Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 Dear Narasimhaye Ji yes agree......to debate or not to debate.......to discuss or not to discuss.....whatever words used for the method of communication designated this is just what I was getting at......everyone has their own way of doing things and their own systems of worship.....and this is a good......... discussion........ however to mention a couple of things that dont sound exactly right The Priests at the MahaGanapati Temple in Mumbai pronounce Gum as you say in chewing gum......they record this sound as such and it certainly doesnt mean grief......since there are many different meanings for same word in Sanskrit the context of the meaning of Gum in the Lord Ganesha Mantra may mean exactly the opposite...........that is saveing from grief............ and I have heard of no one who has complained that they have not gotten misleading results from chanting Aum Gum Ganapatayei Namaha so I cant comment on this.......In the book Healing Mantras it sums up the meaning of the Bij Mantra Gum quite clearly This is the masculine seed for Ganapathi, an energy of the benevolent elephant headed God Ganesha, which removes obstacles and brings success in endeavors. To remove obstacles repeat the seed mantra Gum for a few days until you are comfortable with it. Then move to the mantra Aum Gum Ganapatayei Namaha which means Aum and salutations to the remover of obstacles for which Gum is the seed This description of Bija Mantra Gum certainly does not instill grief in the persons life who chants......it does exactly the opposite....it removes grief or obstacles and to date I have found no literature that says the Bij Mantra Gum does anything else....another difficulty with transliteration is that some words in sanskrit can have opposite meanings depending on how they are used in the context of the mantra or sentence If you can find any book or a Holy Book that says Gum brings grief to the chanter it would be good to see where this is comeing from....as an aside when I was in India in 2001 we went to a Hare Krishna Compound in Mumbai and I found it odd that Lord Ganesha was not represented in the temple of Gods and Goddesses.....was told later when in the US that they did not worship Lord Ganesha and I was more than surprised to hear of such a thing..... as recently most of the organization has gone bankrupt and they have been accused of child abuse within their organization....so althouth the Hare Krisha worship Lord Narasimha they left out Lord Ganesha and as a result it seems that is not a wise thing to do As said before we are all saying about the same thing only that we come from different areas of learning......for example I have never seen the bij mantra Gung spelled as such in Devanagari Script that is Sanskrit.....is not spelled in this way on the Yantras of Lord Ganesha either..........if you have found some documentation on this bij mantra spelled in Devanagari Letters as Gung I would like to know where it is so I can see it..........Any ceremony or Puja I have been to on this side of world with priests from northern or southern India pronounce the mantra as Gum dureing Puja.....in addition the only bij mantra for Lord Ganesha I have seen to date besides Gum...... is spelled as Glaum...... and have only seen this spelled in Roman script........Aum Gum Glaum MahaGanapatayei Namaha....so this is another bij mantra for Lord Ganesha that I have yet to find in Devanagari Spelling Another difficulty is that it well known if the chanter chants the mantra in an incorrect manner they produce sounds that are not of their original intent......so if one chants the mantras with a sound that is not what is intended for outcome then the sincerity doesnt mantter......they dont get what they intended to obtain with their prayers........It takes years of chanting and being educated by Teachers for Priests to be able to correctly chant for specific Accomplishment.......so what you said about being sincere and not necessarily getting the words right is not correct.....it doesnt work.......as an example say I chant plate plate plate because I need a plate to eat on however if the pronounciation is a little off the universe will give what the person is chanting..........instead of plate chanter got table to eat on.......so in this example the chanter got the words .......to eat on correct however the item was not chanted correctly and instead of plate to eat on there was produced a table.....no matter the sincerity of devotion if one does not get the communcation gap right there will be uncertain results............since so many traditions teach precision of pronounciation in this manner I can only conclude that you are wrong in this matter.........is like a sincerly devoute person useing the wrong bij mantras for different Devas.......and then wondering why the results gotten were not the ones intended Specific to Shakti the basic understanding of self empowerment and fearless life teaches that each person has Upa Guru and Siva and Shakti within themselves as do each of the Devas and there really is no need to add any extra shakti to their lives by going through mother to get to son..that is what self empowerment is all about...to be able to accomplish by way of ones own combination of Siva and Shakti that is already one within and without adding from outside their original blueprint of Siva and Shakti so to speak......go straight to the source that is Shiva and you will be working with the most compact finite use of energy for accomplishment that exists because all is included in Shiva Example of going straight to source would be Sri Mahatma Gandhi who continually repeated Ram Ram Ram Ram Ram Ram as his choice of most finite energy to Accomplish........he reduced the power to its most finite egergy and was successful am fairly certain we are all on same major path and because we are all so different we all have different unique ways of expressing ourselves so any way you wish to express yourself will work for you even though each individual may express their own needs in a different manner..........it all works as long as one is correctly chanting the words that attract the Devas To show how different all these different paths have become.......as one example......... some spell OM as Aum and means the same however if you go back far enough in studying Mantra Science you will see representations of Aum spelled as AOM in prayers based from the Ramayana Akara Okara Makara Bijadiya meaning the highest spelling and pronounciation of Aum actually started out as AOM your comments on this would be most interesting Wishing you and Family the Best DD , narasimhaye <no_reply wrote: > > > Sri Dharma Dev, thank you for your educational message but may I digress > with a few parts. Please note this is not a debate but rather to assist > friends in gaining a better understanding who come from differrent > backgrounds and traditional religious lineages: > > > , rudracenter > <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Again by chanting Sri Anjanaayaya Namaha means that the son of > > Anjanaa is being honored by respecting the Mother.... > > The Mother is the Shakti. When a person honors the Mother as well as the > Son, the potency is stronger. This mantra is further enhanced by Shakti > aspect. Kinda also like paying respects to elders before younger > people. Rank and file in a sense. > > By useing a > > word or words for a Devi that are meant to be part of a larger > > Astotara or Chalisa then one is kind of leaveing out all the other > > aspects of the Deva......... > > Not so becos both are honored at same time, Deva and Devi. > > Is best to refer to Lord Hanuman as Lord > > Hanuman and then you have all powers of Lord Hanuman in one > > chanting.......... > > Agree absolutely for persons who feel attuned to doing this way. > > by addressing Lord Hanuman as Lord Ajaneya one is only appealing to the > son by way of the Mother. > > When Son is appealed to by way of Mother or Shakti, the Shakti supports > and empowers the mantra even more. Shakti is Omnipresent and Pervades > all realms. > > > > The difficulty I have found with anyone only speaking about Lord > > Anjaneya is that it only refers to one aspect of the total Lord > > Hanuman enegy so why not just go to the source and chant Aum Sri > > Hanumate Namaha > > Again agree, but only for those who are inclined or attuned to chanting > this particular mantra. If one wants more potency and only wants to > appeal to the Deva aspect, then the adding of Aum at the end of this > mantra will empower it further too. > > > >Gum Gum Gum Gum and you are includeing > > all the is Lord Ganesha > > Gum and Gam are technically traditionally correct, yet wrong. But then > there is no right or wrong if the chanter recites with sincere devotion. > Gum, Gum, Gum as in pronunciation "chewing gum" means "Grief, Grief, > Grief" when spoken verbally. In verbal pronunciation, correct sound is > GuNg. In silent chanting "Gum or Gam" are fine. Imagine someone who > goes "Om Gum (Grief) Ganapataye Namaha" -- the person therefore is > asking Ganapthi to bring grief, instead of removing obstacles. This is > why some people say they get no results but more strife in their lives > after praying to Lord Ganapathi ) > > > > There is lot of room for debate on this however from what I have > > studied I simply dont see Lord Hanuman as Lord Anjaneya because > > chanting to HIM as Lord Anjaneya is like leaveing out all his other > > aspects > > With all due respect, no debate here, not debating here. Just to share > a few tidbits: Every person has the right to see what he or she wants > to see or believe in. We all respect one another's beliefs and > religious backgrounds. I sincerely respect yours too. But chanting to > Hanuman as Anjaneya does not leave out all His other aspects, it > empowers all those other aspects instead. > > > > hope this makes some sort of sense.........it is most fruitful to > > concentrate on one aspect of any Devas Energy be chanting one of > > their many aspects however why stop there and limit oneself.....why > > not go to the source itself > > Devas would not come into existence without the efforts of Devis. > Mothers (Shakti or Devi) are the ones who gave birth (existence) to > Devas. Hence there is also no Shiva without Shakti. Its kinda like > Shiva is Rudraksh and the electromagnetic properties are Shakti, the > "subtle life force". > > > > this is only ones understanding........there is always room for > > other understanding > > Thanks sincerely for saying there is always room for other > understanding. That's where I'm coming from: "other understanding". > > Ommmmm > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.