Gayatri Mantra: Text with Very Bad ...TO ALL

[Guest guest]

Dear Friends,

The on going discussion on Chanting of Gayatri Mantra and other previous topics is slowly beginning to look like "oneupmanship" to my eyes. May be I am wrong and senile.

If I am wrong...please proceed with the arguements.

My humble view is " A child might cry in the same manner " at any given point of time in the day or night.

But the "MOTHER" knows the problem and understands the child's needs. She then proceeds to do the needful.

The meaning of the crying is totally understood by her.

Same way, If a Mantra is done/uttered/hummed/sung/read/thought about/musically set to meter and sung...with pure heart, the Devata of the Mantra will understand your needs.And Devi/Devata will respond positively.

It does not matter if you to Mara...Mara...Mara or ...Rama...Rama...Rama..

So let us keep this in our minds and proceed with the life.There are many miles to cover.

Tatvam-Asi

Just see that you surrender your ego fully and do the japa/singing/chanting of a mantra.

 

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; ;

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]

Dear Tatvam-Asi

 

Thank you,

I fully agree with you. Although a lot of good has

come out of these healthy and entirely peacful

discussions, for the benefit of ignorant souls like

me, it is now slowly drifting towards "oneupmanship".

 

Atma

 

--- Tatvam-Asi <nameisego > wrote:

 

> Dear Friends,

>

> The on going discussion on Chanting of Gayatri

> Mantra and other previous topics is slowly beginning

> to look like "oneupmanship" to my eyes. May be I am

> wrong and senile.

> If I am wrong...please proceed with the

> arguements.

>

> My humble view is " A child might cry in the same

> manner " at any given point of time in the day or

> night.

>

> But the "MOTHER" knows the problem and understands

> the child's needs. She then proceeds to do the

> needful.

>

> The meaning of the crying is totally understood by

> her.

>

> Same way, If a Mantra is

> done/uttered/hummed/sung/read/thought

> about/musically set to meter and sung...with pure

> heart, the Devata of the Mantra will understand your

> needs.And Devi/Devata will respond positively.

> It does not matter if you to Mara...Mara...Mara

> or ...Rama...Rama...Rama.

> So let us keep this in our minds and proceed with

> the life.There are many miles to cover.

>

> Tatvam-Asi

>

>

> Just see that you surrender your ego fully and do

> the japa/singing/chanting of a mantra.

>

>

>

> 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.

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

_________

All New Mail – Tired of Vi@gr@! come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you. http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html