha NEVER to

> be used for the gayatri mantra? Why has your Guru asked you to use the

> Rudraksha and from which scripture did he get the reference for this

> deviation?

 

Mantra Mahodadhi talks about various malas and says that mantras read with Rudraksha mala and Tulasi mala become infinitely more potent. It does not say only Shiva mantras or only Vishnu mantras. Thus, it seems like either can be used for any mantra to make it more potent.

 

In fact, I know several people apart from my guru who use Rudraksha mala with Gayatri.

 

What mala should be used with Gayatri according to you?

 

On a different note, more than the kind of mala used, I think that the person, place and time associated with the preparation of the mala are far more important. Of course, all these may not matter in the long run, after one's sadhana has progressed beyond certain level. But, in the short run, until one reaches that level, all these mundane factors may matter.

 

Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

Narasimha

-------------------------------

Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

-------------------------------

 

> | om gurave namah |

> Dear Narasimha

>

> ok you have clarified that loud chanting is very fine and that is what is to

> be done in the Yajya and the agnihotri.

>

> Then why is it that you are humming something and calling it gayatri mantra

> and not recording the gayatri mantra. What you are humming is NOT gayatri

> mantra. If you want, then record the Gayatri mantra but don;t do such things

> as after 100 years, people will say that this hamm-hum-heem-haam is the

> *real gayatri mantra* as Narasimha said so. So throw this out right now.

>

> Did you ask him about the reason as to why he has asked you to use rudraksha

> mala for the gayatri when it is well known that this is for Shiva mantra.

>

> Second point about right intonation -

>

> 1. You are aware that the Gayatri chandah has 24 syllables or sounds?

>

> 2. That Maharishi Vishwamitra informed the world about this mantra with the

> 24 sounds that is recorded exactly in the Rig Veda Mandala III.62.10

>

> 3. That if you add any other sound to this mantra, then the total number

> would increase beyond the 24 sound. Would it still be Gayatri chandah after

> you add two sounds before and after the mantra? If yes then what is the

> meaning of gayatri chandah? If not then what are you supposed to do to

> ensure that the 24 sound scheme does not break? Have you done that?

>

> 4. Which mala is to be used for the gayatri? Why is the Rudraksha NEVER to

> be used for the gayatri mantra? Why has your Guru asked you to use the

> Rudraksha and from which scripture did he get the reference for this

> deviation?

> Best wishes and warm regards,

> Sanjay Rath

>

> Dear Sanjay,

>

> > ...and please do not compare

> > Thakur to your new spiritual master. You will do all of us a big favor by

> > that.

>

> Did I compare??

>

> I merely gave an *example* to show that a spiritual master is not

> necessarily the one who taught Gayatri first and to counter your claim that

> "anybody else, whether a crow or a human being is just a NIMITTA and not a

> spiritual master." Whether X is my spiritual master or not is between me and

> X and not anybody else's business.

>

> Also, please realize that you are speaking about a person you know nothing

> about. He *could* be the re-incarnation of Swami Vivekananda for example (I

> am not saying he is). You simply have no idea.

>

> Your unprovoked circasm about a person you don't know, when I am calmly

> minding my business, is surprising to me.

>

> > You are again assuming things that the Gayatri diksha alone is the one

> thing

> > that can give moksha.

>

> I did not say it. I guess it is in my karma today to be misinterpreted...

>

> Also, I did not prohibit loud chanting. I said I personally want to chant

> without vaikhari due to certain beliefs which I mentioned. I did not say

> loud chanting is bad. I am being misrepresented there also.

>

> Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> Narasimha

> -------------------------------

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> -------------------------------

>

> > | om gurave namah |

> > Dear Narasimha

> >

> > You are again assuming things that the Gayatri diksha alone is the one

> thing

> > that can give moksha. That is wrong and hence this statement. The giver of

> > the Gayatri is one and most important Guru and this is given in every

> > lineage by the parents or family among the brahmins.

> >

> > That example you give is quite off the mark. Ramakrishna did not get the

> > Gayatri from Totapuri Maharaj but got it at a much younger age. He may

> have

> > got the sanyaasa Gayatri form him which is different. In fact there are so

> > many types of Gayatri's. So do not try to divert the point by saying that

> > Abhedananda did not know his spiritual master. ...and please do not

> compare

> > Thakur to your new spiritual master. You will do all of us a big favor by

> > that.

> >

> > I continue to state that you have done something very wrong by humming the

> > mantra and if you want to put it in the web or in any media you should

> have

> > chanted it and put it there as you did earlier with the mrityunjaya

> mantra.

> > Rest is your problem.

> >

> > Also try to learn about the use of malas with the Gayatri mantra (savitur

> > gayatri to be precise).

> >

> > To all in the lists,

> >

> > Also so that people may not be shocked any further by your statements,

> there

> > is no obstruction to reciting the Gayatri as given in the rig veda. Please

> > go ahead and do this. Don't listen to all this medieval brahminism about

> > right and wrong ways to do the gayatri. None was born an expert and I am

> > pretty sure that the temples in India have remained as pure if not pure

> till

> > date due to the loud chanting of the mantras.

> >

> > if you want to her it loudly or in any manner, please go ahead and hear

> it.

> > If gayatri was played in all government offices in India at least in a low

> > volume, corruption would come down to nil. Rhoda I hope that answers your

> > query.

> >

> > Do mantras as advised by your guru and that will depend on your own

> > spiritual development. Mantras must be done loudly initially to become one

> > with the mantra devata at the physical level. Thereafter it will go

> inwards

> > naturally.

> >

> > Please pass this on to all lists where this was circulated.

> >

> > Best wishes and warm regards,

> > Sanjay Rath

 

> >

> > > Dear Sanjay,

> > >

> > > > I just questioned you whether you had your fathers permission,

> > > > who is the giver of the gayatri to you. Anybody else, whether a

> > > > crow or a human being is just a NIMITTA and not a spiritual master.

> > >

> > > It will be appropriate to trust a person to know his spiritual master. One

> > > will be ill-advised to go to Swami Vivekananda or Swami Abhedanda or

> > > Swami Akhandananda and tell him that Ramakrishna Paramahamsa is

> > > not his spiritual master because Gayatri was first given by someone else!

> > >

> > > In fact, my spiritual guru does consider himself to be just a nimitta.

> > > But that is his humility.

> > >

> > > If you say everyone who guides after the first giving of Gayatri is "just a

> > > NIMITTA", one can consider even the giver of first Gayatri to be a nimitta.

> > > At one level, everything IS a nimitta. But we normally don't speak at that

> > > level.

> > >

> > > > I have no objection to your sharing the mantra as written and this is

> > > > a very good thing to do. There is something very very wrong in

> > > > 'humming the mantra' as then you are actually doing the mantra with

> > > > the DAMANA VIJA and this is very bad. It would have been much

> > > > better and correct if you had actually sung the mantra (in whatever

> > > > intonation you think is right or in whatever manner you feel is

> > > > correct) and put it in the web or given to others.

> > > >

> > > > Respect the mantra please and I am also lodging this wrong

> > > > teaching protest against your spiritual teacher as well.

> > >

> > > I will pass on your protest to him.

> > >

> > > Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> > > Narasimha

[Guest guest]

it is our custom to cover the father, mother and the son with a silk vastra when the father whispers the gayatri mantra in the son's ear so that the audience not only cannot hear but also cannot see it being done. also that is the first time the mother gets to hear the gayatri - at the time of her son's upanayanam. otherwise ladies are not allowed to hear or chant the same.

i hear there's a gayatri specifically for ladies. i wonder about this as i have never heard it to date.

mahalakshmi

 

 

 

 

"Narasimha P.V.R. Rao" <pvr (AT) charter (DOT) net> wrote: Dear Sanjay,

When a father gives Gayatri mantra to son in Upanayanam ceremony, they

 

make him whisper it in his ears so that other people in the audience cannot

 

hear it. Why don't they make him say it loud so that everyone hears?

 

This tradition is not without a reason.

 

 

 

 

 

 

India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new Click here

Catch all the FIFA World Cup 2006 action on India Click here

[Guest guest]

Dear Sanjay,

 

> I find it hard that your tradition is teaching that the Gayatri mantra

> should be *hummed* in the first place.

 

I wonder if you misunderstood me. I do not "hum" this mantra when I chant it everyday. I read it normally (but without vaikhari).

 

> If you are allowed to give it, then give it.

 

I am allowed to give it and will give it to a just a few, e.g. my son.

 

With others, I am merely helping them remember something they have already learnt and forgot due to lack of practice. The humming and the instructions are merely an attempt to help them without taking full responsibility of being their guru.

 

> Don't do these things. If you have the heart of a Ramanujacarya then climb

> on top of the temple and shout *om namo naaraayanaaya* and then the world

> will know the mantra.

 

You are missing a simple point that it is against the teachings of my guru to do that.

 

In fact, when your uncle taught you Gayatri mantra, I am sure he too whispered it into your ears with a cloth covering both of you. Is that correct or not?? Did your uncle shout the Gayatri mantra from the "top of the temple" and teach you? Why did he whisper??

 

You are unfairly trying to compel me to break my spiritual guru's words, without trying to appreciate/understand/respect our beliefs.

 

> As regards the mala, first you said that you have sent the mail to him and

> that were awaiting a reply. So, you did not get a reply or what you write

> below is your reply.

 

When did I say that? When you lodged a protest of "wrong teaching" against me and my guru also, I merely said I will pass that on.

 

> Now why do you want a reply at all from me? Are you not

> satisfied with his teachings?

 

Because you took such a strong position against the use of Rudraksha mala, I merely asked you what was *your* opinion on which mala should be used. Does that amount to not being "satisfied" with the teachings of my guru?

 

In case there is some confusion here, let me set one thing clear. You are my astrology guru. I have known you for a long time. Though you like to talk about spiritual matters, I never looked at you as my spiritual guru. I patiently waited for my spiritual guru and found him when Jupiter and Ketu were transiting over my lagna. He made a tremendous difference in my spiritual progress and I am quite "satisfied" with his guidance. To me, spiritual discussions with you are just like spiritual discussions with others.

 

> Your Tradition (is that Maharashtra or London?)

 

My spiritual guru and his spiritual guru are from the Pune area in Maharashtra state.

 

> To remove your further doubts, which is the effect of Rahu, let me quote the

 

I too can get personal, but I will not.

 

> Swamiji said what

> he had to say. How you and I understand it is very different.

 

Well, reading a mantra does not mean just repeating that mantra. There can be prefixes and suffixes added to the mantra. Just because something comes in contact with a mantra, it does not become part of the mantra and change the chhandas. Regarding Swami Vivekananda's suggestion of adding Om before and after the Gayatri mantra, I can't see how that simple English sentence can be "understood" very differently by you!

 

> In any case, Rudraksha is prohibited for Surya mantras and Tulasi is

> prohibited for Shiva Mantras. A person who offers Tulasi to Shiva will be

> destroyed...

 

Which scripture says that Rudraksha is prohibited for Surya mantras? If you can quote a scripture, we can talk further. Otherwise, it is just your tradition vs my tradition and we can agree to disagree.

 

I know the story of Shiva and Tulasi, but do you really think that one will be "destroyed" if he does Panchakshari mantra of Shiva with Tulasi mala? Similarly, if I use a Rudraksha mala and do a Vishnu mantra with utmost sincerity, will Vishnu be mad at me?

 

If you say that results will come slower if Shiva mantras are done with Tulasi mala, I can understand. But the word "destroyed" used by you is just too much.

 

Moreover, Savitri Gayatri is not a mere Surya mantra. It is a mantra for the all-pervading Atman. I can certainly look at Shiva as the symbol of Atman.. Shiva is often considered the all-pervading Atman (Sun) and Shakti His manifestation (Moon).

 

As I said, more than what kind of mala you are using, the person, place and time associated with its preparation are far more important. If Ramakrishna Paramahansa had prepared a Rudraksha mala and given it to me, I would use it for *all* my mantras.

 

Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

Narasimha

-------------------------------

Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

-------------------------------

 

> | om gurave namah |

> Dear Narasimha

>

> POINT 1:

>

> I find it hard that your tradition is teaching that the Gayatri mantra

> should be *hummed* in the first place. In my tradition (Jagannath Puri) this

> amounts to a disrespect of the Mantra Devata. That is the reason why I

> cannot accept the humming. If you are allowed to give it, then give it.

> Don't do these things. If you have the heart of a Ramanujacarya then climb

> on top of the temple and shout *om namo naaraayanaaya* and then the world

> will know the mantra.

>

> In fact the world knows the mantra. Those who have to do it shall do it when

> they have to do it.

>

> As regards the mala, first you said that you have sent the mail to him and

> that were awaiting a reply. So, you did not get a reply or what you write

> below is your reply. Then it is fine. I take it that it what is taught in

> his/your tradition. Now why do you want a reply at all from me? Are you not

> satisfied with his teachings?

>

> It is well known that Rudraksha is for Shiva, Tulasi for Vishnu, Sveta arka

> for Ganesha, Sphatika (munda mala) for Devi, Rakta chandana for Surya and so

> on. In any case, Rudraksha is prohibited for Surya mantras and Tulasi is

> prohibited for Shiva Mantras. A person who offers Tulasi to Shiva will be

> destroyed...there is a lot more in our tradition and for this you will have

> to wait for my book. But how does it matter to you.

>

> -----------

>

> POINT 2:

>

> On the other issues of mantra shastra regarding the differences between

> Jagannath Puri tradition and Your Tradition (is that Maharashtra or London?)

>

> om namah shivaaya is the same as namah shivaaya as per your tradition or

> guru. Can I ask how? If you count the number of akshara in the mantra, it is

> six for om namah shivaaya and 5 for namah shivaaya. Is it not?

>

> So that people in Kali Yuga will not get this simple math regarding phoneme

> wrong, the great Tirumular wrote a whole book on the mantra 'namah

> shivaaya'...Thirumantram. Please read it and you will know which is

> Panchakshari and which is shadakshari.

>

> To remove your further doubts, which is the effect of Rahu, let me quote the

> two famous stotras. The Panchakshari Sotra and Shadakshari Stotra here.

>

> ------quote panchakshari (5 letter) stotra and mantra derivation-------

>

> nAgendrahArAya trilochanAya bhasmAN^garAgAya maheshvarAya |

> nityAya shuddhAya digambarAya tasmai nakArAya namaH shivAya ||

> 1||........the akshara 'na' is the starting letter of this sloka

> mandAkini\-salilachandana\-charchitAya

> nandIshvara\-pramathanAtha\- maheshvarAya |

> mandArapushhpa\-bahupushhpa\-supUjitAya

> tasmai makArAya namaH shivAya || 2||.................................akshara

> 'ma' is the starting letter of this sloka

> shivAya gaurIvadanAbja\-vR^inda\-

> sUryAya dakshAdhvaranAshakAya |

> shrInIlakaNThAya vR^ishhadhvajAya

> tasmai shikArAya namaH shivAya || 3||..............akshara 'shi' is the

> starting letter of this sloka

> vasishhTha\-kumbhodbhava\-gautamAryamunIndra\-devArchitashekharAya |

> chandrArka\-vaishvAnaralochanAya tasmai vakArAya namaH shivAya ||

> 4||..............akshara 'va' is the starting letter of this sloka

> yakshasvarUpAya jaTAdharAya pinAkahastAya sanAtanAya |

> divyAya devAya digambarAya tasmai yakArAya namaH shivAya ||

> 5||..............akshara 'ya' is the starting letter of this sloka

> pa.nchAksharamidaM puNyaM yaH paThechchhivasannidhau |

> shivalokamavApnoti shivena saha modate ||..............put all the akshara

> together and get the mantra taught by Shankaracharya 'nama shivaya'

> .. iti shriimachchha.nkaraachaaryavirachita shivapaJNchaakshara stotraM

> samaaptaM..

>

> ------quote shadakshari (6 letter) stotra and mantra derivation-------

>

> OMkAraM bi.ndusa.nyuktaM nityaM dhyAya.nti yoginaH |

> kAmadaM mokShadaM chaiva OMkArAya namo namaH || 1||........the akshara 'om'

> is the starting letter of this sloka

> nama.nti R^iShayo devA namantyapsarasAM gaNAH |

> narA nama.nti deveshaM nakArAya namo namaH || 2||........the akshara 'na' is

> the starting letter of this sloka

> mahAdevaM mahAtmAnaM mahAdhyAnaM parAyaNam |

> mahApApaharaM devaM makArAya namo namaH || 3||........the akshara 'ma' is

> the starting letter of this sloka

> shivaM shA.ntaM jagannAthaM lokAnugrahakArakam |

> shivamekapadaM nityaM shikArAya namo namaH || 4||........the akshara 'shi'

> is the starting letter of this sloka

> vAhanaM vR^iShabho yasya vAsukiH ka.nThabhUShaNam |

> vAme shaktidharaM vedaM vakArAya namo namaH || 5||........the akshara 'va'

> is the starting letter of this sloka

> yatra tatra sthito devaH sarvavyApI maheshvaraH |

> yo guruH sarvadevAnAM yakArAya namo namaH || 6||........the akshara 'ya' is

> the starting letter of this sloka

> ShaDakSharamidaM stotraM yaH paThechchhivasa.nnidhau |

> shivalokamavApnoti shivena saha modate || 7||.........put all the akshara

> together and get the mantra 'om nama shivaya'

> || iti shrI rudrayAmale umAmaheshvarasa.nvAde

> ShaDakSharastotraM saMpUrNam ||

>

> It is evident from the above that the panchakshari and shadakshari mantra

> are different. Now if you still have doubts, I can wait till say Feb 2007 to

> discuss this aspect again with you and will advise serious thinking and

> introspection till then. Thank you for this animated debate on mantra

> shastra.

>

> POINT 3: This is regarding the Gayatri to which I have a very clearcut

> answer and know at least 25 samputa or maybe more, but will reply to this

> privately as I am not willing to discuss this in Public. Swamiji said what

> he had to say. How you and I understand it is very different. We can talk on

> this in the west coast when we meet, but I cannot sya more in Public about

> the Gayatri.

>

> Best wishes and warm regards,

> Sanjay Rath

>

> Personal: <http://srath.com/blog/> WebPages ¡ü <http://srath.com/blog/>

> Rath¡Çs Rhapsody

> SJC WebPages: <http://.org/> Sri Jagannath Center ¡ü

> <http://sjcerc.com/> SJCERC ¡ü <http://jiva.us/> JIVA

> Publications: <http://thejyotishdigest.com/> The Jyotish Digest ¡ü

> <http://sagittariuspublications.com/> Sagittarius Publications

> ----

>

>

>

>

> _____

>

> sohamsa [sohamsa] On Behalf Of

> Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

> Wednesday, July 05, 2006 9:23 AM

> sjcBoston; ;

> sohamsa; vedic astrology

> Re: Gayatri Mantra: Text with Very Bad (to Sanjay)

>

>

>

> Dear Sanjay,

>

> > Then why is it that you are humming something and calling it gayatri

> mantra

> > and not recording the gayatri mantra. What you are humming is NOT gayatri

> > mantra. If you want, then record the Gayatri mantra but don;t do such

> things

> > as after 100 years, people will say that this hamm-hum-heem-haam is the

> > *real gayatri mantra* as Narasimha said so. So throw this out right now..

>

> Of course, what I hummed is not "real Gayatri mantra". It was the naada/tune

> of reading the Gayatri mantra with intonation. One would have to apply the

> ups, downs and stresses in that humming to the text in the JPG I gave, add

> the Om's at the beginning and end and construct the "real Gayatri mantra"..

> Anybody who read my mail fully would have known this.

>

> I am not spoon-feeding and not giving the Gayatri itself in audio form

> directly due to certain beliefs of our tradition, which apparently you

> cannot respect. Unfortunate.

>

> When a father gives Gayatri mantra to son in Upanayanam ceremony, they make

> him whisper it in his ears so that other people in the audience cannot hear

> it. Why don't they make him say it loud so that everyone hears? This

> tradition is not without a reason.

>

> Though I did not spoon-feed, what I provided (mantra text and intonation

> markings in JPEG form, instructions on prefixes, suffixes and repetition in

> TEXT form and humming in MP3 form) is sufficient for anyone interested to

> reconstruct everything and get going.

>

> * * *

>

> > Did you ask him about the reason as to why he has asked you to use

> rudraksha

> > mala for the gayatri when it is well known that this is for Shiva mantra.

>

> Let me throw the question back at you: Which scripture says that Rudraksha

> mala should be used only for Shiva mantras?

>

> According to my guru, Gayatri mantra can be read using several kinds of

> malas. Based on the mala used, the experience obtained varies according to

> him.

>

> In any case, Savitri Gayatri is a mantra that is for a form of Sun and Shiva

> is associated with Sun. Speaking at a different level, Savitri Gayatri

> mantra is for realizing the all pervading Atman. If I consider Shiva as

> Satya or all-pervading Brahman and Shakti as the manifestation into various

> forms, Savitri Gayatri mantra IS a Shiva mantra, of the highest form of

> Shiva.

>

> When one finds who one considers to be a Sadguru and starts experiencing

> indescribable ananda in his sadhana, one stops being pedantic and leaves it

> to Guru. If my spiritual guru blesses a mala made of haystackballs or

> mudballs or stones and gives it to me to use in my sadhana, I will gladly

> use it.

>

> Of course, one can ask me why I am being pedantic about intonation then.

> Well, if you are happy with the way you are reading it, I always said to

> please ignore my writings in this matter! I am writing for those who were

> taught Gayatri long back and forgot because they stopped practicing it and

> are looking for some guidance to restart. I can only give guidance based on

> my own practice.

>

> > 1. You are aware that the Gayatri chandah has 24 syllables or sounds?

>

> Of course.

>

> > 2. That Maharishi Vishwamitra informed the world about this mantra with

> the

> > 24 sounds that is recorded exactly in the Rig Veda Mandala III.62.10

>

> Yes, it starts with "tatsaviturvarenyam" and ends with "prachodayaat".

>

> The intonation markings (horizontal lines under letters and single/double

> vertical lines above letters) are also part of the Vedic text.

>

> > 3. That if you add any other sound to this mantra, then the total number

> > would increase beyond the 24 sound. Would it still be Gayatri chandah

> after

> > you add two sounds before and after the mantra? If yes then what is the

> > meaning of gayatri chandah? If not then what are you supposed to do to

> > ensure that the 24 sound scheme does not break? Have you done that?

>

> It is simply your assumption that Om at the beginning and/or end of a mantra

> increases the number of letters in the mantra. Om at the beginning and Om at

> the end are not part of the mantra. They are like a preface and conclusion

> to the mantra.

>

> Swami Vivekananda also taught to say Om, then the Gayatri mantra and then Om

> again, in his book "Rajayoga".

>

> "Om Namassivaaya" may be considered a 6-lettered mantra by you because of

> Om, but we consider it a 5-lettered mantra (Panchakshari - Na Ma Ssi Vaa Ya)

>

> When they do homam, they add "swaha" to the mantras. But, again, that does

> not change the chhandas. For example, there are shlokas in Gayatri, Ushnik

> and Anushtup metres in Durga Saptashati. Before "Chandi homam", the above

> list of metres is read out. When the shlokas are read later, 2 letters

> "Swaha" are added to several shlokas. If you consider them to be a part of

> the shlokas, the metres are all broken due to 2 extra letters. But that is

> not how it works.

>

> Certain prefixes and suffixes added to mantras remain as prefixes and

> suffixes and do not become part of the mantra.

>

> > 4. Which mala is to be used for the gayatri? Why is the Rudraksha NEVER to

> > be used for the gayatri mantra? Why has your Guru asked you to use the

> > Rudraksha and from which scripture did he get the reference for this

> > deviation?

>

> Mantra Mahodadhi talks about various malas and says that mantras read with

> Rudraksha mala and Tulasi mala become infinitely more potent. It does not

> say only Shiva mantras or only Vishnu mantras. Thus, it seems like either

> can be used for any mantra to make it more potent.

>

> In fact, I know several people apart from my guru who use Rudraksha mala

> with Gayatri.

>

> What mala should be used with Gayatri according to you?

>

> On a different note, more than the kind of mala used, I think that the

> person, place and time associated with the preparation of the mala are far

> more important. Of course, all these may not matter in the long run, after

> one's sadhana has progressed beyond certain level. But, in the short run,

> until one reaches that level, all these mundane factors may matter.

>

>

> Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> Narasimha

> -------------------------------

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> -------------------------------

>

> > | om gurave namah |

> > Dear Narasimha

> >

> > ok you have clarified that loud chanting is very fine and that is what is

> to

> > be done in the Yajya and the agnihotri.

> >

> > Then why is it that you are humming something and calling it gayatri

> mantra

> > and not recording the gayatri mantra. What you are humming is NOT gayatri

> > mantra. If you want, then record the Gayatri mantra but don;t do such

> things

> > as after 100 years, people will say that this hamm-hum-heem-haam is the

> > *real gayatri mantra* as Narasimha said so. So throw this out right now..

> >

> > Did you ask him about the reason as to why he has asked you to use

> rudraksha

> > mala for the gayatri when it is well known that this is for Shiva mantra.

> >

> > Second point about right intonation -

> >

> > 1. You are aware that the Gayatri chandah has 24 syllables or sounds?

> >

> > 2. That Maharishi Vishwamitra informed the world about this mantra with

> the

> > 24 sounds that is recorded exactly in the Rig Veda Mandala III.62.10

> >

> > 3. That if you add any other sound to this mantra, then the total number

> > would increase beyond the 24 sound. Would it still be Gayatri chandah

> after

> > you add two sounds before and after the mantra? If yes then what is the

> > meaning of gayatri chandah? If not then what are you supposed to do to

> > ensure that the 24 sound scheme does not break? Have you done that?

> >

> > 4. Which mala is to be used for the gayatri? Why is the Rudraksha NEVER to

> > be used for the gayatri mantra? Why has your Guru asked you to use the

> > Rudraksha and from which scripture did he get the reference for this

> > deviation?

> > Best wishes and warm regards,

> > Sanjay Rath

> >

> > Dear Sanjay,

> >

> > > ...and please do not compare

> > > Thakur to your new spiritual master. You will do all of us a big favor

> by

> > > that.

> >

> > Did I compare??

> >

> > I merely gave an *example* to show that a spiritual master is not

> > necessarily the one who taught Gayatri first and to counter your claim

> that

> > "anybody else, whether a crow or a human being is just a NIMITTA and not a

> > spiritual master." Whether X is my spiritual master or not is between me

> and

> > X and not anybody else's business.

> >

> > Also, please realize that you are speaking about a person you know nothing

> > about. He *could* be the re-incarnation of Swami Vivekananda for example

> (I

> > am not saying he is). You simply have no idea.

> >

> > Your unprovoked circasm about a person you don't know, when I am calmly

> > minding my business, is surprising to me.

> >

> > > You are again assuming things that the Gayatri diksha alone is the one

> > thing

> > > that can give moksha.

> >

> > I did not say it. I guess it is in my karma today to be misinterpreted....

> >

> > Also, I did not prohibit loud chanting. I said I personally want to chant

> > without vaikhari due to certain beliefs which I mentioned. I did not say

> > loud chanting is bad. I am being misrepresented there also.

> >

> > Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> > Narasimha

> > -------------------------------

> > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> > -------------------------------

> >

> > > | om gurave namah |

> > > Dear Narasimha

> > >

> > > You are again assuming things that the Gayatri diksha alone is the one

> > thing

> > > that can give moksha. That is wrong and hence this statement. The giver

> of

> > > the Gayatri is one and most important Guru and this is given in every

> > > lineage by the parents or family among the brahmins.

> > >

> > > That example you give is quite off the mark. Ramakrishna did not get the

> > > Gayatri from Totapuri Maharaj but got it at a much younger age. He may

> > have

> > > got the sanyaasa Gayatri form him which is different. In fact there are

> so

> > > many types of Gayatri's. So do not try to divert the point by saying

> that

> > > Abhedananda did not know his spiritual master. ...and please do not

> > compare

> > > Thakur to your new spiritual master. You will do all of us a big favor

> by

> > > that.

> > >

> > > I continue to state that you have done something very wrong by humming

> the

> > > mantra and if you want to put it in the web or in any media you should

> > have

> > > chanted it and put it there as you did earlier with the mrityunjaya

> > mantra.

> > > Rest is your problem.

> > >

> > > Also try to learn about the use of malas with the Gayatri mantra

> (savitur

> > > gayatri to be precise).

> > >

> > > To all in the lists,

> > >

> > > Also so that people may not be shocked any further by your statements,

> > there

> > > is no obstruction to reciting the Gayatri as given in the rig veda.

> Please

> > > go ahead and do this. Don't listen to all this medieval brahminism about

> > > right and wrong ways to do the gayatri. None was born an expert and I am

> > > pretty sure that the temples in India have remained as pure if not pure

> > till

> > > date due to the loud chanting of the mantras.

> > >

> > > if you want to her it loudly or in any manner, please go ahead and hear

> > it.

> > > If gayatri was played in all government offices in India at least in a

> low

> > > volume, corruption would come down to nil. Rhoda I hope that answers

> your

> > > query.

> > >

> > > Do mantras as advised by your guru and that will depend on your own

> > > spiritual development. Mantras must be done loudly initially to become

> one

> > > with the mantra devata at the physical level. Thereafter it will go

> > inwards

> > > naturally.

> > >

> > > Please pass this on to all lists where this was circulated.

> > >

> > > Best wishes and warm regards,

> > > Sanjay Rath

>

> > >

> > > > Dear Sanjay,

> > > >

> > > > > I just questioned you whether you had your fathers permission,

> > > > > who is the giver of the gayatri to you. Anybody else, whether a

> > > > > crow or a human being is just a NIMITTA and not a spiritual master.

> > > >

>

> > > > It will be appropriate to trust a person to know his spiritual master.

> One

> > > > will be ill-advised to go to Swami Vivekananda or Swami Abhedanda or

> > > > Swami Akhandananda and tell him that Ramakrishna Paramahamsa is

> > > > not his spiritual master because Gayatri was first given by someone

> else!

> > > >

> > > > In fact, my spiritual guru does consider himself to be just a nimitta.

> > > > But that is his humility.

> > > >

> > > > If you say everyone who guides after the first giving of Gayatri is

> "just a

> > > > NIMITTA", one can consider even the giver of first Gayatri to be a

> nimitta.

> > > > At one level, everything IS a nimitta. But we normally don't speak at

> that

> > > > level.

> > > >

> > > > > I have no objection to your sharing the mantra as written and this

> is

> > > > > a very good thing to do. There is something very very wrong in

> > > > > 'humming the mantra' as then you are actually doing the mantra with

> > > > > the DAMANA VIJA and this is very bad. It would have been much

> > > > > better and correct if you had actually sung the mantra (in whatever

> > > > > intonation you think is right or in whatever manner you feel is

> > > > > correct) and put it in the web or given to others.

> > > > >

> > > > > Respect the mantra please and I am also lodging this wrong

> > > > > teaching protest against your spiritual teacher as well.

> > > >

> > > > I will pass on your protest to him.

> > > >

> > > > Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> > > > Narasimha

[Guest guest]

Dear Narasimha and Sanjay,

 

Both of you, I have known in this very jyotish space originally

created by Ben Collins, for sometime. Both of you have been very

significant to the modern jyotish scene and even when I do not agree

with you fully, this little ant knows that both of you were sent by

God to Jyotish, as reactants and catalysts and have stirred many

lives, hearts and souls!

 

I know that I have no right to say this and perhaps neither of you

remember me or that group, but I am beginning to feel that both of

you are carrying out a very PRIVATE conversation that must be carried

out in PRIVATE!

 

Both of you are very beautiful and radiant souls! Please wake up to

your BEAUTY and LIGHT through SILENCE!!

 

Ranjan

 

, "Narasimha P.V.R. Rao" <pvr

wrote:

>

> Dear Sanjay,

>

> > I find it hard that your tradition is teaching that the Gayatri

mantra

> > should be *hummed* in the first place.

>

> I wonder if you misunderstood me. I do not "hum" this mantra when I

chant it everyday. I read it normally (but without vaikhari).

>

> > If you are allowed to give it, then give it.

>

> I am allowed to give it and will give it to a just a few, e.g. my

son.

>

> With others, I am merely helping them remember something they have

already learnt and forgot due to lack of practice. The humming and

the instructions are merely an attempt to help them without taking

full responsibility of being their guru.

>

> > Don't do these things. If you have the heart of a Ramanujacarya

then climb

> > on top of the temple and shout *om namo naaraayanaaya* and then

the world

> > will know the mantra.

>

> You are missing a simple point that it is against the teachings of

my guru to do that.

>

> In fact, when your uncle taught you Gayatri mantra, I am sure he

too whispered it into your ears with a cloth covering both of you. Is

that correct or not?? Did your uncle shout the Gayatri mantra from

the "top of the temple" and teach you? Why did he whisper??

>

> You are unfairly trying to compel me to break my spiritual guru's

words, without trying to appreciate/understand/respect our beliefs.

>

> > As regards the mala, first you said that you have sent the mail

to him and

> > that were awaiting a reply. So, you did not get a reply or what

you write

> > below is your reply.

>

> When did I say that? When you lodged a protest of "wrong teaching"

against me and my guru also, I merely said I will pass that on.

>

> > Now why do you want a reply at all from me? Are you not

> > satisfied with his teachings?

>

> Because you took such a strong position against the use of

Rudraksha mala, I merely asked you what was *your* opinion on which

mala should be used. Does that amount to not being "satisfied" with

the teachings of my guru?

>

> In case there is some confusion here, let me set one thing clear.

You are my astrology guru. I have known you for a long time. Though

you like to talk about spiritual matters, I never looked at you as my

spiritual guru. I patiently waited for my spiritual guru and found

him when Jupiter and Ketu were transiting over my lagna. He made a

tremendous difference in my spiritual progress and I am

quite "satisfied" with his guidance. To me, spiritual discussions

with you are just like spiritual discussions with others.

>

> > Your Tradition (is that Maharashtra or London?)

>

> My spiritual guru and his spiritual guru are from the Pune area in

Maharashtra state.

>

> > To remove your further doubts, which is the effect of Rahu, let

me quote the

>

> I too can get personal, but I will not.

>

> > Swamiji said what

> > he had to say. How you and I understand it is very different.

>

> Well, reading a mantra does not mean just repeating that mantra.

There can be prefixes and suffixes added to the mantra. Just because

something comes in contact with a mantra, it does not become part of

the mantra and change the chhandas. Regarding Swami Vivekananda's

suggestion of adding Om before and after the Gayatri mantra, I can't

see how that simple English sentence can be "understood" very

differently by you!

>

> > In any case, Rudraksha is prohibited for Surya mantras and Tulasi

is

> > prohibited for Shiva Mantras. A person who offers Tulasi to Shiva

will be

> > destroyed...

>

> Which scripture says that Rudraksha is prohibited for Surya

mantras? If you can quote a scripture, we can talk further.

Otherwise, it is just your tradition vs my tradition and we can agree

to disagree.

>

> I know the story of Shiva and Tulasi, but do you really think that

one will be "destroyed" if he does Panchakshari mantra of Shiva with

Tulasi mala? Similarly, if I use a Rudraksha mala and do a Vishnu

mantra with utmost sincerity, will Vishnu be mad at me?

>

> If you say that results will come slower if Shiva mantras are done

with Tulasi mala, I can understand. But the word "destroyed" used by

you is just too much.

>

> Moreover, Savitri Gayatri is not a mere Surya mantra. It is a

mantra for the all-pervading Atman. I can certainly look at Shiva as

the symbol of Atman. Shiva is often considered the all-pervading

Atman (Sun) and Shakti His manifestation (Moon).

>

> As I said, more than what kind of mala you are using, the person,

place and time associated with its preparation are far more

important. If Ramakrishna Paramahansa had prepared a Rudraksha mala

and given it to me, I would use it for *all* my mantras.

>

> Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> Narasimha

> -------------------------------

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> -------------------------------

>

> > | om gurave namah |

> > Dear Narasimha

> >

> > POINT 1:

> >

> > I find it hard that your tradition is teaching that the Gayatri

mantra

> > should be *hummed* in the first place. In my tradition (Jagannath

Puri) this

> > amounts to a disrespect of the Mantra Devata. That is the reason

why I

> > cannot accept the humming. If you are allowed to give it, then

give it.

> > Don't do these things. If you have the heart of a Ramanujacarya

then climb

> > on top of the temple and shout *om namo naaraayanaaya* and then

the world

> > will know the mantra.

> >

> > In fact the world knows the mantra. Those who have to do it shall

do it when

> > they have to do it.

> >

> > As regards the mala, first you said that you have sent the mail

to him and

> > that were awaiting a reply. So, you did not get a reply or what

you write

> > below is your reply. Then it is fine. I take it that it what is

taught in

> > his/your tradition. Now why do you want a reply at all from me?

Are you not

> > satisfied with his teachings?

> >

> > It is well known that Rudraksha is for Shiva, Tulasi for Vishnu,

Sveta arka

> > for Ganesha, Sphatika (munda mala) for Devi, Rakta chandana for

Surya and so

> > on. In any case, Rudraksha is prohibited for Surya mantras and

Tulasi is

> > prohibited for Shiva Mantras. A person who offers Tulasi to Shiva

will be

> > destroyed...there is a lot more in our tradition and for this you

will have

> > to wait for my book. But how does it matter to you.

> >

> > -----------

> >

> > POINT 2:

> >

> > On the other issues of mantra shastra regarding the differences

between

> > Jagannath Puri tradition and Your Tradition (is that Maharashtra

or London?)

> >

> > om namah shivaaya is the same as namah shivaaya as per your

tradition or

> > guru. Can I ask how? If you count the number of akshara in the

mantra, it is

> > six for om namah shivaaya and 5 for namah shivaaya. Is it not?

> >

> > So that people in Kali Yuga will not get this simple math

regarding phoneme

> > wrong, the great Tirumular wrote a whole book on the mantra 'namah

> > shivaaya'...Thirumantram. Please read it and you will know which

is

> > Panchakshari and which is shadakshari.

> >

> > To remove your further doubts, which is the effect of Rahu, let

me quote the

> > two famous stotras. The Panchakshari Sotra and Shadakshari Stotra

here.

> >

> > ------quote panchakshari (5 letter) stotra and mantra derivation--

-----

> >

> > nAgendrahArAya trilochanAya bhasmAN^garAgAya maheshvarAya |

> > nityAya shuddhAya digambarAya tasmai nakArAya namaH shivAya ||

> > 1||........the akshara 'na' is the starting letter of this sloka

> > mandAkini\-salilachandana\-charchitAya

> > nandIshvara\-pramathanAtha\- maheshvarAya |

> > mandArapushhpa\-bahupushhpa\-supUjitAya

> > tasmai makArAya namaH shivAya ||

2||.................................akshara

> > 'ma' is the starting letter of this sloka

> > shivAya gaurIvadanAbja\-vR^inda\-

> > sUryAya dakshAdhvaranAshakAya |

> > shrInIlakaNThAya vR^ishhadhvajAya

> > tasmai shikArAya namaH shivAya || 3||..............akshara 'shi'

is the

> > starting letter of this sloka

> > vasishhTha\-kumbhodbhava\-gautamAryamunIndra\-

devArchitashekharAya |

> > chandrArka\-vaishvAnaralochanAya tasmai vakArAya namaH shivAya ||

> > 4||..............akshara 'va' is the starting letter of this

sloka

> > yakshasvarUpAya jaTAdharAya pinAkahastAya sanAtanAya |

> > divyAya devAya digambarAya tasmai yakArAya namaH shivAya ||

> > 5||..............akshara 'ya' is the starting letter of this

sloka

> > pa.nchAksharamidaM puNyaM yaH paThechchhivasannidhau |

> > shivalokamavApnoti shivena saha modate ||..............put all

the akshara

> > together and get the mantra taught by Shankaracharya 'nama

shivaya'

> > .. iti shriimachchha.nkaraachaaryavirachita shivapaJNchaakshara

stotraM

> > samaaptaM..

> >

> > ------quote shadakshari (6 letter) stotra and mantra derivation---

----

> >

> > OMkAraM bi.ndusa.nyuktaM nityaM dhyAya.nti yoginaH |

> > kAmadaM mokShadaM chaiva OMkArAya namo namaH || 1||........the

akshara 'om'

> > is the starting letter of this sloka

> > nama.nti R^iShayo devA namantyapsarasAM gaNAH |

> > narA nama.nti deveshaM nakArAya namo namaH || 2||........the

akshara 'na' is

> > the starting letter of this sloka

> > mahAdevaM mahAtmAnaM mahAdhyAnaM parAyaNam |

> > mahApApaharaM devaM makArAya namo namaH || 3||........the

akshara 'ma' is

> > the starting letter of this sloka

> > shivaM shA.ntaM jagannAthaM lokAnugrahakArakam |

> > shivamekapadaM nityaM shikArAya namo namaH || 4||........the

akshara 'shi'

> > is the starting letter of this sloka

> > vAhanaM vR^iShabho yasya vAsukiH ka.nThabhUShaNam |

> > vAme shaktidharaM vedaM vakArAya namo namaH || 5||........the

akshara 'va'

> > is the starting letter of this sloka

> > yatra tatra sthito devaH sarvavyApI maheshvaraH |

> > yo guruH sarvadevAnAM yakArAya namo namaH || 6||........the

akshara 'ya' is

> > the starting letter of this sloka

> > ShaDakSharamidaM stotraM yaH paThechchhivasa.nnidhau |

> > shivalokamavApnoti shivena saha modate || 7||.........put all the

akshara

> > together and get the mantra 'om nama shivaya'

> > || iti shrI rudrayAmale umAmaheshvarasa.nvAde

> > ShaDakSharastotraM saMpUrNam ||

> >

> > It is evident from the above that the panchakshari and

shadakshari mantra

> > are different. Now if you still have doubts, I can wait till say

Feb 2007 to

> > discuss this aspect again with you and will advise serious

thinking and

> > introspection till then. Thank you for this animated debate on

mantra

> > shastra.

> >

> > POINT 3: This is regarding the Gayatri to which I have a very

clearcut

> > answer and know at least 25 samputa or maybe more, but will reply

to this

> > privately as I am not willing to discuss this in Public. Swamiji

said what

> > he had to say. How you and I understand it is very different. We

can talk on

> > this in the west coast when we meet, but I cannot sya more in

Public about

> > the Gayatri.

> >

> > Best wishes and warm regards,

> > Sanjay Rath

> >

> > Personal: <http://srath.com/blog/> WebPages ¡ü

<http://srath.com/blog/>

> > Rath¡Çs Rhapsody

> > SJC WebPages: <http://.org/> Sri Jagannath Center ¡ü

> > <http://sjcerc.com/> SJCERC ¡ü <http://jiva.us/> JIVA

> > Publications: <http://thejyotishdigest.com/> The Jyotish Digest

¡ü

> > <http://sagittariuspublications.com/> Sagittarius Publications

> >

----

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > _____

> >

> > sohamsa [sohamsa] On

Behalf Of

> > Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

> > Wednesday, July 05, 2006 9:23 AM

> > sjcBoston; ;

> > sohamsa; vedic astrology

> > Re: Gayatri Mantra: Text with Very Bad (to

Sanjay)

> >

> >

> >

> > Dear Sanjay,

> >

> > > Then why is it that you are humming something and calling it

gayatri

> > mantra

> > > and not recording the gayatri mantra. What you are humming is

NOT gayatri

> > > mantra. If you want, then record the Gayatri mantra but don;t

do such

> > things

> > > as after 100 years, people will say that this hamm-hum-heem-

haam is the

> > > *real gayatri mantra* as Narasimha said so. So throw this out

right now.

> >

> > Of course, what I hummed is not "real Gayatri mantra". It was the

naada/tune

> > of reading the Gayatri mantra with intonation. One would have to

apply the

> > ups, downs and stresses in that humming to the text in the JPG I

gave, add

> > the Om's at the beginning and end and construct the "real Gayatri

mantra".

> > Anybody who read my mail fully would have known this.

> >

> > I am not spoon-feeding and not giving the Gayatri itself in audio

form

> > directly due to certain beliefs of our tradition, which

apparently you

> > cannot respect. Unfortunate.

> >

> > When a father gives Gayatri mantra to son in Upanayanam ceremony,

they make

> > him whisper it in his ears so that other people in the audience

cannot hear

> > it. Why don't they make him say it loud so that everyone hears?

This

> > tradition is not without a reason.

> >

> > Though I did not spoon-feed, what I provided (mantra text and

intonation

> > markings in JPEG form, instructions on prefixes, suffixes and

repetition in

> > TEXT form and humming in MP3 form) is sufficient for anyone

interested to

> > reconstruct everything and get going.

> >

> > * * *

> >

> > > Did you ask him about the reason as to why he has asked you to

use

> > rudraksha

> > > mala for the gayatri when it is well known that this is for

Shiva mantra.

> >

> > Let me throw the question back at you: Which scripture says that

Rudraksha

> > mala should be used only for Shiva mantras?

> >

> > According to my guru, Gayatri mantra can be read using several

kinds of

> > malas. Based on the mala used, the experience obtained varies

according to

> > him.

> >

> > In any case, Savitri Gayatri is a mantra that is for a form of

Sun and Shiva

> > is associated with Sun. Speaking at a different level, Savitri

Gayatri

> > mantra is for realizing the all pervading Atman. If I consider

Shiva as

> > Satya or all-pervading Brahman and Shakti as the manifestation

into various

> > forms, Savitri Gayatri mantra IS a Shiva mantra, of the highest

form of

> > Shiva.

> >

> > When one finds who one considers to be a Sadguru and starts

experiencing

> > indescribable ananda in his sadhana, one stops being pedantic and

leaves it

> > to Guru. If my spiritual guru blesses a mala made of

haystackballs or

> > mudballs or stones and gives it to me to use in my sadhana, I

will gladly

> > use it.

> >

> > Of course, one can ask me why I am being pedantic about

intonation then.

> > Well, if you are happy with the way you are reading it, I always

said to

> > please ignore my writings in this matter! I am writing for those

who were

> > taught Gayatri long back and forgot because they stopped

practicing it and

> > are looking for some guidance to restart. I can only give

guidance based on

> > my own practice.

> >

> > > 1. You are aware that the Gayatri chandah has 24 syllables or

sounds?

> >

> > Of course.

> >

> > > 2. That Maharishi Vishwamitra informed the world about this

mantra with

> > the

> > > 24 sounds that is recorded exactly in the Rig Veda Mandala

III.62.10

> >

> > Yes, it starts with "tatsaviturvarenyam" and ends

with "prachodayaat".

> >

> > The intonation markings (horizontal lines under letters and

single/double

> > vertical lines above letters) are also part of the Vedic text.

> >

> > > 3. That if you add any other sound to this mantra, then the

total number

> > > would increase beyond the 24 sound. Would it still be Gayatri

chandah

> > after

> > > you add two sounds before and after the mantra? If yes then

what is the

> > > meaning of gayatri chandah? If not then what are you supposed

to do to

> > > ensure that the 24 sound scheme does not break? Have you done

that?

> >

> > It is simply your assumption that Om at the beginning and/or end

of a mantra

> > increases the number of letters in the mantra. Om at the

beginning and Om at

> > the end are not part of the mantra. They are like a preface and

conclusion

> > to the mantra.

> >

> > Swami Vivekananda also taught to say Om, then the Gayatri mantra

and then Om

> > again, in his book "Rajayoga".

> >

> > "Om Namassivaaya" may be considered a 6-lettered mantra by you

because of

> > Om, but we consider it a 5-lettered mantra (Panchakshari - Na Ma

Ssi Vaa Ya)

> >

> > When they do homam, they add "swaha" to the mantras. But, again,

that does

> > not change the chhandas. For example, there are shlokas in

Gayatri, Ushnik

> > and Anushtup metres in Durga Saptashati. Before "Chandi homam",

the above

> > list of metres is read out. When the shlokas are read later, 2

letters

> > "Swaha" are added to several shlokas. If you consider them to be

a part of

> > the shlokas, the metres are all broken due to 2 extra letters.

But that is

> > not how it works.

> >

> > Certain prefixes and suffixes added to mantras remain as prefixes

and

> > suffixes and do not become part of the mantra.

> >

> > > 4. Which mala is to be used for the gayatri? Why is the

Rudraksha NEVER to

> > > be used for the gayatri mantra? Why has your Guru asked you to

use the

> > > Rudraksha and from which scripture did he get the reference for

this

> > > deviation?

> >

> > Mantra Mahodadhi talks about various malas and says that mantras

read with

> > Rudraksha mala and Tulasi mala become infinitely more potent. It

does not

> > say only Shiva mantras or only Vishnu mantras. Thus, it seems

like either

> > can be used for any mantra to make it more potent.

> >

> > In fact, I know several people apart from my guru who use

Rudraksha mala

> > with Gayatri.

> >

> > What mala should be used with Gayatri according to you?

> >

> > On a different note, more than the kind of mala used, I think

that the

> > person, place and time associated with the preparation of the

mala are far

> > more important. Of course, all these may not matter in the long

run, after

> > one's sadhana has progressed beyond certain level. But, in the

short run,

> > until one reaches that level, all these mundane factors may

matter.

> >

> >

> > Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> > Narasimha

> > -------------------------------

> > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> > -------------------------------

> >

> > > | om gurave namah |

> > > Dear Narasimha

> > >

> > > ok you have clarified that loud chanting is very fine and that

is what is

> > to

> > > be done in the Yajya and the agnihotri.

> > >

> > > Then why is it that you are humming something and calling it

gayatri

> > mantra

> > > and not recording the gayatri mantra. What you are humming is

NOT gayatri

> > > mantra. If you want, then record the Gayatri mantra but don;t

do such

> > things

> > > as after 100 years, people will say that this hamm-hum-heem-

haam is the

> > > *real gayatri mantra* as Narasimha said so. So throw this out

right now.

> > >

> > > Did you ask him about the reason as to why he has asked you to

use

> > rudraksha

> > > mala for the gayatri when it is well known that this is for

Shiva mantra.

> > >

> > > Second point about right intonation -

> > >

> > > 1. You are aware that the Gayatri chandah has 24 syllables or

sounds?

> > >

> > > 2. That Maharishi Vishwamitra informed the world about this

mantra with

> > the

> > > 24 sounds that is recorded exactly in the Rig Veda Mandala

III.62.10

> > >

> > > 3. That if you add any other sound to this mantra, then the

total number

> > > would increase beyond the 24 sound. Would it still be Gayatri

chandah

> > after

> > > you add two sounds before and after the mantra? If yes then

what is the

> > > meaning of gayatri chandah? If not then what are you supposed

to do to

> > > ensure that the 24 sound scheme does not break? Have you done

that?

> > >

> > > 4. Which mala is to be used for the gayatri? Why is the

Rudraksha NEVER to

> > > be used for the gayatri mantra? Why has your Guru asked you to

use the

> > > Rudraksha and from which scripture did he get the reference for

this

> > > deviation?

> > > Best wishes and warm regards,

> > > Sanjay Rath

> > >

> > > Dear Sanjay,

> > >

> > > > ...and please do not compare

> > > > Thakur to your new spiritual master. You will do all of us a

big favor

> > by

> > > > that.

> > >

> > > Did I compare??

> > >

> > > I merely gave an *example* to show that a spiritual master is

not

> > > necessarily the one who taught Gayatri first and to counter

your claim

> > that

> > > "anybody else, whether a crow or a human being is just a

NIMITTA and not a

> > > spiritual master." Whether X is my spiritual master or not is

between me

> > and

> > > X and not anybody else's business.

> > >

> > > Also, please realize that you are speaking about a person you

know nothing

> > > about. He *could* be the re-incarnation of Swami Vivekananda

for example

> > (I

> > > am not saying he is). You simply have no idea.

> > >

> > > Your unprovoked circasm about a person you don't know, when I

am calmly

> > > minding my business, is surprising to me.

> > >

> > > > You are again assuming things that the Gayatri diksha alone

is the one

> > > thing

> > > > that can give moksha.

> > >

> > > I did not say it. I guess it is in my karma today to be

misinterpreted...

> > >

> > > Also, I did not prohibit loud chanting. I said I personally

want to chant

> > > without vaikhari due to certain beliefs which I mentioned. I

did not say

> > > loud chanting is bad. I am being misrepresented there also.

> > >

> > > Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> > > Narasimha

> > > -------------------------------

> > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> > > -------------------------------

> > >

> > > > | om gurave namah |

> > > > Dear Narasimha

> > > >

> > > > You are again assuming things that the Gayatri diksha alone

is the one

> > > thing

> > > > that can give moksha. That is wrong and hence this statement.

The giver

> > of

> > > > the Gayatri is one and most important Guru and this is given

in every

> > > > lineage by the parents or family among the brahmins.

> > > >

> > > > That example you give is quite off the mark. Ramakrishna did

not get the

> > > > Gayatri from Totapuri Maharaj but got it at a much younger

age. He may

> > > have

> > > > got the sanyaasa Gayatri form him which is different. In fact

there are

> > so

> > > > many types of Gayatri's. So do not try to divert the point by

saying

> > that

> > > > Abhedananda did not know his spiritual master. ...and please

do not

> > > compare

> > > > Thakur to your new spiritual master. You will do all of us a

big favor

> > by

> > > > that.

> > > >

> > > > I continue to state that you have done something very wrong

by humming

> > the

> > > > mantra and if you want to put it in the web or in any media

you should

> > > have

> > > > chanted it and put it there as you did earlier with the

mrityunjaya

> > > mantra.

> > > > Rest is your problem.

> > > >

> > > > Also try to learn about the use of malas with the Gayatri

mantra

> > (savitur

> > > > gayatri to be precise).

> > > >

> > > > To all in the lists,

> > > >

> > > > Also so that people may not be shocked any further by your

statements,

> > > there

> > > > is no obstruction to reciting the Gayatri as given in the rig

veda.

> > Please

> > > > go ahead and do this. Don't listen to all this medieval

brahminism about

> > > > right and wrong ways to do the gayatri. None was born an

expert and I am

> > > > pretty sure that the temples in India have remained as pure

if not pure

> > > till

> > > > date due to the loud chanting of the mantras.

> > > >

> > > > if you want to her it loudly or in any manner, please go

ahead and hear

> > > it.

> > > > If gayatri was played in all government offices in India at

least in a

> > low

> > > > volume, corruption would come down to nil. Rhoda I hope that

answers

> > your

> > > > query.

> > > >

> > > > Do mantras as advised by your guru and that will depend on

your own

> > > > spiritual development. Mantras must be done loudly initially

to become

> > one

> > > > with the mantra devata at the physical level. Thereafter it

will go

> > > inwards

> > > > naturally.

> > > >

> > > > Please pass this on to all lists where this was circulated.

> > > >

> > > > Best wishes and warm regards,

> > > > Sanjay Rath

> >

> > > >

> > > > > Dear Sanjay,

> > > > >

> > > > > > I just questioned you whether you had your fathers

permission,

> > > > > > who is the giver of the gayatri to you. Anybody else,

whether a

> > > > > > crow or a human being is just a NIMITTA and not a

spiritual master.

> > > > >

> >

> > > > > It will be appropriate to trust a person to know his

spiritual master.

> > One

> > > > > will be ill-advised to go to Swami Vivekananda or Swami

Abhedanda or

> > > > > Swami Akhandananda and tell him that Ramakrishna

Paramahamsa is

> > > > > not his spiritual master because Gayatri was first given by

someone

> > else!

> > > > >

> > > > > In fact, my spiritual guru does consider himself to be just

a nimitta.

> > > > > But that is his humility.

> > > > >

> > > > > If you say everyone who guides after the first giving of

Gayatri is

> > "just a

> > > > > NIMITTA", one can consider even the giver of first Gayatri

to be a

> > nimitta.

> > > > > At one level, everything IS a nimitta. But we normally

don't speak at

> > that

> > > > > level.

> > > > >

> > > > > > I have no objection to your sharing the mantra as written

and this

> > is

> > > > > > a very good thing to do. There is something very very

wrong in

> > > > > > 'humming the mantra' as then you are actually doing the

mantra with

> > > > > > the DAMANA VIJA and this is very bad. It would have been

much

> > > > > > better and correct if you had actually sung the mantra

(in whatever

> > > > > > intonation you think is right or in whatever manner you

feel is

> > > > > > correct) and put it in the web or given to others.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Respect the mantra please and I am also lodging this wrong

> > > > > > teaching protest against your spiritual teacher as well.

> > > > >

> > > > > I will pass on your protest to him.

> > > > >

> > > > > Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> > > > > Narasimha

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

| om gurave namah |

Dear Narasimha

 

POINT 1:

 

I find it hard that your tradition is teaching that the Gayatri mantra

should be *hummed* in the first place. In my tradition (Jagannath Puri) this

amounts to a disrespect of the Mantra Devata. That is the reason why I

cannot accept the humming. If you are allowed to give it, then give it.

Don't do these things. If you have the heart of a Ramanujacarya then climb

on top of the temple and shout *om namo naaraayanaaya* and then the world

will know the mantra.

 

In fact the world knows the mantra. Those who have to do it shall do it when

they have to do it.

 

As regards the mala, first you said that you have sent the mail to him and

that were awaiting a reply. So, you did not get a reply or what you write

below is your reply. Then it is fine. I take it that it what is taught in

his/your tradition. Now why do you want a reply at all from me? Are you not

satisfied with his teachings?

 

It is well known that Rudraksha is for Shiva, Tulasi for Vishnu, Sveta arka

for Ganesha, Sphatika (munda mala) for Devi, Rakta chandana for Surya and so

on. In any case, Rudraksha is prohibited for Surya mantras and Tulasi is

prohibited for Shiva Mantras. A person who offers Tulasi to Shiva will be

destroyed...there is a lot more in our tradition and for this you will have

to wait for my book. But how does it matter to you.

 

-----------

 

POINT 2:

 

On the other issues of mantra shastra regarding the differences between

Jagannath Puri tradition and Your Tradition (is that Maharashtra or London?)

 

om namah shivaaya is the same as namah shivaaya as per your tradition or

guru. Can I ask how? If you count the number of akshara in the mantra, it is

six for om namah shivaaya and 5 for namah shivaaya. Is it not?

 

So that people in Kali Yuga will not get this simple math regarding phoneme

wrong, the great Tirumular wrote a whole book on the mantra 'namah

shivaaya'...Thirumantram. Please read it and you will know which is

Panchakshari and which is shadakshari.

 

To remove your further doubts, which is the effect of Rahu, let me quote the

two famous stotras. The Panchakshari Sotra and Shadakshari Stotra here.

 

------quote panchakshari (5 letter) stotra and mantra derivation-------

 

nAgendrahArAya trilochanAya bhasmAN^garAgAya maheshvarAya |

nityAya shuddhAya digambarAya tasmai nakArAya namaH shivAya ||

1||........the akshara 'na' is the starting letter of this sloka

mandAkini\-salilachandana\-charchitAya

nandIshvara\-pramathanAtha\- maheshvarAya |

mandArapushhpa\-bahupushhpa\-supUjitAya

tasmai makArAya namaH shivAya || 2||.................................akshara

'ma' is the starting letter of this sloka

shivAya gaurIvadanAbja\-vR^inda\-

sUryAya dakshAdhvaranAshakAya |

shrInIlakaNThAya vR^ishhadhvajAya

tasmai shikArAya namaH shivAya || 3||..............akshara 'shi' is the

starting letter of this sloka

vasishhTha\-kumbhodbhava\-gautamAryamunIndra\-devArchitashekharAya |

chandrArka\-vaishvAnaralochanAya tasmai vakArAya namaH shivAya ||

4||..............akshara 'va' is the starting letter of this sloka

yakshasvarUpAya jaTAdharAya pinAkahastAya sanAtanAya |

divyAya devAya digambarAya tasmai yakArAya namaH shivAya ||

5||..............akshara 'ya' is the starting letter of this sloka

pa.nchAksharamidaM puNyaM yaH paThechchhivasannidhau |

shivalokamavApnoti shivena saha modate ||..............put all the akshara

together and get the mantra taught by Shankaracharya 'nama shivaya'

.. iti shriimachchha.nkaraachaaryavirachita shivapaJNchaakshara stotraM

samaaptaM..

 

------quote shadakshari (6 letter) stotra and mantra derivation-------

 

OMkAraM bi.ndusa.nyuktaM nityaM dhyAya.nti yoginaH |

kAmadaM mokShadaM chaiva OMkArAya namo namaH || 1||........the akshara 'om'

is the starting letter of this sloka

nama.nti R^iShayo devA namantyapsarasAM gaNAH |

narA nama.nti deveshaM nakArAya namo namaH || 2||........the akshara 'na' is

the starting letter of this sloka

mahAdevaM mahAtmAnaM mahAdhyAnaM parAyaNam |

mahApApaharaM devaM makArAya namo namaH || 3||........the akshara 'ma' is

the starting letter of this sloka

shivaM shA.ntaM jagannAthaM lokAnugrahakArakam |

shivamekapadaM nityaM shikArAya namo namaH || 4||........the akshara 'shi'

is the starting letter of this sloka

vAhanaM vR^iShabho yasya vAsukiH ka.nThabhUShaNam |

vAme shaktidharaM vedaM vakArAya namo namaH || 5||........the akshara 'va'

is the starting letter of this sloka

yatra tatra sthito devaH sarvavyApI maheshvaraH |

yo guruH sarvadevAnAM yakArAya namo namaH || 6||........the akshara 'ya' is

the starting letter of this sloka

ShaDakSharamidaM stotraM yaH paThechchhivasa.nnidhau |

shivalokamavApnoti shivena saha modate || 7||.........put all the akshara

together and get the mantra 'om nama shivaya'

|| iti shrI rudrayAmale umAmaheshvarasa.nvAde

ShaDakSharastotraM saMpUrNam ||

 

It is evident from the above that the panchakshari and shadakshari mantra

are different. Now if you still have doubts, I can wait till say Feb 2007 to

discuss this aspect again with you and will advise serious thinking and

introspection till then. Thank you for this animated debate on mantra

shastra.

 

POINT 3: This is regarding the Gayatri to which I have a very clearcut

answer and know at least 25 samputa or maybe more, but will reply to this

privately as I am not willing to discuss this in Public. Swamiji said what

he had to say. How you and I understand it is very different. We can talk on

this in the west coast when we meet, but I cannot sya more in Public about

the Gayatri.

 

Best wishes and warm regards,

Sanjay Rath

 

Personal: <http://srath.com/blog/> WebPages $B!|(B <http://srath.com/blog/>

Rath$B!G(Bs Rhapsody

SJC WebPages: <http://.org/> Sri Jagannath Center $B!|(B

<http://sjcerc.com/> SJCERC $B!|(B <http://jiva.us/> JIVA

Publications: <http://thejyotishdigest.com/> The Jyotish Digest $B!|(B

<http://sagittariuspublications.com/> Sagittarius Publications

----

 

 

 

 

_____

 

sohamsa [sohamsa] On Behalf Of

Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

Wednesday, July 05, 2006 9:23 AM

sjcBoston; ;

sohamsa; vedic astrology

Re: Gayatri Mantra: Text with Very Bad (to Sanjay)

 

 

 

Dear Sanjay,

 

> Then why is it that you are humming something and calling it gayatri

mantra

> and not recording the gayatri mantra. What you are humming is NOT gayatri

> mantra. If you want, then record the Gayatri mantra but don;t do such

things

> as after 100 years, people will say that this hamm-hum-heem-haam is the

> *real gayatri mantra* as Narasimha said so. So throw this out right now.

 

Of course, what I hummed is not "real Gayatri mantra". It was the naada/tune

of reading the Gayatri mantra with intonation. One would have to apply the

ups, downs and stresses in that humming to the text in the JPG I gave, add

the Om's at the beginning and end and construct the "real Gayatri mantra".

Anybody who read my mail fully would have known this.

 

I am not spoon-feeding and not giving the Gayatri itself in audio form

directly due to certain beliefs of our tradition, which apparently you

cannot respect. Unfortunate.

 

When a father gives Gayatri mantra to son in Upanayanam ceremony, they make

him whisper it in his ears so that other people in the audience cannot hear

it. Why don't they make him say it loud so that everyone hears? This

tradition is not without a reason.

 

Though I did not spoon-feed, what I provided (mantra text and intonation

markings in JPEG form, instructions on prefixes, suffixes and repetition in

TEXT form and humming in MP3 form) is sufficient for anyone interested to

reconstruct everything and get going.

 

* * *

 

> Did you ask him about the reason as to why he has asked you to use

rudraksha

> mala for the gayatri when it is well known that this is for Shiva mantra.

 

Let me throw the question back at you: Which scripture says that Rudraksha

mala should be used only for Shiva mantras?

 

According to my guru, Gayatri mantra can be read using several kinds of

malas. Based on the mala used, the experience obtained varies according to

him.

 

In any case, Savitri Gayatri is a mantra that is for a form of Sun and Shiva

is associated with Sun. Speaking at a different level, Savitri Gayatri

mantra is for realizing the all pervading Atman. If I consider Shiva as

Satya or all-pervading Brahman and Shakti as the manifestation into various

forms, Savitri Gayatri mantra IS a Shiva mantra, of the highest form of

Shiva.

 

When one finds who one considers to be a Sadguru and starts experiencing

indescribable ananda in his sadhana, one stops being pedantic and leaves it

to Guru. If my spiritual guru blesses a mala made of haystackballs or

mudballs or stones and gives it to me to use in my sadhana, I will gladly

use it.

 

Of course, one can ask me why I am being pedantic about intonation then.

Well, if you are happy with the way you are reading it, I always said to

please ignore my writings in this matter! I am writing for those who were

taught Gayatri long back and forgot because they stopped practicing it and

are looking for some guidance to restart. I can only give guidance based on

my own practice.

 

> 1. You are aware that the Gayatri chandah has 24 syllables or sounds?

 

Of course.

 

> 2. That Maharishi Vishwamitra informed the world about this mantra with

the

> 24 sounds that is recorded exactly in the Rig Veda Mandala III.62.10

 

Yes, it starts with "tatsaviturvarenyam" and ends with "prachodayaat".

 

The intonation markings (horizontal lines under letters and single/double

vertical lines above letters) are also part of the Vedic text.

 

> 3. That if you add any other sound to this mantra, then the total number

> would increase beyond the 24 sound. Would it still be Gayatri chandah

after

> you add two sounds before and after the mantra? If yes then what is the

> meaning of gayatri chandah? If not then what are you supposed to do to

> ensure that the 24 sound scheme does not break? Have you done that?

 

It is simply your assumption that Om at the beginning and/or end of a mantra

increases the number of letters in the mantra. Om at the beginning and Om at

the end are not part of the mantra. They are like a preface and conclusion

to the mantra.

 

Swami Vivekananda also taught to say Om, then the Gayatri mantra and then Om

again, in his book "Rajayoga".

 

"Om Namassivaaya" may be considered a 6-lettered mantra by you because of

Om, but we consider it a 5-lettered mantra (Panchakshari - Na Ma Ssi Vaa Ya)

 

When they do homam, they add "swaha" to the mantras. But, again, that does

not change the chhandas. For example, there are shlokas in Gayatri, Ushnik

and Anushtup metres in Durga Saptashati. Before "Chandi homam", the above

list of metres is read out. When the shlokas are read later, 2 letters

"Swaha" are added to several shlokas. If you consider them to be a part of

the shlokas, the metres are all broken due to 2 extra letters. But that is

not how it works.

 

Certain prefixes and suffixes added to mantras remain as prefixes and

suffixes and do not become part of the mantra.

 

> 4. Which mala is to be used for the gayatri? Why is the Rudraksha NEVER to

> be used for the gayatri mantra? Why has your Guru asked you to use the

> Rudraksha and from which scripture did he get the reference for this

> deviation?

 

Mantra Mahodadhi talks about various malas and says that mantras read with

Rudraksha mala and Tulasi mala become infinitely more potent. It does not

say only Shiva mantras or only Vishnu mantras. Thus, it seems like either

can be used for any mantra to make it more potent.

 

In fact, I know several people apart from my guru who use Rudraksha mala

with Gayatri.

 

What mala should be used with Gayatri according to you?

 

On a different note, more than the kind of mala used, I think that the

person, place and time associated with the preparation of the mala are far

more important. Of course, all these may not matter in the long run, after

one's sadhana has progressed beyond certain level. But, in the short run,

until one reaches that level, all these mundane factors may matter.

 

 

Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

Narasimha

-------------------------------

Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

-------------------------------

 

> | om gurave namah |

> Dear Narasimha

>

> ok you have clarified that loud chanting is very fine and that is what is

to

> be done in the Yajya and the agnihotri.

>

> Then why is it that you are humming something and calling it gayatri

mantra

> and not recording the gayatri mantra. What you are humming is NOT gayatri

> mantra. If you want, then record the Gayatri mantra but don;t do such

things

> as after 100 years, people will say that this hamm-hum-heem-haam is the

> *real gayatri mantra* as Narasimha said so. So throw this out right now.

>

> Did you ask him about the reason as to why he has asked you to use

rudraksha

> mala for the gayatri when it is well known that this is for Shiva mantra.

>

> Second point about right intonation -

>

> 1. You are aware that the Gayatri chandah has 24 syllables or sounds?

>

> 2. That Maharishi Vishwamitra informed the world about this mantra with

the

> 24 sounds that is recorded exactly in the Rig Veda Mandala III.62.10

>

> 3. That if you add any other sound to this mantra, then the total number

> would increase beyond the 24 sound. Would it still be Gayatri chandah

after

> you add two sounds before and after the mantra? If yes then what is the

> meaning of gayatri chandah? If not then what are you supposed to do to

> ensure that the 24 sound scheme does not break? Have you done that?

>

> 4. Which mala is to be used for the gayatri? Why is the Rudraksha NEVER to

> be used for the gayatri mantra? Why has your Guru asked you to use the

> Rudraksha and from which scripture did he get the reference for this

> deviation?

> Best wishes and warm regards,

> Sanjay Rath

>

> Dear Sanjay,

>

> > ...and please do not compare

> > Thakur to your new spiritual master. You will do all of us a big favor

by

> > that.

>

> Did I compare??

>

> I merely gave an *example* to show that a spiritual master is not

> necessarily the one who taught Gayatri first and to counter your claim

that

> "anybody else, whether a crow or a human being is just a NIMITTA and not a

> spiritual master." Whether X is my spiritual master or not is between me

and

> X and not anybody else's business.

>

> Also, please realize that you are speaking about a person you know nothing

> about. He *could* be the re-incarnation of Swami Vivekananda for example

(I

> am not saying he is). You simply have no idea.

>

> Your unprovoked circasm about a person you don't know, when I am calmly

> minding my business, is surprising to me.

>

> > You are again assuming things that the Gayatri diksha alone is the one

> thing

> > that can give moksha.

>

> I did not say it. I guess it is in my karma today to be misinterpreted...

>

> Also, I did not prohibit loud chanting. I said I personally want to chant

> without vaikhari due to certain beliefs which I mentioned. I did not say

> loud chanting is bad. I am being misrepresented there also.

>

> Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> Narasimha

> -------------------------------

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> -------------------------------

>

> > | om gurave namah |

> > Dear Narasimha

> >

> > You are again assuming things that the Gayatri diksha alone is the one

> thing

> > that can give moksha. That is wrong and hence this statement. The giver

of

> > the Gayatri is one and most important Guru and this is given in every

> > lineage by the parents or family among the brahmins.

> >

> > That example you give is quite off the mark. Ramakrishna did not get the

> > Gayatri from Totapuri Maharaj but got it at a much younger age. He may

> have

> > got the sanyaasa Gayatri form him which is different. In fact there are

so

> > many types of Gayatri's. So do not try to divert the point by saying

that

> > Abhedananda did not know his spiritual master. ...and please do not

> compare

> > Thakur to your new spiritual master. You will do all of us a big favor

by

> > that.

> >

> > I continue to state that you have done something very wrong by humming

the

> > mantra and if you want to put it in the web or in any media you should

> have

> > chanted it and put it there as you did earlier with the mrityunjaya

> mantra.

> > Rest is your problem.

> >

> > Also try to learn about the use of malas with the Gayatri mantra

(savitur

> > gayatri to be precise).

> >

> > To all in the lists,

> >

> > Also so that people may not be shocked any further by your statements,

> there

> > is no obstruction to reciting the Gayatri as given in the rig veda.

Please

> > go ahead and do this. Don't listen to all this medieval brahminism about

> > right and wrong ways to do the gayatri. None was born an expert and I am

> > pretty sure that the temples in India have remained as pure if not pure

> till

> > date due to the loud chanting of the mantras.

> >

> > if you want to her it loudly or in any manner, please go ahead and hear

> it.

> > If gayatri was played in all government offices in India at least in a

low

> > volume, corruption would come down to nil. Rhoda I hope that answers

your

> > query.

> >

> > Do mantras as advised by your guru and that will depend on your own

> > spiritual development. Mantras must be done loudly initially to become

one

> > with the mantra devata at the physical level. Thereafter it will go

> inwards

> > naturally.

> >

> > Please pass this on to all lists where this was circulated.

> >

> > Best wishes and warm regards,

> > Sanjay Rath

 

> >

> > > Dear Sanjay,

> > >

> > > > I just questioned you whether you had your fathers permission,

> > > > who is the giver of the gayatri to you. Anybody else, whether a

> > > > crow or a human being is just a NIMITTA and not a spiritual master.

> > >

 

> > > It will be appropriate to trust a person to know his spiritual master.

One

> > > will be ill-advised to go to Swami Vivekananda or Swami Abhedanda or

> > > Swami Akhandananda and tell him that Ramakrishna Paramahamsa is

> > > not his spiritual master because Gayatri was first given by someone

else!

> > >

> > > In fact, my spiritual guru does consider himself to be just a nimitta.

> > > But that is his humility.

> > >

> > > If you say everyone who guides after the first giving of Gayatri is

"just a

> > > NIMITTA", one can consider even the giver of first Gayatri to be a

nimitta.

> > > At one level, everything IS a nimitta. But we normally don't speak at

that

> > > level.

> > >

> > > > I have no objection to your sharing the mantra as written and this

is

> > > > a very good thing to do. There is something very very wrong in

> > > > 'humming the mantra' as then you are actually doing the mantra with

> > > > the DAMANA VIJA and this is very bad. It would have been much

> > > > better and correct if you had actually sung the mantra (in whatever

> > > > intonation you think is right or in whatever manner you feel is

> > > > correct) and put it in the web or given to others.

> > > >

> > > > Respect the mantra please and I am also lodging this wrong

> > > > teaching protest against your spiritual teacher as well.

> > >

> > > I will pass on your protest to him.

> > >

> > > Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> > > Narasimha

 

 

 

 

 

_____

 

avast! <http://www.avast.com> Antivirus: Outbound message clean.

 

 

Virus Database (VPS): 0627-1, 07/05/2006

Tested on: 7/5/2006 5:23:29 PM

avast! - copyright © 1988-2006 ALWIL Software.

 

 

 

 

_____

 

avast! Antivirus <http://www.avast.com> : Outbound message clean.

 

 

Virus Database (VPS): 0627-1, 07/05/2006

Tested on: 7/6/2006 9:41:52 AM

avast! - copyright © 1988-2006 ALWIL Software.

[Guest guest]

Brilliant Clarification..>.I would say..Kudos for you

sir!It is hertening to hear from you...The way you

explained should remove all doubts on this matter..One

should always maintain the sanctity of our revered

mantras..We already have so many linient ways od

chanting and different prayogas but humming is sth

which is uncalled for..You infact can never be sure of

the tune...

 

 

I think in this mindblowing discussion,the crux of the

matter is that while mental chanting(manasik jaap) in

any condition is fine but these weired ways like

humming should not be resorted to.

 

Regards

Ravi Shreevastava

--- Sanjay Rath <guruji (AT) srath (DOT) com> wrote:

 

>

> | om gurave namah |

> Dear Narasimha

>

> POINT 1:

>

> I find it hard that your tradition is teaching that

> the Gayatri mantra

> should be *hummed* in the first place. In my

> tradition (Jagannath Puri) this

> amounts to a disrespect of the Mantra Devata. That

> is the reason why I

> cannot accept the humming. If you are allowed to

> give it, then give it.

> Don't do these things. If you have the heart of a

> Ramanujacarya then climb

> on top of the temple and shout *om namo

> naaraayanaaya* and then the world

> will know the mantra.

>

> In fact the world knows the mantra. Those who have

> to do it shall do it when

> they have to do it.

>

> As regards the mala, first you said that you have

> sent the mail to him and

> that were awaiting a reply. So, you did not get a

> reply or what you write

> below is your reply. Then it is fine. I take it that

> it what is taught in

> his/your tradition. Now why do you want a reply at

> all from me? Are you not

> satisfied with his teachings?

>

> It is well known that Rudraksha is for Shiva, Tulasi

> for Vishnu, Sveta arka

> for Ganesha, Sphatika (munda mala) for Devi, Rakta

> chandana for Surya and so

> on. In any case, Rudraksha is prohibited for Surya

> mantras and Tulasi is

> prohibited for Shiva Mantras. A person who offers

> Tulasi to Shiva will be

> destroyed...there is a lot more in our tradition and

> for this you will have

> to wait for my book. But how does it matter to you.

>

> -----------

>

> POINT 2:

>

> On the other issues of mantra shastra regarding the

> differences between

> Jagannath Puri tradition and Your Tradition (is that

> Maharashtra or London?)

>

> om namah shivaaya is the same as namah shivaaya as

> per your tradition or

> guru. Can I ask how? If you count the number of

> akshara in the mantra, it is

> six for om namah shivaaya and 5 for namah shivaaya.

> Is it not?

>

> So that people in Kali Yuga will not get this simple

> math regarding phoneme

> wrong, the great Tirumular wrote a whole book on the

> mantra 'namah

> shivaaya'...Thirumantram. Please read it and you

> will know which is

> Panchakshari and which is shadakshari.

>

> To remove your further doubts, which is the effect

> of Rahu, let me quote the

> two famous stotras. The Panchakshari Sotra and

> Shadakshari Stotra here.

>

> ------quote panchakshari (5 letter) stotra and

> mantra derivation-------

>

> nAgendrahArAya trilochanAya bhasmAN^garAgAya

> maheshvarAya |

> nityAya shuddhAya digambarAya tasmai nakArAya namaH

> shivAya ||

> 1||........the akshara 'na' is the starting letter

> of this sloka

> mandAkini\-salilachandana\-charchitAya

> nandIshvara\-pramathanAtha\- maheshvarAya |

> mandArapushhpa\-bahupushhpa\-supUjitAya

> tasmai makArAya namaH shivAya ||

> 2||.................................akshara

> 'ma' is the starting letter of this sloka

> shivAya gaurIvadanAbja\-vR^inda\-

> sUryAya dakshAdhvaranAshakAya |

> shrInIlakaNThAya vR^ishhadhvajAya

> tasmai shikArAya namaH shivAya ||

> 3||..............akshara 'shi' is the

> starting letter of this sloka

>

vasishhTha\-kumbhodbhava\-gautamAryamunIndra\-devArchitashekharAya

> |

> chandrArka\-vaishvAnaralochanAya tasmai vakArAya

> namaH shivAya ||

> 4||..............akshara 'va' is the starting

> letter of this sloka

> yakshasvarUpAya jaTAdharAya pinAkahastAya sanAtanAya

> |

> divyAya devAya digambarAya tasmai yakArAya namaH

> shivAya ||

> 5||..............akshara 'ya' is the starting

> letter of this sloka

> pa.nchAksharamidaM puNyaM yaH paThechchhivasannidhau

> |

> shivalokamavApnoti shivena saha modate

> ||..............put all the akshara

> together and get the mantra taught by Shankaracharya

> 'nama shivaya'

> .. iti shriimachchha.nkaraachaaryavirachita

> shivapaJNchaakshara stotraM

> samaaptaM..

>

> ------quote shadakshari (6 letter) stotra and mantra

> derivation-------

>

> OMkAraM bi.ndusa.nyuktaM nityaM dhyAya.nti yoginaH |

> kAmadaM mokShadaM chaiva OMkArAya namo namaH ||

> 1||........the akshara 'om'

> is the starting letter of this sloka

> nama.nti R^iShayo devA namantyapsarasAM gaNAH |

> narA nama.nti deveshaM nakArAya namo namaH ||

> 2||........the akshara 'na' is

> the starting letter of this sloka

> mahAdevaM mahAtmAnaM mahAdhyAnaM parAyaNam |

> mahApApaharaM devaM makArAya namo namaH ||

> 3||........the akshara 'ma' is

> the starting letter of this sloka

> shivaM shA.ntaM jagannAthaM lokAnugrahakArakam |

> shivamekapadaM nityaM shikArAya namo namaH ||

> 4||........the akshara 'shi'

> is the starting letter of this sloka

> vAhanaM vR^iShabho yasya vAsukiH ka.nThabhUShaNam |

> vAme shaktidharaM vedaM vakArAya namo namaH ||

> 5||........the akshara 'va'

> is the starting letter of this sloka

> yatra tatra sthito devaH sarvavyApI maheshvaraH |

> yo guruH sarvadevAnAM yakArAya namo namaH ||

> 6||........the akshara 'ya' is

> the starting letter of this sloka

> ShaDakSharamidaM stotraM yaH paThechchhivasa.nnidhau

> |

> shivalokamavApnoti shivena saha modate ||

> 7||.........put all the akshara

> together and get the mantra 'om nama shivaya'

> || iti shrI rudrayAmale umAmaheshvarasa.nvAde

> ShaDakSharastotraM saMpUrNam ||

>

> It is evident from the above that the panchakshari

> and shadakshari mantra

> are different. Now if you still have doubts, I can

> wait till say Feb 2007 to

> discuss this aspect again with you and will advise

> serious thinking and

> introspection till then. Thank you for this animated

> debate on mantra

> shastra.

>

> POINT 3: This is regarding the Gayatri to which I

> have a very clearcut

> answer and know at least 25 samputa or maybe more,

> but will reply to this

> privately as I am not willing to discuss this in

> Public. Swamiji said what

> he had to say. How you and I understand it is very

> different. We can talk on

> this in the west coast when we meet, but I cannot

> sya more in Public about

> the Gayatri.

>

> Best wishes and warm regards,

> Sanjay Rath

>

 

> Personal: <http://srath.com/blog/> WebPages ¡ü

> <http://srath.com/blog/>

> Rath¡Çs Rhapsody

> SJC WebPages: <http://.org/> Sri

> Jagannath Center ¡ü

> <http://sjcerc.com/> SJCERC ¡ü <http://jiva.us/>

> JIVA

> Publications: <http://thejyotishdigest.com/> The

> Jyotish Digest ¡ü

> <http://sagittariuspublications.com/> Sagittarius

> Publications

>

----

>

>

>

>

> _____

>

> sohamsa

> [sohamsa] On Behalf Of

> Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

> Wednesday, July 05, 2006 9:23 AM

> sjcBoston;

> ;

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

________

India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new

http://in.answers./

[Guest guest]

dear friends

 

unless this thread is an academic debate between two great gurus

like adi shankara and mandan mishra, i wish to submit few words in

my limited knowledge.

 

i fully appreciate and respect the decision of narasimhaji's

decision to share mantras (any mantra) only to a person whom he

feels deserving. in olden days, a son used to be the first

deserving person. but in many cases it is proved that it is the

DESERVING SHISHYA who get the mantras secrets revealed from the

guru. in the upanayana samskaram, the father is giving this mantra

to his son akin to a guru giving this mantra to his shishya. in

puranas, numerous references were given where it is mentioned that a

guru will give a mantra or share his knowlege only to a person whom

he feels deserving. dronacharya did not share the secrets of

archery to his own son and gave to other deserving shishyas. so

this tradition shall be respected as the discretionary privilege of

a guru and a shishya can only serve the guru till such time, the

guru gives these mantras on his own. a shishya cannot demand or

force a guru to give a mantra. if any person decides to chant any

mantra on his own, without knowing the right mantra, without knowing

the right pronounciation, no one stops him and he has the freedom to

do so. whether it gives the desired result or not depends on the

perfect manner. if an arya samaji recite it perfectly without any

guru, it is fair enough and he will reap the results of it. in

christianity, some think jesus is god, some think jesus is son of

god and some think jesus is the messenger of god but each respect

the other's tradition or belief without any imposition on other.

 

it is clearly written in shivapuran that doing japam of any mantra

with a rudraksha mala is the best. hence rudraksha mala is not

prohibited for chanting any mantra, rather it is put above par with

all other malas like pearls, corals, crystals etc.

 

with best wishes

pandit arjun

 

vedic astrology, "Sanjay Rath" <guruji

wrote:

>

>

> | om gurave namah |

> Dear Narasimha

>

> POINT 1:

>

> I find it hard that your tradition is teaching that the Gayatri

mantra

> should be *hummed* in the first place. In my tradition (Jagannath

Puri) this

> amounts to a disrespect of the Mantra Devata. That is the reason

why I

> cannot accept the humming. If you are allowed to give it, then

give it.

> Don't do these things. If you have the heart of a Ramanujacarya

then climb

> on top of the temple and shout *om namo naaraayanaaya* and then

the world

> will know the mantra.

>

> In fact the world knows the mantra. Those who have to do it shall

do it when

> they have to do it.

>

> As regards the mala, first you said that you have sent the mail to

him and

> that were awaiting a reply. So, you did not get a reply or what

you write

> below is your reply. Then it is fine. I take it that it what is

taught in

> his/your tradition. Now why do you want a reply at all from me?

Are you not

> satisfied with his teachings?

>

> It is well known that Rudraksha is for Shiva, Tulasi for Vishnu,

Sveta arka

> for Ganesha, Sphatika (munda mala) for Devi, Rakta chandana for

Surya and so

> on. In any case, Rudraksha is prohibited for Surya mantras and

Tulasi is

> prohibited for Shiva Mantras. A person who offers Tulasi to Shiva

will be

> destroyed...there is a lot more in our tradition and for this you

will have

> to wait for my book. But how does it matter to you.

>

> -----------

>

> POINT 2:

>

> On the other issues of mantra shastra regarding the differences

between

> Jagannath Puri tradition and Your Tradition (is that Maharashtra

or London?)

>

> om namah shivaaya is the same as namah shivaaya as per your

tradition or

> guru. Can I ask how? If you count the number of akshara in the

mantra, it is

> six for om namah shivaaya and 5 for namah shivaaya. Is it not?

>

> So that people in Kali Yuga will not get this simple math

regarding phoneme

> wrong, the great Tirumular wrote a whole book on the mantra 'namah

> shivaaya'...Thirumantram. Please read it and you will know which is

> Panchakshari and which is shadakshari.

>

> To remove your further doubts, which is the effect of Rahu, let me

quote the

> two famous stotras. The Panchakshari Sotra and Shadakshari Stotra

here.

>

> ------quote panchakshari (5 letter) stotra and mantra derivation---

----

>

> nAgendrahArAya trilochanAya bhasmAN^garAgAya maheshvarAya |

> nityAya shuddhAya digambarAya tasmai nakArAya namaH shivAya ||

> 1||........the akshara 'na' is the starting letter of this sloka

> mandAkini\-salilachandana\-charchitAya

> nandIshvara\-pramathanAtha\- maheshvarAya |

> mandArapushhpa\-bahupushhpa\-supUjitAya

> tasmai makArAya namaH shivAya ||

2||.................................akshara

> 'ma' is the starting letter of this sloka

> shivAya gaurIvadanAbja\-vR^inda\-

> sUryAya dakshAdhvaranAshakAya |

> shrInIlakaNThAya vR^ishhadhvajAya

> tasmai shikArAya namaH shivAya || 3||..............akshara 'shi'

is the

> starting letter of this sloka

> vasishhTha\-kumbhodbhava\-gautamAryamunIndra\-devArchitashekharAya

|

> chandrArka\-vaishvAnaralochanAya tasmai vakArAya namaH shivAya ||

> 4||..............akshara 'va' is the starting letter of this sloka

> yakshasvarUpAya jaTAdharAya pinAkahastAya sanAtanAya |

> divyAya devAya digambarAya tasmai yakArAya namaH shivAya ||

> 5||..............akshara 'ya' is the starting letter of this sloka

> pa.nchAksharamidaM puNyaM yaH paThechchhivasannidhau |

> shivalokamavApnoti shivena saha modate ||..............put all the

akshara

> together and get the mantra taught by Shankaracharya 'nama shivaya'

> .. iti shriimachchha.nkaraachaaryavirachita shivapaJNchaakshara

stotraM

> samaaptaM..

>

> ------quote shadakshari (6 letter) stotra and mantra derivation----

---

>

> OMkAraM bi.ndusa.nyuktaM nityaM dhyAya.nti yoginaH |

> kAmadaM mokShadaM chaiva OMkArAya namo namaH || 1||........the

akshara 'om'

> is the starting letter of this sloka

> nama.nti R^iShayo devA namantyapsarasAM gaNAH |

> narA nama.nti deveshaM nakArAya namo namaH || 2||........the

akshara 'na' is

> the starting letter of this sloka

> mahAdevaM mahAtmAnaM mahAdhyAnaM parAyaNam |

> mahApApaharaM devaM makArAya namo namaH || 3||........the

akshara 'ma' is

> the starting letter of this sloka

> shivaM shA.ntaM jagannAthaM lokAnugrahakArakam |

> shivamekapadaM nityaM shikArAya namo namaH || 4||........the

akshara 'shi'

> is the starting letter of this sloka

> vAhanaM vR^iShabho yasya vAsukiH ka.nThabhUShaNam |

> vAme shaktidharaM vedaM vakArAya namo namaH || 5||........the

akshara 'va'

> is the starting letter of this sloka

> yatra tatra sthito devaH sarvavyApI maheshvaraH |

> yo guruH sarvadevAnAM yakArAya namo namaH || 6||........the

akshara 'ya' is

> the starting letter of this sloka

> ShaDakSharamidaM stotraM yaH paThechchhivasa.nnidhau |

> shivalokamavApnoti shivena saha modate || 7||.........put all the

akshara

> together and get the mantra 'om nama shivaya'

> || iti shrI rudrayAmale umAmaheshvarasa.nvAde

> ShaDakSharastotraM saMpUrNam ||

>

> It is evident from the above that the panchakshari and shadakshari

mantra

> are different. Now if you still have doubts, I can wait till say

Feb 2007 to

> discuss this aspect again with you and will advise serious

thinking and

> introspection till then. Thank you for this animated debate on

mantra

> shastra.

>

> POINT 3: This is regarding the Gayatri to which I have a very

clearcut

> answer and know at least 25 samputa or maybe more, but will reply

to this

> privately as I am not willing to discuss this in Public. Swamiji

said what

> he had to say. How you and I understand it is very different. We

can talk on

> this in the west coast when we meet, but I cannot sya more in

Public about

> the Gayatri.

>

> Best wishes and warm regards,

> Sanjay Rath

>

> Personal: <http://srath.com/blog/> WebPages ¡ü

<http://srath.com/blog/>

> Rath¡Çs Rhapsody

> SJC WebPages: <http://.org/> Sri Jagannath Center ¡ü

> <http://sjcerc.com/> SJCERC ¡ü <http://jiva.us/> JIVA

> Publications: <http://thejyotishdigest.com/> The Jyotish Digest ¡ü

> <http://sagittariuspublications.com/> Sagittarius Publications

> -

---

>

>

>

>

> _____

>

> sohamsa [sohamsa] On

Behalf Of

> Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

> Wednesday, July 05, 2006 9:23 AM

> sjcBoston; ;

> sohamsa; vedic astrology

> Re: Gayatri Mantra: Text with Very Bad (to

Sanjay)

>

>

>

> Dear Sanjay,

>

> > Then why is it that you are humming something and calling it

gayatri

> mantra

> > and not recording the gayatri mantra. What you are humming is

NOT gayatri

> > mantra. If you want, then record the Gayatri mantra but don;t do

such

> things

> > as after 100 years, people will say that this hamm-hum-heem-haam

is the

> > *real gayatri mantra* as Narasimha said so. So throw this out

right now.

>

> Of course, what I hummed is not "real Gayatri mantra". It was the

naada/tune

> of reading the Gayatri mantra with intonation. One would have to

apply the

> ups, downs and stresses in that humming to the text in the JPG I

gave, add

> the Om's at the beginning and end and construct the "real Gayatri

mantra".

> Anybody who read my mail fully would have known this.

>

> I am not spoon-feeding and not giving the Gayatri itself in audio

form

> directly due to certain beliefs of our tradition, which apparently

you

> cannot respect. Unfortunate.

>

> When a father gives Gayatri mantra to son in Upanayanam ceremony,

they make

> him whisper it in his ears so that other people in the audience

cannot hear

> it. Why don't they make him say it loud so that everyone hears?

This

> tradition is not without a reason.

>

> Though I did not spoon-feed, what I provided (mantra text and

intonation

> markings in JPEG form, instructions on prefixes, suffixes and

repetition in

> TEXT form and humming in MP3 form) is sufficient for anyone

interested to

> reconstruct everything and get going.

>

> * * *

>

> > Did you ask him about the reason as to why he has asked you to

use

> rudraksha

> > mala for the gayatri when it is well known that this is for

Shiva mantra.

>

> Let me throw the question back at you: Which scripture says that

Rudraksha

> mala should be used only for Shiva mantras?

>

> According to my guru, Gayatri mantra can be read using several

kinds of

> malas. Based on the mala used, the experience obtained varies

according to

> him.

>

> In any case, Savitri Gayatri is a mantra that is for a form of Sun

and Shiva

> is associated with Sun. Speaking at a different level, Savitri

Gayatri

> mantra is for realizing the all pervading Atman. If I consider

Shiva as

> Satya or all-pervading Brahman and Shakti as the manifestation

into various

> forms, Savitri Gayatri mantra IS a Shiva mantra, of the highest

form of

> Shiva.

>

> When one finds who one considers to be a Sadguru and starts

experiencing

> indescribable ananda in his sadhana, one stops being pedantic and

leaves it

> to Guru. If my spiritual guru blesses a mala made of haystackballs

or

> mudballs or stones and gives it to me to use in my sadhana, I will

gladly

> use it.

>

> Of course, one can ask me why I am being pedantic about intonation

then.

> Well, if you are happy with the way you are reading it, I always

said to

> please ignore my writings in this matter! I am writing for those

who were

> taught Gayatri long back and forgot because they stopped

practicing it and

> are looking for some guidance to restart. I can only give guidance

based on

> my own practice.

>

> > 1. You are aware that the Gayatri chandah has 24 syllables or

sounds?

>

> Of course.

>

> > 2. That Maharishi Vishwamitra informed the world about this

mantra with

> the

> > 24 sounds that is recorded exactly in the Rig Veda Mandala

III.62.10

>

> Yes, it starts with "tatsaviturvarenyam" and ends

with "prachodayaat".

>

> The intonation markings (horizontal lines under letters and

single/double

> vertical lines above letters) are also part of the Vedic text.

>

> > 3. That if you add any other sound to this mantra, then the

total number

> > would increase beyond the 24 sound. Would it still be Gayatri

chandah

> after

> > you add two sounds before and after the mantra? If yes then what

is the

> > meaning of gayatri chandah? If not then what are you supposed to

do to

> > ensure that the 24 sound scheme does not break? Have you done

that?

>

> It is simply your assumption that Om at the beginning and/or end

of a mantra

> increases the number of letters in the mantra. Om at the beginning

and Om at

> the end are not part of the mantra. They are like a preface and

conclusion

> to the mantra.

>

> Swami Vivekananda also taught to say Om, then the Gayatri mantra

and then Om

> again, in his book "Rajayoga".

>

> "Om Namassivaaya" may be considered a 6-lettered mantra by you

because of

> Om, but we consider it a 5-lettered mantra (Panchakshari - Na Ma

Ssi Vaa Ya)

>

> When they do homam, they add "swaha" to the mantras. But, again,

that does

> not change the chhandas. For example, there are shlokas in

Gayatri, Ushnik

> and Anushtup metres in Durga Saptashati. Before "Chandi homam",

the above

> list of metres is read out. When the shlokas are read later, 2

letters

> "Swaha" are added to several shlokas. If you consider them to be a

part of

> the shlokas, the metres are all broken due to 2 extra letters. But

that is

> not how it works.

>

> Certain prefixes and suffixes added to mantras remain as prefixes

and

> suffixes and do not become part of the mantra.

>

> > 4. Which mala is to be used for the gayatri? Why is the

Rudraksha NEVER to

> > be used for the gayatri mantra? Why has your Guru asked you to

use the

> > Rudraksha and from which scripture did he get the reference for

this

> > deviation?

>

> Mantra Mahodadhi talks about various malas and says that mantras

read with

> Rudraksha mala and Tulasi mala become infinitely more potent. It

does not

> say only Shiva mantras or only Vishnu mantras. Thus, it seems like

either

> can be used for any mantra to make it more potent.

>

> In fact, I know several people apart from my guru who use

Rudraksha mala

> with Gayatri.

>

> What mala should be used with Gayatri according to you?

>

> On a different note, more than the kind of mala used, I think that

the

> person, place and time associated with the preparation of the mala

are far

> more important. Of course, all these may not matter in the long

run, after

> one's sadhana has progressed beyond certain level. But, in the

short run,

> until one reaches that level, all these mundane factors may matter.

>

>

> Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> Narasimha

> -------------------------------

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> -------------------------------

>

> > | om gurave namah |

> > Dear Narasimha

> >

> > ok you have clarified that loud chanting is very fine and that

is what is

> to

> > be done in the Yajya and the agnihotri.

> >

> > Then why is it that you are humming something and calling it

gayatri

> mantra

> > and not recording the gayatri mantra. What you are humming is

NOT gayatri

> > mantra. If you want, then record the Gayatri mantra but don;t do

such

> things

> > as after 100 years, people will say that this hamm-hum-heem-haam

is the

> > *real gayatri mantra* as Narasimha said so. So throw this out

right now.

> >

> > Did you ask him about the reason as to why he has asked you to

use

> rudraksha

> > mala for the gayatri when it is well known that this is for

Shiva mantra.

> >

> > Second point about right intonation -

> >

> > 1. You are aware that the Gayatri chandah has 24 syllables or

sounds?

> >

> > 2. That Maharishi Vishwamitra informed the world about this

mantra with

> the

> > 24 sounds that is recorded exactly in the Rig Veda Mandala

III.62.10

> >

> > 3. That if you add any other sound to this mantra, then the

total number

> > would increase beyond the 24 sound. Would it still be Gayatri

chandah

> after

> > you add two sounds before and after the mantra? If yes then what

is the

> > meaning of gayatri chandah? If not then what are you supposed to

do to

> > ensure that the 24 sound scheme does not break? Have you done

that?

> >

> > 4. Which mala is to be used for the gayatri? Why is the

Rudraksha NEVER to

> > be used for the gayatri mantra? Why has your Guru asked you to

use the

> > Rudraksha and from which scripture did he get the reference for

this

> > deviation?

> > Best wishes and warm regards,

> > Sanjay Rath

> >

> > Dear Sanjay,

> >

> > > ...and please do not compare

> > > Thakur to your new spiritual master. You will do all of us a

big favor

> by

> > > that.

> >

> > Did I compare??

> >

> > I merely gave an *example* to show that a spiritual master is not

> > necessarily the one who taught Gayatri first and to counter your

claim

> that

> > "anybody else, whether a crow or a human being is just a NIMITTA

and not a

> > spiritual master." Whether X is my spiritual master or not is

between me

> and

> > X and not anybody else's business.

> >

> > Also, please realize that you are speaking about a person you

know nothing

> > about. He *could* be the re-incarnation of Swami Vivekananda for

example

> (I

> > am not saying he is). You simply have no idea.

> >

> > Your unprovoked circasm about a person you don't know, when I am

calmly

> > minding my business, is surprising to me.

> >

> > > You are again assuming things that the Gayatri diksha alone is

the one

> > thing

> > > that can give moksha.

> >

> > I did not say it. I guess it is in my karma today to be

misinterpreted...

> >

> > Also, I did not prohibit loud chanting. I said I personally want

to chant

> > without vaikhari due to certain beliefs which I mentioned. I did

not say

> > loud chanting is bad. I am being misrepresented there also.

> >

> > Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> > Narasimha

> > -------------------------------

> > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

> > -------------------------------

> >

> > > | om gurave namah |

> > > Dear Narasimha

> > >

> > > You are again assuming things that the Gayatri diksha alone is

the one

> > thing

> > > that can give moksha. That is wrong and hence this statement.

The giver

> of

> > > the Gayatri is one and most important Guru and this is given

in every

> > > lineage by the parents or family among the brahmins.

> > >

> > > That example you give is quite off the mark. Ramakrishna did

not get the

> > > Gayatri from Totapuri Maharaj but got it at a much younger

age. He may

> > have

> > > got the sanyaasa Gayatri form him which is different. In fact

there are

> so

> > > many types of Gayatri's. So do not try to divert the point by

saying

> that

> > > Abhedananda did not know his spiritual master. ...and please

do not

> > compare

> > > Thakur to your new spiritual master. You will do all of us a

big favor

> by

> > > that.

> > >

> > > I continue to state that you have done something very wrong by

humming

> the

> > > mantra and if you want to put it in the web or in any media

you should

> > have

> > > chanted it and put it there as you did earlier with the

mrityunjaya

> > mantra.

> > > Rest is your problem.

> > >

> > > Also try to learn about the use of malas with the Gayatri

mantra

> (savitur

> > > gayatri to be precise).

> > >

> > > To all in the lists,

> > >

> > > Also so that people may not be shocked any further by your

statements,

> > there

> > > is no obstruction to reciting the Gayatri as given in the rig

veda.

> Please

> > > go ahead and do this. Don't listen to all this medieval

brahminism about

> > > right and wrong ways to do the gayatri. None was born an

expert and I am

> > > pretty sure that the temples in India have remained as pure if

not pure

> > till

> > > date due to the loud chanting of the mantras.

> > >

> > > if you want to her it loudly or in any manner, please go ahead

and hear

> > it.

> > > If gayatri was played in all government offices in India at

least in a

> low

> > > volume, corruption would come down to nil. Rhoda I hope that

answers

> your

> > > query.

> > >

> > > Do mantras as advised by your guru and that will depend on

your own

> > > spiritual development. Mantras must be done loudly initially

to become

> one

> > > with the mantra devata at the physical level. Thereafter it

will go

> > inwards

> > > naturally.

> > >

> > > Please pass this on to all lists where this was circulated.

> > >

> > > Best wishes and warm regards,

> > > Sanjay Rath

>

> > >

> > > > Dear Sanjay,

> > > >

> > > > > I just questioned you whether you had your fathers

permission,

> > > > > who is the giver of the gayatri to you. Anybody else,

whether a

> > > > > crow or a human being is just a NIMITTA and not a

spiritual master.

> > > >

>

> > > > It will be appropriate to trust a person to know his

spiritual master.

> One

> > > > will be ill-advised to go to Swami Vivekananda or Swami

Abhedanda or

> > > > Swami Akhandananda and tell him that Ramakrishna Paramahamsa

is

> > > > not his spiritual master because Gayatri was first given by

someone

> else!

> > > >

> > > > In fact, my spiritual guru does consider himself to be just

a nimitta.

> > > > But that is his humility.

> > > >

> > > > If you say everyone who guides after the first giving of

Gayatri is

> "just a

> > > > NIMITTA", one can consider even the giver of first Gayatri

to be a

> nimitta.

> > > > At one level, everything IS a nimitta. But we normally don't

speak at

> that

> > > > level.

> > > >

> > > > > I have no objection to your sharing the mantra as written

and this

> is

> > > > > a very good thing to do. There is something very very

wrong in

> > > > > 'humming the mantra' as then you are actually doing the

mantra with

> > > > > the DAMANA VIJA and this is very bad. It would have been

much

> > > > > better and correct if you had actually sung the mantra (in

whatever

> > > > > intonation you think is right or in whatever manner you

feel is

> > > > > correct) and put it in the web or given to others.

> > > > >

> > > > > Respect the mantra please and I am also lodging this wrong

> > > > > teaching protest against your spiritual teacher as well.

> > > >

> > > > I will pass on your protest to him.

> > > >

> > > > Sarvam SreeKrishnaarpanamastu,

> > > > Narasimha

>

>

>

>

>

> _____

>

> avast! <http://www.avast.com> Antivirus: Outbound message clean.

>

>

> Virus Database (VPS): 0627-1, 07/05/2006

> Tested on: 7/5/2006 5:23:29 PM

> avast! - copyright © 1988-2006 ALWIL Software.

>

>

>

>

> _____

>

> avast! Antivirus <http://www.avast.com> : Outbound message clean.

>

>

> Virus Database (VPS): 0627-1, 07/05/2006

> Tested on: 7/6/2006 9:41:52 AM

> avast! - copyright © 1988-2006 ALWIL Software.

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Pranaam Guru deva

Pleae pardon my ignorance. I do beleive you when you

said the following but am interested in knowing the

reason as I beleive usage of various malas are

secondary (possibly to keep the count or number of

times the mantra is recited.) The main thing is to

recite the mantra for what ever deity, and the phala

is based on how and what you recite, sincerity with

which you recite and the number of times to attain

siddhi.

I also had unknowingly used rudraksha mala while doing

Savitur gayatri and now that you have mentioned it, I

would like to know the reason.

 

Thanks for your time.

 

Lakshman

> It is well known that Rudraksha is for Shiva, Tulasi

> for Vishnu, Sveta arka

> for Ganesha, Sphatika (munda mala) for Devi, Rakta

> chandana for Surya and so

> on. In any case, Rudraksha is prohibited for Surya

> mantras and Tulasi is

> prohibited for Shiva Mantras. A person who offers

> Tulasi to Shiva will be

> destroyed...there is a lot more in our tradition and

> for this you will have

> to wait for my book.