Manthra-Gurudeva (to Sanjay)

[Guest guest]

Pranaam Sanjay,

 

If you send the badhaka trouble removing mantra in URW Palladio

font, I *may* be able to help.

 

Whether you stick to brahmaaya or not is your prerogative.

 

However, the analogy with scholars finding fault with maha mantra is

a wrong analogy. Maha mantra has no grammatical flaws. I don't know

what mistakes these Oriya scholars saw in it.

 

On the other hand, what I am pointing out very basic. It is

analogous to reading " On Namo Narayanaya " as " Om Namo Narayanave " .

It is so fundamental.

 

BTW, if bra in " jyotir-brahma " is a long a or deergha (i.e. " jyotir-

braahmaaya " ), then it is valid! It is meaningful too. The

word " braahmah " means the personification of the sacred scriptural

knowledge of Brahmaa. Instead of praying to Brahmaa (creator), if

you want to pray to the Veda Purusha of Jyotisha, you may pray

to " Jyotir-braahmah " . Then it is a word like " raamah " and the

offering form has aaya at the end. It is a meaningful mantra.

 

Thus, I can see two valid alternatives:

 

Om Sreem Dhleem Jyotir-brahmane namah

 

or

 

Om Sreem Dhleem Jyotir-braahmaaya namah

 

I cannot reconcile with the third one (i.e. what you wrote below).

 

Hope this helps.

 

At your service,

Narasimha

 

> Om Srim Dhlim Jyotir-Brahmaaya Namah

> Dear Narasimha

> This is exactly as published in the book. I have been following it

as it is

> given irrespective of whether it maybe right or not as there seems

to be

> more to the order of the akshara than just grammar. Sometimes i

have found

> the mantra difficult to understand like the one for the removal of

Badhaka '

> Om AbaaDaaya svaaha'. Now this seems to be quite meaningless for

me. Yet I

> use it with the hope that someday the meaning shall come.

>

> I believe that the pundits had criticised the mahamantra as well

as not

> following the perfect rules during the times of achyuta das. He

mentions

> this in the patala-17 but goes on to confirm that the mantra is to

be done

> exactly as given and that this can give samadhi (he actually got

samadhi).

> Please someone from orissa can help translate and explain this for

the

> benefit of the list.

> paöala-17

> kalira mahämantra

> hare kåñëa hare kåñëa kåñëa kåñëa hare hare|

> hare räma hare räma räma räma hare hare||

> çuëa acyuta mana dayi| kalira mahämantra ehi||

> kali prabhaba heba düra| präëé saàsäru taripäre||

> hakära rakära bhedare| malä saàyoga rüpa ghare||

> äsuchi jäuchi pavana| sai ajapä mane ghena||

> präëa pavane mantra misi| ruddha kariba ravi çaçé||

> mürkha kahibe kete kathä| rakära hakära vyavasthä||

> sethire nahin kichi phala| samädhi patha dåòha kara||

> e mantra patha heba sthira| samädhi patha heba sära||

> äge e mantra bhäva dhari| prema sägare jäo buòi||

> lakña lakña ku mana balä| äpe tu hoibu bäulä||

> ñola näma e mahämantra| niçväse heba ätajäta||

> omkäru mantrara utpatti| japare prakäçiba jyoti||

> antara heba våndävana| puëi ayodhyä käçé dhäma||

> dekhibu kåñëa lélä mäna| e mantra améya vacana||

> With Best Regards

> Sanjay Rath

> ----

>

> varahamihira

> Thursday, September 25, 2003 07:17:05 PM

> varahamihira

> |Sri Varaha| Re: Manthra-Gurudeva

>

> Pranaam Sanjay,

>

> Yes, it will be excellent to learn more about various

beejaaksharas

> from you, during the next few weeks!

>

> Regarding personal or impersonal form, that does not matter as far

as

> the word is concerned. The word is the same in both cases. Brahman

is

> the root form for Brahmaa (like " aatman " is for " aatmaa "

and " raama "

> is for " raamah " ). They are not two different words.

>

> Whether you are talking about impersonal or personal form, the 1st

> vibhakti form is brahmaa only. The word brahman is only the root

and

> cannot be used in a sentence.

>

> There is no " brahmah " like " raamah " . If there is, " brahmaaya " will

be

> legal like " raamaaya " . Just like you say " paramaatmaa " in 1st

> vibhakti and " paramaatmane " in 4th vibhakti, you have to

> say " jyotirbrahmaa " in 1st vibhakti and " jyotirbrahmane " in 4th

> vibhakti.

>

> I am reasonably confident there was an error in the transmission

of

> this mantra from Achyutananda to you.

>

> May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> Narasimha