Gayatri Mantra: Text with Very Bad (to Sanjay)

July 5, 2006

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

July 5, 2006

| 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\-supUjitAyatasmai makArAya namaH shivAya || 2||.................................akshara 'ma' is the starting letter of this sloka

shivAya gaurIvadanAbja\-vR^inda\-sUryAya dakshAdhvaranAshakAya |shrInIlakaNThAya vR^ishhadhvajAyatasmai 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 RathPersonal: WebPages ¡ü Rath¡Çs Rhapsody SJC WebPages: Sri Jagannath Center ¡ü SJCERC ¡ü JIVAPublications: The Jyotish Digest ¡ü Sagittarius Publications----

sohamsa [sohamsa ] On Behalf Of Narasimha P.V.R. RaoWednesday, July 05, 2006 9:23 AMsjcBoston ; ; sohamsa ; vedic astrology Subject: Re: Gayatri Mantra: Text with Very Bad (to Sanjay)