Guest Melvin1 Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 How would you feel if your name is mispelled? For example my name Melvin was mispelled as Mhelvin. This would mean that there are two persons in one, Melvin and Mhelvin. Yah. Yah. I know. The philosophy of acintya beda beda tattva come into play regarding this matter. But let us respect Krsna by not referring Him as Krishna ( Blind ones are not even excused). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primate Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Actually it's Kṛṣṇa or कृष्ण (BTW, if you see any 'squares' in the above text, then your browser doesn't support the font used.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Melvin1 Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Actually it's Kṛṣṇa or कृष्ण (BTW, if you see any 'squares' in the above text, then your browser doesn't support the font used.) Nope. I don`t see any squares in the above text. My browser maybe doesn`t like the font used by Theist`s text ( the thread on Mahabharata). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonic Yogi Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 Melvin, if you ever bothered to study the Sanskrit pronunciation guide in the back of Srila Prabhupada's books you would know that the s in Krsna has a dot under it which means that it is pronounced in English as (sh). So, when Sanskrit diacritic marks aren't used as in Kṛṣṇa most people would not properly pronounce it as Krsna. Without diacritic marks the most accurate way to write कृष्ण in English is Krishna. If it is written without diacritical marks as Krsna it looks as if it says Kurzna. Kurzna is not the Holy Name. In English it is most accurately written as "Krishna". So, your spelling as Krsna is not accruate as it does not have the necessary diacritical marks to show that the r is like ri and the s is like sh. So, your spelling as Krsna is not correct. It doesn't have the necessary diacritical marks to show proper pronunciation. Without diacritical marks the name of Kṛṣṇa is more accurately spelled in English as Krishna. In the English dictionary it is found as Krishna not as Krsna. If you do a search for Krsna in the English dictionary (Webster) you get a result that the word is not found. If you search for Krishna in the English dictionary you will get: <input name="book" value="Dictionary" type="hidden"> <input name="quer" value="Krishna" type="hidden"> <input name="jump" type="hidden"> <input name="list" value="va:3,0,0,0|Krishna=88823515|Krishna[2]=201957006|Hare Krishna=2072609320" type="hidden"> <dl><dt class="hwrd">Main Entry:</dt><dd class="hwrd">Krish·na </dd><dt class="pron">Pronunciation:</dt><dd class="pron"> \ˈkrish-nə, ˈkrēsh-\ </dd><dt class="func">Function:</dt><dd class="func">noun </dd><dt class="ety">Etymology:</dt><dd class="ety">Sanskrit Kṛṣṇa</dd><dt class="date">Date:</dt><dd class="date">1864</dd></dl> : a deity or deified hero of later Hinduism worshipped as an incarnation of Vishnu Actually, Kṛṣṇa, as I copied and pasted it from Primate's post is not the proper spelling with diacritical marks, because it has a dot under the *a when the dot should be under the *r. So, when I copied and pasted the name from Primate's post I ended up making a mistake. I just found a strange anomaly. When I copied and pasted Krsna from the vedabase.net it changed the diacritical mark on the *r and moved it over to the *a. That must be what happened when Primate tried to post the spelling in his first post on this topic. The dot is supposed to be under the *r and not the *a, but when you copy and paste it from vedabase it changes it and moved the dot to the *a. I wonder if that is some error in the font the browser is using for the diacritical? The only way I can manage to show it properly is by showing this image because I can't get the font to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primate Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 I see that I (primate) am now designated as the starter of this thread. The starter of this thread, however, is Melvin1 I also notice that the font-size of my post #2 has been changed to a larger size! What's up? Edit: OK, that's much better. The larger font-size is fine with me.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sambya Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 the last part of the word krishna has a short ' A ' . its not pronounced as krishnAA as many in india and abroad do . krishnAA is another name of durga and also a name of draupadi because she was dark in colour . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sant Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 कृष्ण Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranjeetmore Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 It doesn't matter in the least. Vrajvasis call Dwaraka as Dwarika Vridavana as Vridaban Nrsimha as Nrsingha. And yet it is found that the innocent vrajavasis who infuse much more devotion in the calling out of such names,attain to the same fruit more quickly. You massively ignore the fact that Sri Krsna is paramatma.He is noting down every thing.If some great devotee is calling Him as "Shukara !" with love,He will immediately accept it.Some scholars who give organised lectures on Geeta,call Him as Krsna,still they remain in darkness. Love for Godhead is the underlying factor of all that is related to Bhakti-marga.What you propose is the subject of panditya discussions.They are tasteless to the pure bhaktas(Please don't take offence neither think that I am indirectly referring to myself as a pure bhakta). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonic Yogi Posted April 19, 2009 Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 It doesn't matter in the least. Ok, so let's just chant Kakadoodoo and everything is all the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranjeetmore Posted April 19, 2009 Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 you dnt get me. shukara bhagavan literally means boar God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sant Posted April 19, 2009 Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 कृष्ण write this in english the best way and youve got his name i guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonic Yogi Posted April 19, 2009 Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 Actually, Kṛṣṇa, as I copied and pasted it from Primate's post is not the proper spelling with diacritical marks, because it has a dot under the *a when the dot should be under the *r. So, when I copied and pasted the name from Primate's post I ended up making a mistake. I just found a strange anomaly. When I copied and pasted Krsna from the vedabase.net it changed the diacritical mark on the *r and moved it over to the *a. That must be what happened when Primate tried to post the spelling in his first post on this topic. The dot is supposed to be under the *r and not the *a, but when you copy and paste it from vedabase it changes it and moved the dot to the *a. I wonder if that is some error in the font the browser is using for the diacritical? The only way I can manage to show it properly is by showing this image because I can't get the font to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranjeetmore Posted April 19, 2009 Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 tell me one thing. Have you heard about Valmiki ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonic Yogi Posted April 19, 2009 Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 tell me one thing. Have you heard about Valmiki ? Who are you talking to? Have you ever heard of names? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primate Posted April 19, 2009 Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 Here it is, Krsna with the dot beneath the 'r': Kṛṣṇa The font is Tahoma. When you change the font to Verdana (the default font), the dot moves to the 'a'. And back to the 'r', when you change the font to Tahoma again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narasingh Posted April 19, 2009 Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 কৃষ্ণ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Melvin1 Posted April 19, 2009 Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 কৃষ্ণ Don`t tell me ( primate) that`s not an example of a conscious chaos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primate Posted April 19, 2009 Report Share Posted April 19, 2009 Don`t tell me ( primate) that`s not an example of a conscious chaos. No, Verdana is just a bad font. Use Tahoma when you want to display text with Diacritics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
empy Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 really unnecessary and avoidable confusion is created in the minds of devotees. Sage Valmiki referred him as कृष्ण in sanskrit, and we are worrying about its spelling in English!!. People get confused in pronuncing KRSNA as KRISHNA. These spellings are for literary critics only. Let us, like other folks, stick to Krishna. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primate Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 কৃষ্ণ হরে কৃষ্ণ হরে কৃষ্ণ কৃষ্ণ কৃষ্ণ হরে হরে হরে রাম হরে রাম রাম রাম হরে হরে Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Melvin1 Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 হরে কৃষ্ণ হরে কৃষ্ণ কৃষ্ণ কৃষ্ণ হরে হরে হরে রাম হরে রাম রাম রাম হরে হরে What`s the meaning of all these squares? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonic Yogi Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Sometimes we hear Latin devotees say it as Kreeshnaa.(most always they do) But, the i is soft. In Latin I think that the i is long, so the latin devotees say Kreeshnaa because the a in Latin is like AH. In the Holy Name the i is soft and the a is like a soft u like the u in but. So, because of the nature of Latin it ends up being KREESHNAA. They have trouble making the transition to Sanskrit pronunciation and say it like it is a Latin word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonic Yogi Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Sometimes we hear Latin devotees say it as Kreeshnaa.(most always they do)But, the i is soft. In Latin I think that the i is long, so the latin devotees say Kreeshnaa because the a in Latin is like AH. In the Holy Name the i is soft and the a is like a soft u like the u in but. So, because of the nature of Latin it ends up being KREESHNAA. They have trouble making the transition to Sanskrit pronunciation and say it like it is a Latin word. This might have something to do with Melvin's original point, because he is Filipino and in the Phils. there is a strong Latin influence on the languages especially Tagalog. In Latin the i is always hard like ee and the a is always long like AH. So, the Spanish speaking people say KREESHNAA. This might be at the heart of Melvin's complaint about improper spelling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sant Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 krishn krishn krishn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonic Yogi Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 krishn krishn krishn 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.