Veda and the Tune, Word

[Guest guest]

Namaste All.

 

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the

Word was God. [John 1:1-2]

 

It is interesting to note that, phonetically, 'Word' and 'Veda' seem

to sound similar.

 

Replacing 'Word' with 'Veda' in the above, we have:-

'In the beginning was the Veda, and the Veda was with God, and the

Veda was God.'

 

When Veda is chanted, we have a particular way to chant. 'Metre' in

this case takes precedance over contents, meaning and semantics.

 

The specific way Veda is chanted with its metre, just wondering

whether there is something more significant in the chant alone,

ignoring the beauty of chanting and semantics altogether. (Question

#1)

 

John mentions 'Word' and not the details or the semantics of the

'Word'. Just wondering why. (Question #2).

 

Wish you all a happy new year-2003.

 

Regards,

Raghava

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "raghavakaluri <raghavakaluri>"

<raghavakaluri> wrote:

> Namaste All.

>

> In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the

> Word was God. [John 1:1-2]

>

> It is interesting to note that, phonetically, 'Word' and 'Veda'

seem

> to sound similar.

 

Namaste,

 

John was an Essene mystic. Veda comes from Vid or Vaak. Word in

ancient times was probably pronounced vord or vort. Its all indo-

european language anyway.

 

John was probably writing to other Early Christians and Essenes,

hence the lack of in depth explanation. They were already in the

know.....ONS....IMO....Tony.

[Guest guest]

Dear Respected Ragjhav-Ji:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was

with God, and the Word was God. [John 1:1-2]

 

It is interesting to note that, phonetically, 'Word' and 'Veda' seem

to sound similar.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

 

All our mantras always begin with "OM". Although "OM" itself is not

literally found in the R^igveda text.

 

The purpose of such invocation is expressed in the following shloka -

 

OM kaarashcaatha shabdashca dvavatau brahmaNaH puraa . ka.nTha.m

bhitvaa vinairyaatau tasmaanmaa.ngalikaavubhau ..

 

That "WORD" was with God and it resided in his "kaNTha" (where the

sounds originate from). That is why we say OM or atha at the

beginning of all rituals.

 

Importance of the correct pronunciation can not be overstressed,

especially to to this Advita list, because every one knows that a

slight change in the svara can totally change the meaning of the

words.

 

paaNIni shixaa tell us -

 

anaxara.m hataayuShyaM vissvaraM visvaraM vyaadhipiiDitam |

axataa shastra ruupeNa vajraM patati mastake || 53 ||

 

All our vedic knowledge was transferred to the next generation by the

word of mouth. Therefore correct pronunciation is extremely critical

to convey the correct meaning.

 

That is why OM is invoked at the beginning of all rituals.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

It is interesting to note that, phonetically, 'Word' and 'Veda' seem

to sound similar. Replacing 'Word' with 'Veda' in the above, we have:-

'In the beginning was the Veda, and the Veda was with God, and the

Veda was God.' <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

 

I would go a step further by saying that "WORD" is not Veda, but the

knowledge of that sound is veda. vedaanaama saama vedosmi.

 

Try to be aware of the original where everything began with.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Regards,

 

Dr. Yadu

 

 

 

advaitin, "raghavakaluri <raghavakaluri>"

<raghavakaluri> wrote:

> Namaste All.

>

> In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the

> Word was God. [John 1:1-2]

>

> It is interesting to note that, phonetically, 'Word' and 'Veda'

seem

> to sound similar.

>

> Replacing 'Word' with 'Veda' in the above, we have:-

> 'In the beginning was the Veda, and the Veda was with God, and the

> Veda was God.'

>

> When Veda is chanted, we have a particular way to chant. 'Metre' in

> this case takes precedance over contents, meaning and semantics.

>

> The specific way Veda is chanted with its metre, just wondering

> whether there is something more significant in the chant alone,

> ignoring the beauty of chanting and semantics altogether. (Question

> #1)

>

> John mentions 'Word' and not the details or the semantics of the

> 'Word'. Just wondering why. (Question #2).

>

> Wish you all a happy new year-2003.

>

> Regards,

> Raghava

[Guest guest]

--- ymoharir <ymoharir wrote:

>

> I would go a step further by saying that "WORD" is

> not Veda, but the

> knowledge of that sound is veda. vedaanaama saama

> vedosmi.

>

> Try to be aware of the original where everything

> began with.

>

 

 

Namaste Dr Yadu,

Sorry, but I only picked this up after sending my own

reply.

You are right, of course, although could we be

pedantic and query the accuracy of 'began with' in

relation to Om?

 

One thing that I did not mention earlier is that the

word silence is closely linked to stillness

etymologically. All of which is getting away from the

concept of Om. So it is better to keep with that and

the knowledge of the sound of the Veda.

 

Best wishes

 

ken knight

 

 

=====

‘From this Supreme Self are all these, indeed, breathed forth.’

 

 

 

 

 

 

Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger.

http://messenger./