Guest guest Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 There is an obvious variation in the way certain words are pronounced/written) between sanskrit and buddhist (among them tibetan and japanese) texts. Though i am nowhere near to ascholar in these texts, the versions that i have come across a couple of words are: AUM (OM) ~ Ong Hum ~ Hung Padme ~ Peme Svaaha ~ soha (so ha) dharma ~ dhamma " Om Mani Padme Hum " is often seen written as " Om Mani Peme Hung " " Om Ah hum vajra guru padma siddhi hum " ~ " Om ah hung vajra guru pema siddhi hung " " dharmam sharanam gachchaami " ~ " dhammam sharanam gachchaami " " om soham " ~ " ong so-hung " ! It may quite be possible that " turye " 4th - beyond the 3 states) is converted to " ture " . The essence of the mantra seems most probably be praying to Tara, who ferries across, to the state beyond (the 3) i.e. the 4th. sohamsa , manoj sharma <swastik_astro wrote: > > JAI MAA > > Narasimha ji > > Sadar Pranam > > Guru ji i have a Mantra Kosha printed by Kalyan mandir prakashan Allahbad. they quote this mantra from Tara Bhagti Sudharnava of Gandharva sanhita, this mantra ends with Swahaa the mantra is om tare tattare ture swaha. they also publish same mantra without extra half ta in tatare from brhama sanhita. sir the publishers mainly published the Shakta & tantra material, they also have good knowledge of das mahavidya tantra also. > > if i make a mistake then plz forgive me & bless me. > > thanks > > --- On Mon, 3/11/08, Narasimha P.V.R. Rao <pvr wrote: > Narasimha P.V.R. Rao <pvr > Tara mantra (Re: Parampara Knowledge) > sohamsa > Monday, 3 November, 2008, 1:17 AM > > > > > > > > Namaste, >  > Someone I respect who was doing Tara sadhana asked > me about this mantra many years back. He quoted a mantra called " om taare > tuttare ture sohaa " from apparently some Buddhist texts. He tried it for while > and strongly suspected that it was wrong. He thought it was originally a > Sanskrit mantra and practice of this mantra for many generations by people not > knowing Sanskrit resulted in a corruption in time. He sought my help and asked > me to guess what the original Sanskrit version could be. He wanted to do sadhana > using the original Sanskrit version guessed by me. >  > Obviously, the text I gave above has no meaning in > Sanskrit. >  > I *guessed* that tuttare may originally have been > dustare. The word " dustaraa " means unconquerable or invincible. The word ture > does have a meaning, but I guessed that it was probably turye after the previous > word. The word " turyaa " means the supreme power beyond all states of existence. > The word sohaa must of course be swaahaa. Thus, I guessed that the original > Sanskrit version may have been " om taare dustare turye svaahaa " and gave it to > that gentleman. This was simply my speculation at the request of that > gentleman. >  > *       > *       * >  > After making this correction as requested by that > gentleman, it remained in my mind. But I did not ask anyone to chant that > mantra. >  > When I was teaching in my class how to count > letters and words in mantras and see devata sthana, I used several examples. I > even used things like " god is great " as mantras. Basically, any pattern of > sounds repeated in the mind over a time has an effect and I was > demonstrating some technicalities related to that. So any combination of sounds > can be used as an example. As one of the examples, I used this guessed Sanskrit > version of Tara mantra that was stuck in my mind. >  > Best > regards, > Narasimha > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- ---- > Do > a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ homam > Do > Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ tarpana > Spirituality: > http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > Free > Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. net > Free > Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst rologer.org > Sri > Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan nath.org > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- ---- >  > sohamsa@ .com, " Arpad Joo " > <panchasila@ ..> wrote: > > > > > > Hare Rama > Krishna, > > > > Namaste Mr. Narasimha: > > > > I realise that > you cannot answer every mail, due to your workload. I > > †" and I am sure I > speak for everyone here- appreciate this. We are > > ALL busy.I am also glad > that you usually identify your sources. This is > > a good and laudable > practice. > > > > As you have written in your post: > > > > > " If I made any lapse, please bring it to attention and I will be > > very > happy to correct myself. " > > > > So ,here it is: > > > > Just > very simply- under what authority have you changed the venerable > > and > ancient Tara Mantra: " OM TARE TUTTARE TURE SVAHA, " into Om > > Tare Dustarye > Turye Svaha- or something like that.... > > > > Since this mangled form > has been published on your website (maintained > > by your students), may I > take the opportunity to ask you to identify > > your scriptural source for > this...that is †" if you have any. > > > > I have asked the same question > now several times, over a period of some > > months now. > > > > I > await your answer.... > > > > Thank you Sir > > > > With deep > respect to all > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Narasimha > P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > Namaste Sir, > > > > > > > People should realize that I have no time to reply to all > emails > > addressed to me. > > > > > > I MAY mention mantras > that I got from other people or books without > > referring to the > source. > > > > > > But, when it comes to astrology, I ensure > whenever teaching my own > > research that it is identified as such. I > identify what was taught by my > > gurus, what I found in the words of > rishis unambiguously, what I > > extrapolated from those words and what I > thought of by myself. I am > > usually thorough in identifying the source > and type of astrological > > knowledge I share with others. If I made any > lapse, please bring it to > > attention and I will be very happy to correct > myself. > > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu, > > > > Narasimha > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- ---- > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ homam > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ tarpana > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. net > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst rologer.org > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan nath.org > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- ---- > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Arpad Joo " > panchasila@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hare > Rama Krishna, > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the > principle. > > > > > > > > Please allow me to quote from > your recent post: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " It seemed to me like several teachings that were not > identified > > > > explicitly as either research or parampara > knowledge may actually be > > > > his(Pt.S.Rath) research. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " On several > occasions, I privately requested him (Pandit Sanjay > > > > Rath) to > acknowledge whether a specific teaching was strictly from > > > > > parampara or his own research/extrapolat ion. On each occasion, he > > > just > > > > smiled and evaded the question. I told him that it is > important to > > me > > > > and perhaps others to know which > knowledge is from parampara and > > which > > > > knowledge is his > own research and requested that he should clarify > > when > > > > > teaching new things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was > mixing up > > the > > > > two, though some people may be assuming > that anything from him not > > > > explicitly identified as research > is from parampara. As a seeker of > > > > knowledge who has a good > level of belief in the knowledge coming > > from > > > > Sri > Achyutananda, this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things > > > > > particularly challenging for me. " (The underline is from me.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have a similar > problem with you. I have asked you a question > > > > -several times > now- to identify the scriptural basis of a Mantra > > > > which you > teach publicly to your students. Mantras are at least as > > > > > serious an issue (if not more) than a Sanskrit Shloka of Parasara. > > > Since > > > > you have consistently evaded the answer to my question,I > am forced > > to > > > > come to the following > conclusion-either: > > > > > > > > 1. You cannot identify > the scriptural source of the Mantra which you > > > > teach. > > > > > > > > > 2. This mantra was given to you in a " parampara " or > (worse) > > > > > > > > 3. You have made up a mantra to suit > your purpose. > > > > > > > > 4. You mix up the source of an > authentic Mantra, with personal > > > > revelation/research or > " parampara " . > > > > > > > > 5. The Mantra which you have > taught to your students is falsified. > > > > > > > > (I > reckon ALL of the above) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is always advisable to adhere and follow consistently > to the > > > > principles of what one preaches (see above) > > > > > > > > > Please feel free to challenge me (shotgun > approach)to quote the > > > > " chapter and verse " -in the original, to > support my argument. > > > > > > > > It is one thing to > accuse someone ( a brilliant authority on these > > > > > subjects-Pt. S.Rath!)of mixing up Rishi's words,parampara, personal > > > > > research etc ,carelessly, and then failing to apply the same > > > standards > > > > to oneself. > > > > > > > > I > have another name for this: > > > > > > > > > Hypocrisy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I said before: it IS the Principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With deep respect to all: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. Moreover,it is > my personal belief, that if we add up all the > > > > " Jyotish " > knowledge of all the members on this list, (and I include > > you > > > > > and me here as well) > > > > > > > > we may not > amount to more than- let's say- 5% of what Pt.Sanjay Rath > > > > > knows.Just to keep things in perspective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Narasimha > P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Sundeep and others, > > > > > > > > > > > > Or if they were, > > > > > > were they just deluding themselves? > Were they simply predicting > > > > > > correctly because of > their spiritual strength? If so, we might > > as > > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea leaves up in the > > > air > > > > > > and predict using spiritual strength, > no? > > > > > > > > > > Let us take a step back. Some > of the SJC gurus and some other > > people > > > > at SJC were > once using 7 chara karakas and arudha padas as taught by > > Sri > > > > > KN Rao. Some of them were happy and found them working. When > they > > came > > > > to SJC, they switched and found things > working better. The > > bottomline is > > > > that their knowledge > was incomplete before, but contained some > > useful > > > > stuff > nevertheless. > > > > > > > > > > I am pretty sure > there are a lot of mistakes in our understanding > > even > > > > > now. The bottomline is that our knowledge is incomplete now, but > > > > > contains some useful stuff nevertheless. > > > > > > > > > > > One more thing: Not all knowledge is equally critical in > our > > practical > > > > predictions. > > > > > > > > > > > Suppose I predict someone's marriage or promotion. > Whether I see > > D-9 > > > > or D-10 for marriage is critical. > Whether I see D-10 or D-12 for > > > > promotion is critical. Whether > I use TA dasa with TP charts or not > > is > > > > critical. > Whether I take the 6th or 7th house for marriage is > > critical. > > > > > > > > > > > But, if I evaluate the argalas on 7th > house or UL incorrectly, it > > may > > > > be masked off in the > other things I consider. If I use a wrong > > planet as > > > > DK > or AmK or PK, again it may be masked off in the other things I > > > > > consider. After all, we consider multiple factors and make a > > > prediction > > > > when there is an agreement between several > factors. > > > > > > > > > > Thus, we use a lot of > knowledge and techniques and some of them > > > > critical and some of > them are less critical in our predictions. Our > > > > predictions are > due to multiple factors and not just one. > > > > > > > > > > > Bottomline on the negative side: We have some incorrect > knowledge. > > > > Though this may make some uncomfortable, this is > the truth. > > > > > > > > > > Bottomline on the > positive side: We have a decent body of > > knowledge > > > > with > a good degree of reliability and, when we combine multiple > > > > > techniques, we are in a good shape a good percentage of times! The > > > same > > > > is true with others outside our parampara also (like Sri > KN Rao's > > > > followers), though the degree of correctness may be > different with > > > > different techniques used by them. > > > > > > > > > > > > And relatedly, note that all this suddenly > puts a lot of > > parampara > > > > > > knowledge in > question. An average person like me treats > > parampara > > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one naturally assumes that this > > > > > > > knowledge has been tested over the generations. > > > > > > > > > > > Apart from knowledge in a parampara getting > corrupted in time, > > there > > > > is another issue - knowledge > not from a parampara may be > > misunderstood > > > > to be from a > parampara. > > > > > > > > > > I subjectively found a > lot of difference between some of Sanjay > > ji's > > > > initial > teachings like Tithi Pravesha and Narayana dasa and some of > > his > > > > > later teachings. The initial teachings were simple, logical > and > > > > beautiful, but I was not convinced by several teachings > later on. I > > had > > > > a strong suspicion that some of those > teachings were Sanjay ji's own > > > > research/extrapolat ions. It > seemed to me like several teachings that > > > > were not identified > explicitly as either research or parampara > > knowledge > > > > > may actually be his research. > > > > > > > > > > I > did not hide my suspicion from him. I mentioned it privately to > > > him. > > > > On several occasions, I privately requested him to > acknowledge > > whether a > > > > specific teaching was strictly > from parampara or his own > > > > research/extrapolat ion. On each > occasion, he just smiled and evaded > > the > > > > question. I > told him that it is important to me and perhaps others > > to > > > > > know which knowledge is from parampara and which knowledge is his > > > own > > > > research and requested that he should clarify when > teaching new > > things. > > > > > > > > > > From > his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was mixing > > up > > > > > the two, though some people may be assuming that anything from > him > > not > > > > explicitly identified as research is from > parampara. As a seeker of > > > > knowledge who has a good level of > belief in the knowledge coming > > from > > > > Sri Achyutananda, > this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things > > > > particularly > challenging for me. > > > > > > > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa calculation) , into the trash > > > can, > > > > > > > > > > Regarding drigdasa > calculation, Sanjay ji privately told me > > several > > > > years > back that he was taught drigdasa along with so many other > > dasas > in > > > > one afternoon and that he just took very brief notes on so > many > > things > > > > at once. He said there could have beem > confusion or mistakes in > > > > drigdasa. Given this uncertainty, it > is not impossible that what he > > > > finally taught is different > from Achyutananda' s teaching. > > > > > > > > > > > Parasara's verses on drigdasa were translated the same way by all > > > > > translators I saw. And I have not deviated from Santhanam etc. I > > > only > > > > supplemented it with a small rule related to > interpretation. Thus, > > what > > > > I shared on drigdasa > calculations is not just my own independent > > > > interpretation, > but an interpretation of Santhanam and Sharma too. > > > > > > > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu, > > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- ---- > > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ homam > > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ tarpana > > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. net > > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst rologer.org > > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan nath.org > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- ---- > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, > " vedicastrostudent " > > vedicastrostudent@ > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimhaji (and > Vistiji), > > > > > > While I cant question Narasimhaji' s > scholarship, it is clear > > that > > > > > > these kind of > issues question the very root of parampara > > knowledge > > > > > > > if not astrology itself. The silence (from SJC Gurus and > > > Sanjayji) > > > > > > surprises me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > In scientific subjects, if a new theory comes > up that > > contradicts > > > > > > an old one, it must > either be a generalization of the old theory > > > > > > (e.g. > Einstein's theory of relativity (new) is not in > > contradiction > > > > > > > with Newton's theory (old) at speeds far less than the speed > of > > > > > > light), or at the very least it must explain why > the old theory > > > > > > correctly predicted in some cases, or > if the old theory didnt > > even > > > > > > do that, then > why the old theory's observations were wrong > > (since > > > > > > > those wrong observations supported the old theory). > > > > > > > > > > > > > In this case, Narasimhaji has simply > thrown the entire CK > > > > > > replacement theory into the > trash can. Which immediately begs > > the > > > > > > > question: So are Sanjayji's explanations of Alan Leo's and > > > Mahatma > > > > > > Gandhi's charts, in his AK paper, wrong? > Narasimhaji, after your > > new > > > > > > found knowledge, > you must either conclude that the events in > > one's > > > > > > > life (i.e. total change of motivation and direction in life, not > > > > > > > present in most people's life) that Sanjayji has > hitherto > > explained > > > > > > using AK replacement, do > not exist i.e Sanjayji was merely > > deluding > > > > > > > himself, OR that they are explained by some other astrological > > > > > > > combination. So far, in the new scheme of things, you havent > > > > > > > volunteered any astrological combination that explains ALL > and > > ONLY > > > > > > those events that have so far been > explained by Sanjayji as CK > > > > > > replacement. I quote > directly from Sanjayji's paper, Section 3.1 > > - > > > > > > > " The carakaraka being replaced gives us an idea of the area of > > > life > > > > > > where a major unheaval is expected to occur > while the slot, > > which is > > > > > > falling vacant, > needs the strong support of Lord Siva in the > > form of > > > > > > > a strong sthira karaka so that the concerned relation/aspect > of > > life > > > > > > is not disturbed or destroyed. > <some omitted>. The spiritual > > impact > > > > > > > on the person is very strong if the AK, AMK or BK are > > > involved.. " . > > > > > > Please clarify your position on > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > And relatedly, > note that all this suddenly puts a lot of > > parampara > > > > > > > knowledge in question. An average person like me treats > > > parampara > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one > naturally assumes that this > > > > > > knowledge has been > tested over the generations. As an example, > > how > > > > > > > do I build confidence that one day some one wont come up with a > > > key > > > > > > undiscovered precursor verse of Parasara that > unambiguously says > > " In > > > > > > all my remaining > verses, when I say Rahu I actually mean Jupiter > > and > > > > > > > when I say Jupiter, I actually mean Rahu " , and in doing so > > > trashes > > > > > > all current knowledge. The way I build that > confidence is that I > > see > > > > > > that the current > knowledge WORKS IN PRACTICE. Since it WORKS IN > > > > > > > PRACTICE, I know that the probability of discovering such a > > verse > is > > > > > > next to nil. And Narasimhaji, now that you have > thrown CK > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa > calculation) , into the trash > > can, > > > > > > it makes > me wonder - Were Sanjay Rathji, his Guru Pt Kasinath > > > > > > > Rathji, or his Guru Pt Jagannath Rathji, and their Gurus, were > > > they > > > > > > all using this knowledge previously AT ALL or > NOT? Or if they > > were, > > > > > > were they just > deluding themselves? Were they simply predicting > > > > > > > correctly because of their spiritual strength? If so, we might > > > as > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea > leaves up in the > > air > > > > > > and predict using > spiritual strength, no? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sundeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Get your preferred Email name! > Now you can @ymail.com and @rocketmail.com. > http://mail.promotions./newdomains/aa/ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Hare Rama Krishna, Dera Soul Sadhak There are certain linguistical groups which have definite disabilities in pronouncing certain words and sounds. This is not only with regards to Sanskrit mantras. I still recall (somewhat ashamed now) how we used to "torture" Japanese students in Vienna, Austria at the "Hochschule" with the german word for "Beethoven Competition"- that is "Beethovenwettbewerb". It provided endless source of laughter how the hapeless and unsuspecting Japanese music students grappled with the word (it's a mouthful anyway).Just ask any native Japanese speaker to pronounce a simple word like "Violin".You will be amazed what comes out of his/her mouth. And again,I used to ask my Tibetan Lama friend- an accomplished adept with some amazing yogic abilities- to pronounce for me "Ushnishasitatapatra"- after all, this is a puja they do (to avert calamities.)Try as hard as he was able,and he REALLY tried, the end result was always a very mangled version of this word. Tibetans,Japanese,Koreans,Chinese,Mongolians etc language groups have grave difficulties in pronouncing two consonants together such as : DM (as in Padma), sounds like Peme JR (as in Vajra),- Benzar RM (as in Rama)- in Thailand people cheerfully say "Lamayana" for Ramayana. Sometimes a reversal of vowels happen in some mantras, such as the Tibetan version of "Shantim Kuru"- as Shintam Kuru SV- (as in Svaha), Soha. This type of linguistical malajustment and mispronounciation is not exactly the monopoly of these above mentioned language groups. If you listen to (most, but not all)native Tamil pujaris, you will also hear some pretty amazing Sanskrit pronounciation, such as : Siti Vinayagar (that is: Siddhi Vinayaka) Saturthi (that is Chaturti),Abishegam (Abisheka) etc. Once , some time ago I have asked a Tamil pujari friend to give Maha Mrityunjaya Mantra to another friend of mine. Well, how he has pronounced this venerable and ancient mantra was totally unrecognizable (to me at least). There are, of course,amongst the educated class of Tibetan yogis, quite a number of them, who have excellent Sanskrit pronounciation. I am reminded of a story of the famous scholar Sakya Pandita, who has lived a few hundred years ago. Once, traveling through the high Tibetan mountains, he has overheard some yogi, in retreat reciting the "Kilaya" mantra, something like this: "OM Chilaya etc…" So, he stopped, and somewhat condescendingly explained the old yogi, that his pronounciation is totally wrong. Thereupon the old yogi just simply said, OK, let me try your version. He recited "OM Kilaya etc…", and threw his dagger into the air. Nothing happened. Hm, this is strange, he said, let me try my version. So he recited : "OM Chilaya…" then he threw his dagger again into the air- and it burst into flames. Sakya Pandita was humbled. The great sanskrit scholar was taught a real lesson about saddhana. I recall, that the superb Sanskrit scholar, Dr. Usharbudh Arya (now Swami Veda Bharati) narrated, that his own guru (Swami Rama of the Himalayas, no less) asked him to pronounce certain mantras differently (especially bija mantras), explaining to him, that in VALID yogic pronounciation, mantras will sound different). Now, here was a "bona fide" great scholar, who is (still is) a world renown expert of Sanskrit. He told us, how difficult it was for him to accept this "yogic pronounciation" as a Sanskrit scholar. (but ,of course he did). So, the question is, do the effectiveness of the pujas, as conducted by some of the Tamil speaking pujaris, when they "shortchange" (to put it mildly) mantras, decrease or diminish in anyway? Do the Tibetan tantric pujas lose their effectiveness because some of the Lamas (again not all) mispronounce words? Experience shows otherwise…. With deep respect to all AJ (the repeated advice to me was: "since you can do it well, and can pronounce perfectly- you must do it perfectly)" sohamsa , "Soul Sadhak" <soulsadhak wrote:>> There is an obvious variation in the way certain words are > pronounced/written) between sanskrit and buddhist (among them tibetan > and japanese) texts. Though i am nowhere near to ascholar in these > texts, the versions that i have come across a couple of words are:> > AUM (OM) ~ Ong> Hum ~ Hung> Padme ~ Peme> Svaaha ~ soha (so ha)> dharma ~ dhamma> > "Om Mani Padme Hum" is often seen written as "Om Mani Peme Hung"> "Om Ah hum vajra guru padma siddhi hum" ~ "Om ah hung vajra guru pema > siddhi hung"> "dharmam sharanam gachchaami" ~ "dhammam sharanam gachchaami"> "om soham" ~ "ong so-hung"!> > It may quite be possible that "turye" 4th - beyond the 3 states) is > converted to "ture". The essence of the mantra seems most probably > be praying to Tara, who ferries across, to the state beyond (the 3) > i.e. the 4th.> > > sohamsa , manoj sharma swastik_astro@ > wrote:> >> > JAI MAA> > > > Narasimha ji> > > > Sadar Pranam> > > > Guru ji i have a Mantra Kosha printed by Kalyan mandir prakashan > Allahbad. they quote this mantra from Tara Bhagti Sudharnava of > Gandharva sanhita, this mantra ends with Swahaa the mantra is om tare > tattare ture swaha. they also publish same mantra without extra half > ta in tatare from brhama sanhita. sir the publishers mainly published > the Shakta & tantra material, they also have good knowledge of das > mahavidya tantra also.> > > > if i make a mistake then plz forgive me & bless me.> > > > thanks> > > > --- On Mon, 3/11/08, Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@ wrote:> > Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@> > Tara mantra (Re: Parampara Knowledge)> > sohamsa > > Monday, 3 November, 2008, 1:17 AM> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste,> >  > > Someone I respect who was doing Tara sadhana asked > > me about this mantra many years back. He quoted a mantra called "om > taare > > tuttare ture sohaa" from apparently some Buddhist texts. He tried > it for while > > and strongly suspected that it was wrong. He thought it was > originally a > > Sanskrit mantra and practice of this mantra for many generations by > people not > > knowing Sanskrit resulted in a corruption in time. He sought my > help and asked > > me to guess what the original Sanskrit version could be. He wanted > to do sadhana > > using the original Sanskrit version guessed by me.> >  > > Obviously, the text I gave above has no meaning in > > Sanskrit.> >  > > I *guessed* that tuttare may originally have been > > dustare. The word "dustaraa" means unconquerable or invincible. The > word ture > > does have a meaning, but I guessed that it was probably turye after > the previous > > word. The word "turyaa" means the supreme power beyond all states > of existence. > > The word sohaa must of course be swaahaa. Thus, I guessed that the > original > > Sanskrit version may have been "om taare dustare turye svaahaa" and > gave it to > > that gentleman. This was simply my speculation at the request of > that > > gentleman.> >  > > *       > > *       *> >  > > After making this correction as requested by that > > gentleman, it remained in my mind. But I did not ask anyone to > chant that > > mantra.> >  > > When I was teaching in my class how to count > > letters and words in mantras and see devata sthana, I used several > examples. I > > even used things like "god is great" as mantras. Basically, any > pattern of > > sounds repeated in the mind over a time has an effect and I was > > demonstrating some technicalities related to that. So any > combination of sounds > > can be used as an example. As one of the examples, I used this > guessed Sanskrit > > version of Tara mantra that was stuck in my mind.> >  > > Best > > regards,> > Narasimha> > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----> ----> > Do > > a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ homam> > Do > > Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ tarpana> > Spirituality: > > http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom> > Free > > Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. net> > Free > > Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst rologer.org> > Sri > > Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan nath.org> > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----> ---- > >  > > sohamsa@ .com, "Arpad Joo" > > <panchasila@ ..> wrote:> > >> > > > > > Hare Rama > > Krishna,> > > > > > Namaste Mr. Narasimha:> > > > > > I realise that > > you cannot answer every mail, due to your workload. I> > > â€" and I am sure I > > speak for everyone here- appreciate this. We are> > > ALL busy.I am also glad > > that you usually identify your sources. This is> > > a good and laudable > > practice.> > > > > > As you have written in your post:> > > > > > > > "If I made any lapse, please bring it to attention and I will be> > > very > > happy to correct myself."> > > > > > So ,here it is:> > > > > > Just > > very simply- under what authority have you changed the venerable> > > and > > ancient Tara Mantra: "OM TARE TUTTARE TURE SVAHA, "into Om> > > Tare Dustarye > > Turye Svaha- or something like that....> > > > > > Since this mangled form > > has been published on your website (maintained> > > by your students), may I > > take the opportunity to ask you to identify> > > your scriptural source for > > this...that is â€"if you have any.> > > > > > I have asked the same question > > now several times, over a period of some> > > months now.> > > > > > I > > await your answer....> > > > > > Thank you Sir> > > > > > With deep > > respect to all> > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, "Narasimha > > P.V.R. Rao" <pvr@> wrote:> > > >> > > > Namaste Sir,> > > > > >> > > > People should realize that I have no time to reply to all > > emails> > > addressed to me.> > > >> > > > I MAY mention mantras > > that I got from other people or books without> > > referring to the > > source.> > > >> > > > But, when it comes to astrology, I ensure > > whenever teaching my own> > > research that it is identified as such. I > > identify what was taught by my> > > gurus, what I found in the words of > > rishis unambiguously, what I> > > extrapolated from those words and what I > > thought of by myself. I am> > > usually thorough in identifying the source > > and type of astrological> > > knowledge I share with others. If I made any > > lapse, please bring it to> > > attention and I will be very happy to correct > > myself.> > > >> > > > Krishnaarpanamastu,> > > > > > Narasimha> > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----> ----> > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ homam> > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > tarpana> > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom> > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. net> > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst rologer.org> > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan nath.org> > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----> ----> > > > > >> > > > sohamsa@ .com, "Arpad Joo" > > panchasila@ wrote:> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Hare > > Rama Krishna,> > > > >> > > > > Dear Narasimha,> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > It is the > > principle.> > > > >> > > > > Please allow me to quote from > > your recent post:> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > "It seemed to me like several teachings that were not > > identified> > > > > explicitly as either research or parampara > > knowledge may actually be> > > > > his(Pt.S.Rath) research."> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > "On several > > occasions, I privately requested him (Pandit Sanjay> > > > > Rath) to > > acknowledge whether a specific teaching was strictly from> > > > > > > parampara or his own research/extrapolat ion. On each occasion, he> > > > > just> > > > > smiled and evaded the question. I told him that it is > > important to> > > me> > > > > and perhaps others to know which > > knowledge is from parampara and> > > which> > > > > knowledge is his > > own research and requested that he should clarify> > > when> > > > > > > teaching new things.> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > From his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was > > mixing up> > > the> > > > > two, though some people may be assuming > > that anything from him not> > > > > explicitly identified as research > > is from parampara. As a seeker of> > > > > knowledge who has a good > > level of belief in the knowledge coming> > > from> > > > > Sri > > Achyutananda, this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things> > > > > > > particularly challenging for me." (The underline is from me.)> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > I have a similar > > problem with you. I have asked you a question> > > > > -several times > > now- to identify the scriptural basis of a Mantra> > > > > which you > > teach publicly to your students. Mantras are at least as> > > > > > > serious an issue (if not more) than a Sanskrit Shloka of Parasara.> > > > > Since> > > > > you have consistently evaded the answer to my question,I > > am forced> > > to> > > > > come to the following > > conclusion-either:> > > > >> > > > > 1. You cannot identify > > the scriptural source of the Mantra which you> > > > > teach.> > > > > > >> > > > > 2. This mantra was given to you in a "parampara" or > > (worse)> > > > >> > > > > 3. You have made up a mantra to suit > > your purpose.> > > > >> > > > > 4. You mix up the source of an > > authentic Mantra, with personal> > > > > revelation/research or > > "parampara".> > > > >> > > > > 5. The Mantra which you have > > taught to your students is falsified.> > > > >> > > > > (I > > reckon ALL of the above)> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > It is always advisable to adhere and follow consistently > > to the> > > > > principles of what one preaches (see above)> > > > > > >> > > > > Please feel free to challenge me (shotgun > > approach)to quote the> > > > > "chapter and verse"-in the original, to > > support my argument.> > > > >> > > > > It is one thing to > > accuse someone ( a brilliant authority on these> > > > > > > subjects-Pt. S.Rath!)of mixing up Rishi's words,parampara, personal> > > > > > > research etc ,carelessly, and then failing to apply the same> > > > > standards> > > > > to oneself.> > > > >> > > > > I > > have another name for this:> > > > >> > > > > > > Hypocrisy.> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > As I said before: it IS the Principle.> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > With deep respect to all:> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > AJ> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > P.S. Moreover,it is > > my personal belief, that if we add up all the> > > > > "Jyotish" > > knowledge of all the members on this list, (and I include> > > you> > > > > > > and me here as well)> > > > >> > > > > we may not > > amount to more than- let's say- 5% of what Pt.Sanjay Rath> > > > > > > knows.Just to keep things in perspective.> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > sohamsa@ .com, "Narasimha > > P.V.R. Rao" <pvr@> wrote:> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Namaste Sundeep and others,> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Or if they were,> > > > > > > were they just deluding themselves? > > Were they simply predicting> > > > > > > correctly because of > > their spiritual strength? If so, we might> > > as> > > > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea leaves up in the> > > > > air> > > > > > > and predict using spiritual strength, > > no?> > > > > >> > > > > > Let us take a step back. Some > > of the SJC gurus and some other> > > people> > > > > at SJC were > > once using 7 chara karakas and arudha padas as taught by> > > Sri> > > > > > > KN Rao. Some of them were happy and found them working. When > > they> > > came> > > > > to SJC, they switched and found things > > working better. The> > > bottomline is> > > > > that their knowledge > > was incomplete before, but contained some> > > useful> > > > > stuff > > nevertheless.> > > > > >> > > > > > I am pretty sure > > there are a lot of mistakes in our understanding> > > even> > > > > > > now. The bottomline is that our knowledge is incomplete now, but> > > > > > > contains some useful stuff nevertheless.> > > > > >> > > > > > > > One more thing: Not all knowledge is equally critical in > > our> > > practical> > > > > predictions.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Suppose I predict someone's marriage or promotion. > > Whether I see> > > D-9> > > > > or D-10 for marriage is critical. > > Whether I see D-10 or D-12 for> > > > > promotion is critical. Whether > > I use TA dasa with TP charts or not> > > is> > > > > critical. > > Whether I take the 6th or 7th house for marriage is> > > critical.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > But, if I evaluate the argalas on 7th > > house or UL incorrectly, it> > > may> > > > > be masked off in the > > other things I consider. If I use a wrong> > > planet as> > > > > DK > > or AmK or PK, again it may be masked off in the other things I> > > > > > > consider. After all, we consider multiple factors and make a> > > > > prediction> > > > > when there is an agreement between several > > factors.> > > > > >> > > > > > Thus, we use a lot of > > knowledge and techniques and some of them> > > > > critical and some of > > them are less critical in our predictions. Our> > > > > predictions are > > due to multiple factors and not just one.> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Bottomline on the negative side: We have some incorrect > > knowledge.> > > > > Though this may make some uncomfortable, this is > > the truth.> > > > > >> > > > > > Bottomline on the > > positive side: We have a decent body of> > > knowledge> > > > > with > > a good degree of reliability and, when we combine multiple> > > > > > > techniques, we are in a good shape a good percentage of times! The> > > > > same> > > > > is true with others outside our parampara also (like Sri > > KN Rao's> > > > > followers), though the degree of correctness may be > > different with> > > > > different techniques used by them.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > And relatedly, note that all this suddenly > > puts a lot of> > > parampara> > > > > > > knowledge in > > question. An average person like me treats> > > parampara> > > > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one naturally assumes that this> > > > > > > > > knowledge has been tested over the generations.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Apart from knowledge in a parampara getting > > corrupted in time,> > > there> > > > > is another issue - knowledge > > not from a parampara may be> > > misunderstood> > > > > to be from a > > parampara.> > > > > >> > > > > > I subjectively found a > > lot of difference between some of Sanjay> > > ji's> > > > > initial > > teachings like Tithi Pravesha and Narayana dasa and some of> > > his> > > > > > > later teachings. The initial teachings were simple, logical > > and> > > > > beautiful, but I was not convinced by several teachings > > later on. I> > > had> > > > > a strong suspicion that some of those > > teachings were Sanjay ji's own> > > > > research/extrapolat ions. It > > seemed to me like several teachings that> > > > > were not identified > > explicitly as either research or parampara> > > knowledge> > > > > > > may actually be his research.> > > > > >> > > > > > I > > did not hide my suspicion from him. I mentioned it privately to> > > > > him.> > > > > On several occasions, I privately requested him to > > acknowledge> > > whether a> > > > > specific teaching was strictly > > from parampara or his own> > > > > research/extrapolat ion. On each > > occasion, he just smiled and evaded> > > the> > > > > question. I > > told him that it is important to me and perhaps others> > > to> > > > > > > know which knowledge is from parampara and which knowledge is his> > > > > own> > > > > research and requested that he should clarify when > > teaching new> > > things.> > > > > >> > > > > > From > > his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was mixing> > > up> > > > > > > the two, though some people may be assuming that anything from > > him> > > not> > > > > explicitly identified as research is from > > parampara. As a seeker of> > > > > knowledge who has a good level of > > belief in the knowledge coming> > > from> > > > > Sri Achyutananda, > > this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things> > > > > particularly > > challenging for me.> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa calculation) , into the trash> > > > > can,> > > > > >> > > > > > Regarding drigdasa > > calculation, Sanjay ji privately told me> > > several> > > > > years > > back that he was taught drigdasa along with so many other> > > dasas > > in> > > > > one afternoon and that he just took very brief notes on so > > many> > > things> > > > > at once. He said there could have beem > > confusion or mistakes in> > > > > drigdasa. Given this uncertainty, it > > is not impossible that what he> > > > > finally taught is different > > from Achyutananda' s teaching.> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Parasara's verses on drigdasa were translated the same way by all> > > > > > > translators I saw. And I have not deviated from Santhanam etc. I> > > > > only> > > > > supplemented it with a small rule related to > > interpretation. Thus,> > > what> > > > > I shared on drigdasa > > calculations is not just my own independent> > > > > interpretation, > > but an interpretation of Santhanam and Sharma too.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu,> > > > > > > > Narasimha> > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----> ----> > > > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > homam> > > > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > tarpana> > > > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom> > > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. > net> > > > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst > rologer.org> > > > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan > nath.org> > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----> ----> > > > > > > >> > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, > > "vedicastrostudent"> > > vedicastrostudent@> > > > > wrote:> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear Narasimhaji (and > > Vistiji),> > > > > > > While I cant question Narasimhaji' s > > scholarship, it is clear> > > that> > > > > > > these kind of > > issues question the very root of parampara> > > knowledge> > > > > > > > > if not astrology itself. The silence (from SJC Gurus and> > > > > Sanjayji)> > > > > > > surprises me.> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > In scientific subjects, if a new theory comes > > up that> > > contradicts> > > > > > > an old one, it must > > either be a generalization of the old theory> > > > > > > (e.g. > > Einstein's theory of relativity (new) is not in> > > contradiction> > > > > > > > > with Newton's theory (old) at speeds far less than the > speed > > of> > > > > > > light), or at the very least it must explain why > > the old theory> > > > > > > correctly predicted in some cases, or > > if the old theory didnt> > > even> > > > > > > do that, then > > why the old theory's observations were wrong> > > (since> > > > > > > > > those wrong observations supported the old theory).> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > In this case, Narasimhaji has simply > > thrown the entire CK> > > > > > > replacement theory into the > > trash can. Which immediately begs> > > the> > > > > > > > > question: So are Sanjayji's explanations of Alan Leo's and> > > > > Mahatma> > > > > > > Gandhi's charts, in his AK paper, wrong? > > Narasimhaji, after your> > > new> > > > > > > found knowledge, > > you must either conclude that the events in> > > one's> > > > > > > > > life (i.e. total change of motivation and direction in life, not> > > > > > > > > present in most people's life) that Sanjayji has > > hitherto> > > explained> > > > > > > using AK replacement, do > > not exist i.e Sanjayji was merely> > > deluding> > > > > > > > > himself, OR that they are explained by some other astrological> > > > > > > > > combination. So far, in the new scheme of things, you havent> > > > > > > > > volunteered any astrological combination that explains ALL > > and> > > ONLY> > > > > > > those events that have so far been > > explained by Sanjayji as CK> > > > > > > replacement. I quote > > directly from Sanjayji's paper, Section 3.1> > > -> > > > > > > > > "The carakaraka being replaced gives us an idea of the area of> > > > > life> > > > > > > where a major unheaval is expected to occur > > while the slot,> > > which is> > > > > > > falling vacant, > > needs the strong support of Lord Siva in the> > > form of> > > > > > > > > a strong sthira karaka so that the concerned relation/aspect > > of> > > life> > > > > > > is not disturbed or destroyed. > > <some omitted>. The spiritual> > > impact> > > > > > > > > on the person is very strong if the AK, AMK or BK are> > > > > involved..".> > > > > > > Please clarify your position on > > this.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > And relatedly, > > note that all this suddenly puts a lot of> > > parampara> > > > > > > > > knowledge in question. An average person like me treats> > > > > parampara> > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one > > naturally assumes that this> > > > > > > knowledge has been > > tested over the generations. As an example,> > > how> > > > > > > > > do I build confidence that one day some one wont come up with a> > > > > key> > > > > > > undiscovered precursor verse of Parasara that > > unambiguously says> > > "In> > > > > > > all my remaining > > verses, when I say Rahu I actually mean Jupiter> > > and> > > > > > > > > when I say Jupiter, I actually mean Rahu", and in doing so> > > > > trashes> > > > > > > all current knowledge. The way I build that > > confidence is that I> > > see> > > > > > > that the current > > knowledge WORKS IN PRACTICE. Since it WORKS IN> > > > > > > > > PRACTICE, I know that the probability of discovering such a> > > verse > > is> > > > > > > next to nil. And Narasimhaji, now that you have > > thrown CK> > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa > > calculation) , into the trash> > > can,> > > > > > > it makes > > me wonder - Were Sanjay Rathji, his Guru Pt Kasinath> > > > > > > > > Rathji, or his Guru Pt Jagannath Rathji, and their Gurus, were> > > > > they> > > > > > > all using this knowledge previously AT ALL or > > NOT? Or if they> > > were,> > > > > > > were they just > > deluding themselves? Were they simply predicting> > > > > > > > > correctly because of their spiritual strength? If so, we might> > > > > as> > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea > > leaves up in the> > > air> > > > > > > and predict using > > spiritual strength, no?> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Regards,> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Sundeep> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Get your preferred Email name!> > Now you can @ymail.com and @rocketmail.com. > > http://mail.promotions./newdomains/aa/> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Dear Arpad, This is a very interesting acount you have given. It also raises a rhetoric question whether water ceases to exist as water if called paani, aab etc. This is so far as gross items go. For mantras that act at a subtle level there can be 2 veiws or more: 1. Correct pronunciation is a must (why then is there emphasis on the same while reciting vedas etc.) - or else rakshati and bhakshati can yeild different results (wonder if someone really evaluated that) 2. Meaning/Essence of the mantra should be understood and the effect thus proceeds from there. Both veiws may be right in their own way. A prayer may have no words, yet can be effective. Example of Valmiki reciting Mara-Mara is popular - whichever category that one falls in! Thanx for your time. Best Regards, SS sohamsa , " Arpad Joo " <panchasila wrote: > > > > > Hare Rama Krishna, > > Dera Soul Sadhak > > > > There are certain linguistical groups which have definite disabilities > in pronouncing certain words and sounds. This is not only with regards > to Sanskrit mantras. > > I still recall (somewhat ashamed now) how we used to " torture " > Japanese students in Vienna, Austria at the " Hochschule " with > the german word for " Beethoven Competition " - that is > " Beethovenwettbewerb " . It provided endless source of laughter > > how the hapeless and unsuspecting Japanese music students grappled with > the word (it's a mouthful anyway).Just ask any native Japanese > speaker to pronounce a simple word like " Violin " .You will be > amazed what comes out of his/her mouth. > > And again,I used to ask my Tibetan Lama friend- an accomplished adept > with some amazing yogic abilities- to pronounce for me > " Ushnishasitatapatra " - after all, this is a puja they do (to > avert calamities.)Try as hard as he was able,and he REALLY tried, the > end result was always a very mangled version of this word. > > Tibetans,Japanese,Koreans,Chinese,Mongolians etc language groups have > grave difficulties in pronouncing two consonants together such as : > > DM (as in Padma), sounds like Peme > > JR (as in Vajra),- Benzar > > RM (as in Rama)- in Thailand people cheerfully say " Lamayana " > for Ramayana. > > Sometimes a reversal of vowels happen in some mantras, such as the > Tibetan version of " Shantim Kuru " - as Shintam Kuru > > SV- (as in Svaha), Soha. > > This type of linguistical malajustment and mispronounciation is not > exactly the monopoly of these above mentioned language groups. > > If you listen to (most, but not all)native Tamil pujaris, you will also > hear some pretty amazing Sanskrit pronounciation, such as : > > Siti Vinayagar (that is: Siddhi Vinayaka) > > Saturthi (that is Chaturti),Abishegam (Abisheka) etc. > > Once , some time ago I have asked a Tamil pujari friend to give Maha > Mrityunjaya Mantra to another friend of mine. Well, how he has > pronounced this venerable and ancient mantra was totally unrecognizable > (to me at least). > > There are, of course,amongst the educated class of Tibetan yogis, quite > a number of them, who have excellent Sanskrit pronounciation. > > I am reminded of a story of the famous scholar Sakya Pandita, who has > lived a few hundred years ago. Once, traveling through the high Tibetan > mountains, he has overheard some yogi, in retreat reciting the > " Kilaya " mantra, something like this: " OM Chilaya etc… " > So, he stopped, and somewhat condescendingly explained the old yogi, > that his pronounciation is totally wrong. Thereupon the old yogi just > simply said, OK, let me try your version. He recited " OM Kilaya > etc… " , and threw his dagger into the air. Nothing happened. Hm, > this is strange, he said, let me try my version. So he recited : " OM > Chilaya… " then he threw his dagger again into the air- and it burst > into flames. Sakya Pandita was humbled. The great sanskrit scholar was > taught a real lesson about saddhana. > > I recall, that the superb Sanskrit scholar, Dr. Usharbudh Arya (now > Swami Veda Bharati) narrated, that his own guru (Swami Rama of the > Himalayas, no less) asked him to pronounce certain mantras differently > (especially bija mantras), explaining to him, that in VALID yogic > pronounciation, mantras will sound different). Now, here was a " bona > fide " great scholar, who is (still is) a world renown expert of > Sanskrit. He told us, how difficult it was for him to accept this > " yogic pronounciation " as a Sanskrit scholar. (but ,of course he > did). > > So, the question is, do the effectiveness of the pujas, as conducted by > some of the Tamil speaking pujaris, when they " shortchange " (to > put it mildly) mantras, decrease or diminish in anyway? Do the Tibetan > tantric pujas lose their effectiveness because some of the Lamas (again > not all) mispronounce words? > > Experience shows otherwise…. > > > > With deep respect to all > > > > AJ > > (the repeated advice to me was: " since you can do it well, and can > pronounce perfectly- you must do it perfectly) " > > > > > > sohamsa , " Soul Sadhak " <soulsadhak@> wrote: > > > > There is an obvious variation in the way certain words are > > pronounced/written) between sanskrit and buddhist (among them tibetan > > and japanese) texts. Though i am nowhere near to ascholar in these > > texts, the versions that i have come across a couple of words are: > > > > AUM (OM) ~ Ong > > Hum ~ Hung > > Padme ~ Peme > > Svaaha ~ soha (so ha) > > dharma ~ dhamma > > > > " Om Mani Padme Hum " is often seen written as " Om Mani Peme Hung " > > " Om Ah hum vajra guru padma siddhi hum " ~ " Om ah hung vajra guru pema > > siddhi hung " > > " dharmam sharanam gachchaami " ~ " dhammam sharanam gachchaami " > > " om soham " ~ " ong so-hung " ! > > > > It may quite be possible that " turye " 4th - beyond the 3 states) is > > converted to " ture " . The essence of the mantra seems most probably > > be praying to Tara, who ferries across, to the state beyond (the 3) > > i.e. the 4th. > > > > > > sohamsa , manoj sharma swastik_astro@ > > wrote: > > > > > > JAI MAA > > > > > > Narasimha ji > > > > > > Sadar Pranam > > > > > > Guru ji i have a Mantra Kosha printed by Kalyan mandir prakashan > > Allahbad. they quote this mantra from Tara Bhagti Sudharnava of > > Gandharva sanhita, this mantra ends with Swahaa the mantra is om tare > > tattare ture swaha. they also publish same mantra without extra half > > ta in tatare from brhama sanhita. sir the publishers mainly published > > the Shakta & tantra material, they also have good knowledge of das > > mahavidya tantra also. > > > > > > if i make a mistake then plz forgive me & bless me. > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > --- On Mon, 3/11/08, Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@ wrote: > > > Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@ > > > Tara mantra (Re: Parampara Knowledge) > > > sohamsa > > > Monday, 3 November, 2008, 1:17 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste, > > >  > > > Someone I respect who was doing Tara sadhana asked > > > me about this mantra many years back. He quoted a mantra called " om > > taare > > > tuttare ture sohaa " from apparently some Buddhist texts. He tried > > it for while > > > and strongly suspected that it was wrong. He thought it was > > originally a > > > Sanskrit mantra and practice of this mantra for many generations by > > people not > > > knowing Sanskrit resulted in a corruption in time. He sought my > > help and asked > > > me to guess what the original Sanskrit version could be. He wanted > > to do sadhana > > > using the original Sanskrit version guessed by me. > > >  > > > Obviously, the text I gave above has no meaning in > > > Sanskrit. > > >  > > > I *guessed* that tuttare may originally have been > > > dustare. The word " dustaraa " means unconquerable or invincible. The > > word ture > > > does have a meaning, but I guessed that it was probably turye after > > the previous > > > word. The word " turyaa " means the supreme power beyond all states > > of existence. > > > The word sohaa must of course be swaahaa. Thus, I guessed that the > > original > > > Sanskrit version may have been " om taare dustare turye svaahaa " and > > gave it to > > > that gentleman. This was simply my speculation at the request of > > that > > > gentleman. > > >  > > > *       > > > *       * > > >  > > > After making this correction as requested by that > > > gentleman, it remained in my mind. But I did not ask anyone to > > chant that > > > mantra. > > >  > > > When I was teaching in my class how to count > > > letters and words in mantras and see devata sthana, I used several > > examples. I > > > even used things like " god is great " as mantras. Basically, any > > pattern of > > > sounds repeated in the mind over a time has an effect and I was > > > demonstrating some technicalities related to that. So any > > combination of sounds > > > can be used as an example. As one of the examples, I used this > > guessed Sanskrit > > > version of Tara mantra that was stuck in my mind. > > >  > > > Best > > > regards, > > > Narasimha > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - ---- > > ---- > > > Do > > > a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ homam > > > Do > > > Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ tarpana > > > Spirituality: > > > http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > > > Free > > > Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. net > > > Free > > > Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst rologer.org > > > Sri > > > Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan nath.org > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - ---- > > ---- > > >  > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Arpad Joo " > > > <panchasila@ ..> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hare Rama > > > Krishna, > > > > > > > > Namaste Mr. Narasimha: > > > > > > > > I realise that > > > you cannot answer every mail, due to your workload. I > > > > †" and I am sure I > > > speak for everyone here- appreciate this. We are > > > > ALL busy.I am also glad > > > that you usually identify your sources. This is > > > > a good and laudable > > > practice. > > > > > > > > As you have written in your post: > > > > > > > > > > > " If I made any lapse, please bring it to attention and I will be > > > > very > > > happy to correct myself. " > > > > > > > > So ,here it is: > > > > > > > > Just > > > very simply- under what authority have you changed the venerable > > > > and > > > ancient Tara Mantra: " OM TARE TUTTARE TURE SVAHA, " into Om > > > > Tare Dustarye > > > Turye Svaha- or something like that.... > > > > > > > > Since this mangled form > > > has been published on your website (maintained > > > > by your students), may I > > > take the opportunity to ask you to identify > > > > your scriptural source for > > > this...that is †" if you have any. > > > > > > > > I have asked the same question > > > now several times, over a period of some > > > > months now. > > > > > > > > I > > > await your answer.... > > > > > > > > Thank you Sir > > > > > > > > With deep > > > respect to all > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Narasimha > > > P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > People should realize that I have no time to reply to all > > > emails > > > > addressed to me. > > > > > > > > > > I MAY mention mantras > > > that I got from other people or books without > > > > referring to the > > > source. > > > > > > > > > > But, when it comes to astrology, I ensure > > > whenever teaching my own > > > > research that it is identified as such. I > > > identify what was taught by my > > > > gurus, what I found in the words of > > > rishis unambiguously, what I > > > > extrapolated from those words and what I > > > thought of by myself. I am > > > > usually thorough in identifying the source > > > and type of astrological > > > > knowledge I share with others. If I made any > > > lapse, please bring it to > > > > attention and I will be very happy to correct > > > myself. > > > > > > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu, > > > > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - ---- > > ---- > > > > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ homam > > > > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > tarpana > > > > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. net > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst rologer.org > > > > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan nath.org > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - ---- > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Arpad Joo " > > > panchasila@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hare > > > Rama Krishna, > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please allow me to quote from > > > your recent post: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " It seemed to me like several teachings that were not > > > identified > > > > > > explicitly as either research or parampara > > > knowledge may actually be > > > > > > his(Pt.S.Rath) research. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " On several > > > occasions, I privately requested him (Pandit Sanjay > > > > > > Rath) to > > > acknowledge whether a specific teaching was strictly from > > > > > > > > > parampara or his own research/extrapolat ion. On each occasion, he > > > > > > > just > > > > > > smiled and evaded the question. I told him that it is > > > important to > > > > me > > > > > > and perhaps others to know which > > > knowledge is from parampara and > > > > which > > > > > > knowledge is his > > > own research and requested that he should clarify > > > > when > > > > > > > > > teaching new things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was > > > mixing up > > > > the > > > > > > two, though some people may be assuming > > > that anything from him not > > > > > > explicitly identified as research > > > is from parampara. As a seeker of > > > > > > knowledge who has a good > > > level of belief in the knowledge coming > > > > from > > > > > > Sri > > > Achyutananda, this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things > > > > > > > > > particularly challenging for me. " (The underline is from me.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have a similar > > > problem with you. I have asked you a question > > > > > > -several times > > > now- to identify the scriptural basis of a Mantra > > > > > > which you > > > teach publicly to your students. Mantras are at least as > > > > > > > > > serious an issue (if not more) than a Sanskrit Shloka of Parasara. > > > > > > > Since > > > > > > you have consistently evaded the answer to my question,I > > > am forced > > > > to > > > > > > come to the following > > > conclusion-either: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. You cannot identify > > > the scriptural source of the Mantra which you > > > > > > teach. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. This mantra was given to you in a " parampara " or > > > (worse) > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. You have made up a mantra to suit > > > your purpose. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. You mix up the source of an > > > authentic Mantra, with personal > > > > > > revelation/research or > > > " parampara " . > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. The Mantra which you have > > > taught to your students is falsified. > > > > > > > > > > > > (I > > > reckon ALL of the above) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is always advisable to adhere and follow consistently > > > to the > > > > > > principles of what one preaches (see above) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please feel free to challenge me (shotgun > > > approach)to quote the > > > > > > " chapter and verse " -in the original, to > > > support my argument. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is one thing to > > > accuse someone ( a brilliant authority on these > > > > > > > > > subjects-Pt. S.Rath!)of mixing up Rishi's words,parampara, personal > > > > > > > > > research etc ,carelessly, and then failing to apply the same > > > > > > > standards > > > > > > to oneself. > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > have another name for this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hypocrisy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I said before: it IS the Principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With deep respect to all: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. Moreover,it is > > > my personal belief, that if we add up all the > > > > > > " Jyotish " > > > knowledge of all the members on this list, (and I include > > > > you > > > > > > > > > and me here as well) > > > > > > > > > > > > we may not > > > amount to more than- let's say- 5% of what Pt.Sanjay Rath > > > > > > > > > knows.Just to keep things in perspective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Narasimha > > > P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Sundeep and others, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or if they were, > > > > > > > > were they just deluding themselves? > > > Were they simply predicting > > > > > > > > correctly because of > > > their spiritual strength? If so, we might > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea leaves up in the > > > > > > > air > > > > > > > > and predict using spiritual strength, > > > no? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let us take a step back. Some > > > of the SJC gurus and some other > > > > people > > > > > > at SJC were > > > once using 7 chara karakas and arudha padas as taught by > > > > Sri > > > > > > > > > KN Rao. Some of them were happy and found them working. When > > > they > > > > came > > > > > > to SJC, they switched and found things > > > working better. The > > > > bottomline is > > > > > > that their knowledge > > > was incomplete before, but contained some > > > > useful > > > > > > stuff > > > nevertheless. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am pretty sure > > > there are a lot of mistakes in our understanding > > > > even > > > > > > > > > now. The bottomline is that our knowledge is incomplete now, but > > > > > > > > > contains some useful stuff nevertheless. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One more thing: Not all knowledge is equally critical in > > > our > > > > practical > > > > > > predictions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suppose I predict someone's marriage or promotion. > > > Whether I see > > > > D-9 > > > > > > or D-10 for marriage is critical. > > > Whether I see D-10 or D-12 for > > > > > > promotion is critical. Whether > > > I use TA dasa with TP charts or not > > > > is > > > > > > critical. > > > Whether I take the 6th or 7th house for marriage is > > > > critical. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if I evaluate the argalas on 7th > > > house or UL incorrectly, it > > > > may > > > > > > be masked off in the > > > other things I consider. If I use a wrong > > > > planet as > > > > > > DK > > > or AmK or PK, again it may be masked off in the other things I > > > > > > > > > consider. After all, we consider multiple factors and make a > > > > > > > prediction > > > > > > when there is an agreement between several > > > factors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus, we use a lot of > > > knowledge and techniques and some of them > > > > > > critical and some of > > > them are less critical in our predictions. Our > > > > > > predictions are > > > due to multiple factors and not just one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bottomline on the negative side: We have some incorrect > > > knowledge. > > > > > > Though this may make some uncomfortable, this is > > > the truth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bottomline on the > > > positive side: We have a decent body of > > > > knowledge > > > > > > with > > > a good degree of reliability and, when we combine multiple > > > > > > > > > techniques, we are in a good shape a good percentage of times! The > > > > > > > same > > > > > > is true with others outside our parampara also (like Sri > > > KN Rao's > > > > > > followers), though the degree of correctness may be > > > different with > > > > > > different techniques used by them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And relatedly, note that all this suddenly > > > puts a lot of > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > knowledge in > > > question. An average person like me treats > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one naturally assumes that this > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge has been tested over the generations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apart from knowledge in a parampara getting > > > corrupted in time, > > > > there > > > > > > is another issue - knowledge > > > not from a parampara may be > > > > misunderstood > > > > > > to be from a > > > parampara. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I subjectively found a > > > lot of difference between some of Sanjay > > > > ji's > > > > > > initial > > > teachings like Tithi Pravesha and Narayana dasa and some of > > > > his > > > > > > > > > later teachings. The initial teachings were simple, logical > > > and > > > > > > beautiful, but I was not convinced by several teachings > > > later on. I > > > > had > > > > > > a strong suspicion that some of those > > > teachings were Sanjay ji's own > > > > > > research/extrapolat ions. It > > > seemed to me like several teachings that > > > > > > were not identified > > > explicitly as either research or parampara > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > may actually be his research. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > did not hide my suspicion from him. I mentioned it privately to > > > > > > > him. > > > > > > On several occasions, I privately requested him to > > > acknowledge > > > > whether a > > > > > > specific teaching was strictly > > > from parampara or his own > > > > > > research/extrapolat ion. On each > > > occasion, he just smiled and evaded > > > > the > > > > > > question. I > > > told him that it is important to me and perhaps others > > > > to > > > > > > > > > know which knowledge is from parampara and which knowledge is his > > > > > > > own > > > > > > research and requested that he should clarify when > > > teaching new > > > > things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From > > > his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was mixing > > > > up > > > > > > > > > the two, though some people may be assuming that anything from > > > him > > > > not > > > > > > explicitly identified as research is from > > > parampara. As a seeker of > > > > > > knowledge who has a good level of > > > belief in the knowledge coming > > > > from > > > > > > Sri Achyutananda, > > > this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things > > > > > > particularly > > > challenging for me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa calculation) , into the trash > > > > > > > can, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding drigdasa > > > calculation, Sanjay ji privately told me > > > > several > > > > > > years > > > back that he was taught drigdasa along with so many other > > > > dasas > > > in > > > > > > one afternoon and that he just took very brief notes on so > > > many > > > > things > > > > > > at once. He said there could have beem > > > confusion or mistakes in > > > > > > drigdasa. Given this uncertainty, it > > > is not impossible that what he > > > > > > finally taught is different > > > from Achyutananda' s teaching. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parasara's verses on drigdasa were translated the same way by all > > > > > > > > > translators I saw. And I have not deviated from Santhanam etc. I > > > > > > > only > > > > > > supplemented it with a small rule related to > > > interpretation. Thus, > > > > what > > > > > > I shared on drigdasa > > > calculations is not just my own independent > > > > > > interpretation, > > > but an interpretation of Santhanam and Sharma too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu, > > > > > > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - ---- > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > homam > > > > > > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > tarpana > > > > > > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. > > net > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst > > rologer.org > > > > > > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan > > nath.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - ---- > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, > > > " vedicastrostudent " > > > > vedicastrostudent@ > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimhaji (and > > > Vistiji), > > > > > > > > While I cant question Narasimhaji' s > > > scholarship, it is clear > > > > that > > > > > > > > these kind of > > > issues question the very root of parampara > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > if not astrology itself. The silence (from SJC Gurus and > > > > > > > Sanjayji) > > > > > > > > surprises me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In scientific subjects, if a new theory comes > > > up that > > > > contradicts > > > > > > > > an old one, it must > > > either be a generalization of the old theory > > > > > > > > (e.g. > > > Einstein's theory of relativity (new) is not in > > > > contradiction > > > > > > > > > > > with Newton's theory (old) at speeds far less than the > > speed > > > of > > > > > > > > light), or at the very least it must explain why > > > the old theory > > > > > > > > correctly predicted in some cases, or > > > if the old theory didnt > > > > even > > > > > > > > do that, then > > > why the old theory's observations were wrong > > > > (since > > > > > > > > > > > those wrong observations supported the old theory). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In this case, Narasimhaji has simply > > > thrown the entire CK > > > > > > > > replacement theory into the > > > trash can. Which immediately begs > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > question: So are Sanjayji's explanations of Alan Leo's and > > > > > > > Mahatma > > > > > > > > Gandhi's charts, in his AK paper, wrong? > > > Narasimhaji, after your > > > > new > > > > > > > > found knowledge, > > > you must either conclude that the events in > > > > one's > > > > > > > > > > > life (i.e. total change of motivation and direction in life, not > > > > > > > > > > > present in most people's life) that Sanjayji has > > > hitherto > > > > explained > > > > > > > > using AK replacement, do > > > not exist i.e Sanjayji was merely > > > > deluding > > > > > > > > > > > himself, OR that they are explained by some other astrological > > > > > > > > > > > combination. So far, in the new scheme of things, you havent > > > > > > > > > > > volunteered any astrological combination that explains ALL > > > and > > > > ONLY > > > > > > > > those events that have so far been > > > explained by Sanjayji as CK > > > > > > > > replacement. I quote > > > directly from Sanjayji's paper, Section 3.1 > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > " The carakaraka being replaced gives us an idea of the area of > > > > > > > life > > > > > > > > where a major unheaval is expected to occur > > > while the slot, > > > > which is > > > > > > > > falling vacant, > > > needs the strong support of Lord Siva in the > > > > form of > > > > > > > > > > > a strong sthira karaka so that the concerned relation/aspect > > > of > > > > life > > > > > > > > is not disturbed or destroyed. > > > <some omitted>. The spiritual > > > > impact > > > > > > > > > > > on the person is very strong if the AK, AMK or BK are > > > > > > > involved.. " . > > > > > > > > Please clarify your position on > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And relatedly, > > > note that all this suddenly puts a lot of > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge in question. An average person like me treats > > > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one > > > naturally assumes that this > > > > > > > > knowledge has been > > > tested over the generations. As an example, > > > > how > > > > > > > > > > > do I build confidence that one day some one wont come up with a > > > > > > > key > > > > > > > > undiscovered precursor verse of Parasara that > > > unambiguously says > > > > " In > > > > > > > > all my remaining > > > verses, when I say Rahu I actually mean Jupiter > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > when I say Jupiter, I actually mean Rahu " , and in doing so > > > > > > > trashes > > > > > > > > all current knowledge. The way I build that > > > confidence is that I > > > > see > > > > > > > > that the current > > > knowledge WORKS IN PRACTICE. Since it WORKS IN > > > > > > > > > > > PRACTICE, I know that the probability of discovering such a > > > > verse > > > is > > > > > > > > next to nil. And Narasimhaji, now that you have > > > thrown CK > > > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa > > > calculation) , into the trash > > > > can, > > > > > > > > it makes > > > me wonder - Were Sanjay Rathji, his Guru Pt Kasinath > > > > > > > > > > > Rathji, or his Guru Pt Jagannath Rathji, and their Gurus, were > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > all using this knowledge previously AT ALL or > > > NOT? Or if they > > > > were, > > > > > > > > were they just > > > deluding themselves? Were they simply predicting > > > > > > > > > > > correctly because of their spiritual strength? If so, we might > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea > > > leaves up in the > > > > air > > > > > > > > and predict using > > > spiritual strength, no? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sundeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Get your preferred Email name! > > > Now you can @ymail.com and @rocketmail.com. > > > http://mail.promotions./newdomains/aa/ > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Hare Rama Krishna, Dear SS, Dear SS, I don't know…I do not have the answers. Please allow me tell you a story, which has happened to me, many,many years ago. In the 1970s, I received Gayatri diksha from Brahmachari Omkardas (now Swami). A few months after that, he sent me up to Uttarakashi, actually above the village, somewhere between Gangotri and Uttarakashi. I have had many wondrous experiences there, which I will not detail here. Suffice it to say, that 2 yogis,very advanced yogis- both of them have done several Gayatri Purascharanas already, endowed with siddhis and wisdom- took me under their tutelage and further "polished" my Gayatri. I will never forget this. One day, in particular, at a beautiful spot at the bank of the river Ganges they started "working on " my Sanskrit pronounciation with regards to Gayatri. They worked on me (and on these few lines of 24 syllables) for nearly 3 hours! Now, I would like to tell you that I am a professional musician with superb training, in the classical sense.I have had voice training every day, since the age of six (Sundays excepted).I play several instruments and have performed by now more the 1,500 concerts all over the world. I have- what is known -as perfect pitch.Made some 50+++ CDs. Etc Well, I am a thoroughly trained musician, and can reproduce virtually any sound, sing anything and pronounce anything well. And even then, it took these 2 adepts 3 hours of grilling, until they were fully satisfied, that my Gayatri chanting is perfect. I have also learned, of course, that there are many, many ways to chant Gayatri, in various ragas. This is a vidya in itself.I sometimes have the feeling that I can make even an inert stone or a boulder weep, when Gayatri is sung in Bhairavi Raga… Many people believe that the traditional vedic 3 note chanting is the only way.This is probably, because this is what people know and can "do". (unfortunately, because of Bollywood, people start to believe that the hip gyrations of Sharukh Khan is authentic Indian classical dancing, and the popular hindi song "chori,chori, chupkeh, chupkeh" is equal to Ravi Shankar.I actually heard this from some teary eyed Japanese fans). To come to my point: yes ,pronounciation is VERY important. Vitally important. But if people just can't do it then…. What do you do? Forbid them to chant a mantra? I think I have narrated a story which I have experienced in Thailand. There the lady manager of the Hotel (Manohra) approached me, with a curious request. She has observed me meditating in the mornings beneath a large Ganapati statue, in the swimming pool (of all places). She asked me to correct her mantra (actually she said: mantla). After working with her on her pronounciation, for a long time,the final, final, final "end product", which she was able to do, sounded like, and I am not kidding here: "Hele Klisna, Hele Klisna, Klisna, Klisna, Hele Hele, Hele Lama, Hele Lama, Lama Lama, Hele Hele…" But…. When she chanted it, tears streamed down on her cheeks, and she had a beatific smile, with full faith, and devotion- which is so rare to see- this Thai Buddhist lady chanted and chanted…. I realized of course, that the Divine mother was teaching me a lesson in devotion- through this Thai lady, humbling me and putting my "hybris" into the right place (dust bin). I touched her feet and said: Mother, go ahead, you have everything. So,what is important?Perfect pronounciation or devotion? Method and exactness of "vidya" or faith? Let me try to answer this in another way. In the 4th century (some 1,600 years ago by now), St. Benedict , the founder of western monastic Christianity coined a motto for his monks –which they retained to this day: "ora and labora". This a loaded phrase and as more meaning than appears on the surface, but loosely translated means: "pray AND work". Later on, I believe other Benedictines enlarged the meaning considerably, explaining that you must PRAY (ORA)(with such utter devotion and intensity)AS IF EVERYTHING is dependent on Prayer- AND you must WORK (LABORA) (with such devotion and intensity) AS IF EVERYTHING is dependent on Work. In a similar way my thinking on mantras runs like this: We must pronounce the mantras with such exactness as if everything and all effectiveness is dependent on the correct pronounciation/intonation AND, we must have such devotion and faith as if everything is dependent on the correct "bhava'. I don't know, if I made any sense here….just a few thoughts With deep respect to All AJ sohamsa , "Soul Sadhak" <soulsadhak wrote:>> Dear Arpad,> > This is a very interesting acount you have given. It also raises a > rhetoric question whether water ceases to exist as water if called > paani, aab etc. This is so far as gross items go. > > For mantras that act at a subtle level there can be 2 veiws or more:> > 1. Correct pronunciation is a must (why then is there emphasis on the > same while reciting vedas etc.) - or else rakshati and bhakshati can > yeild different results (wonder if someone really evaluated that)> > 2. Meaning/Essence of the mantra should be understood and the effect > thus proceeds from there. > > Both veiws may be right in their own way. > > A prayer may have no words, yet can be effective.> > Example of Valmiki reciting Mara-Mara is popular - whichever category > that one falls in!> > Thanx for your time.> > Best Regards,> SS> > > > sohamsa , "Arpad Joo" panchasila@ wrote:> >> > > > > > > > Hare Rama Krishna,> > > > Dera Soul Sadhak> > > > > > > > There are certain linguistical groups which have definite > disabilities> > in pronouncing certain words and sounds. This is not only with > regards> > to Sanskrit mantras.> > > > I still recall (somewhat ashamed now) how we used to "torture"> > Japanese students in Vienna, Austria at the "Hochschule" with> > the german word for "Beethoven Competition"- that is> > "Beethovenwettbewerb". It provided endless source of laughter> > > > how the hapeless and unsuspecting Japanese music students grappled > with> > the word (it's a mouthful anyway).Just ask any native Japanese> > speaker to pronounce a simple word like "Violin".You will be> > amazed what comes out of his/her mouth.> > > > And again,I used to ask my Tibetan Lama friend- an accomplished > adept> > with some amazing yogic abilities- to pronounce for me> > "Ushnishasitatapatra"- after all, this is a puja they do (to> > avert calamities.)Try as hard as he was able,and he REALLY tried, > the> > end result was always a very mangled version of this word.> > > > Tibetans,Japanese,Koreans,Chinese,Mongolians etc language groups > have> > grave difficulties in pronouncing two consonants together such as :> > > > DM (as in Padma), sounds like Peme> > > > JR (as in Vajra),- Benzar> > > > RM (as in Rama)- in Thailand people cheerfully say "Lamayana"> > for Ramayana.> > > > Sometimes a reversal of vowels happen in some mantras, such as the> > Tibetan version of "Shantim Kuru"- as Shintam Kuru> > > > SV- (as in Svaha), Soha.> > > > This type of linguistical malajustment and mispronounciation is not> > exactly the monopoly of these above mentioned language groups.> > > > If you listen to (most, but not all)native Tamil pujaris, you will > also> > hear some pretty amazing Sanskrit pronounciation, such as :> > > > Siti Vinayagar (that is: Siddhi Vinayaka)> > > > Saturthi (that is Chaturti),Abishegam (Abisheka) etc.> > > > Once , some time ago I have asked a Tamil pujari friend to give Maha> > Mrityunjaya Mantra to another friend of mine. Well, how he has> > pronounced this venerable and ancient mantra was totally > unrecognizable> > (to me at least).> > > > There are, of course,amongst the educated class of Tibetan yogis, > quite > > a number of them, who have excellent Sanskrit pronounciation.> > > > I am reminded of a story of the famous scholar Sakya Pandita, who > has> > lived a few hundred years ago. Once, traveling through the high > Tibetan> > mountains, he has overheard some yogi, in retreat reciting the> > "Kilaya" mantra, something like this: "OM Chilaya etc…"> > So, he stopped, and somewhat condescendingly explained the old yogi,> > that his pronounciation is totally wrong. Thereupon the old yogi > just> > simply said, OK, let me try your version. He recited "OM Kilaya> > etc…", and threw his dagger into the air. Nothing happened. Hm,> > this is strange, he said, let me try my version. So he recited : "OM> > Chilaya…" then he threw his dagger again into the air- and it burst> > into flames. Sakya Pandita was humbled. The great sanskrit scholar > was> > taught a real lesson about saddhana.> > > > I recall, that the superb Sanskrit scholar, Dr. Usharbudh Arya (now> > Swami Veda Bharati) narrated, that his own guru (Swami Rama of the> > Himalayas, no less) asked him to pronounce certain mantras > differently> > (especially bija mantras), explaining to him, that in VALID yogic> > pronounciation, mantras will sound different). Now, here was a "bona> > fide" great scholar, who is (still is) a world renown expert of> > Sanskrit. He told us, how difficult it was for him to accept this> > "yogic pronounciation" as a Sanskrit scholar. (but ,of course he> > did).> > > > So, the question is, do the effectiveness of the pujas, as > conducted by> > some of the Tamil speaking pujaris, when they "shortchange" (to> > put it mildly) mantras, decrease or diminish in anyway? Do the > Tibetan> > tantric pujas lose their effectiveness because some of the Lamas > (again> > not all) mispronounce words?> > > > Experience shows otherwise….> > > > > > > > With deep respect to all> > > > > > > > AJ> > > > (the repeated advice to me was: "since you can do it well, and can> > pronounce perfectly- you must do it perfectly)"> > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa , "Soul Sadhak" <soulsadhak@> wrote:> > >> > > There is an obvious variation in the way certain words are> > > pronounced/written) between sanskrit and buddhist (among them > tibetan> > > and japanese) texts. Though i am nowhere near to ascholar in these> > > texts, the versions that i have come across a couple of words are:> > >> > > AUM (OM) ~ Ong> > > Hum ~ Hung> > > Padme ~ Peme> > > Svaaha ~ soha (so ha)> > > dharma ~ dhamma> > >> > > "Om Mani Padme Hum" is often seen written as "Om Mani Peme Hung"> > > "Om Ah hum vajra guru padma siddhi hum" ~ "Om ah hung vajra guru > pema> > > siddhi hung"> > > "dharmam sharanam gachchaami" ~ "dhammam sharanam gachchaami"> > > "om soham" ~ "ong so-hung"!> > >> > > It may quite be possible that "turye" 4th - beyond the 3 states) > is> > > converted to "ture". The essence of the mantra seems most probably> > > be praying to Tara, who ferries across, to the state beyond (the > 3)> > > i.e. the 4th.> > >> > >> > > sohamsa , manoj sharma swastik_astro@> > > wrote:> > > >> > > > JAI MAA> > > >> > > > Narasimha ji> > > >> > > > Sadar Pranam> > > >> > > > Guru ji i have a Mantra Kosha printed by Kalyan mandir prakashan> > > Allahbad. they quote this mantra from Tara Bhagti Sudharnava of> > > Gandharva sanhita, this mantra ends with Swahaa the mantra is om > tare> > > tattare ture swaha. they also publish same mantra without extra > half> > > ta in tatare from brhama sanhita. sir the publishers mainly > published> > > the Shakta & tantra material, they also have good knowledge of das> > > mahavidya tantra also.> > > >> > > > if i make a mistake then plz forgive me & bless me.> > > >> > > > thanks> > > >> > > > --- On Mon, 3/11/08, Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@ wrote:> > > > Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@> > > > Tara mantra (Re: Parampara Knowledge)> > > > sohamsa > > > > Monday, 3 November, 2008, 1:17 AM> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Namaste,> > > > Â> > > > Someone I respect who was doing Tara sadhana asked> > > > me about this mantra many years back. He quoted a mantra > called "om> > > taare> > > > tuttare ture sohaa" from apparently some Buddhist texts. He > tried> > > it for while> > > > and strongly suspected that it was wrong. He thought it was> > > originally a> > > > Sanskrit mantra and practice of this mantra for many > generations by> > > people not> > > > knowing Sanskrit resulted in a corruption in time. He sought my> > > help and asked> > > > me to guess what the original Sanskrit version could be. He > wanted> > > to do sadhana> > > > using the original Sanskrit version guessed by me.> > > > Â> > > > Obviously, the text I gave above has no meaning in> > > > Sanskrit.> > > > Â> > > > I *guessed* that tuttare may originally have been> > > > dustare. The word "dustaraa" means unconquerable or invincible. > The> > > word ture> > > > does have a meaning, but I guessed that it was probably turye > after> > > the previous> > > > word. The word "turyaa" means the supreme power beyond all > states> > > of existence.> > > > The word sohaa must of course be swaahaa. Thus, I guessed that > the> > > original> > > > Sanskrit version may have been "om taare dustare turye svaahaa" > and> > > gave it to> > > > that gentleman. This was simply my speculation at the request of> > > that> > > > gentleman.> > > > Â> > > > *      Â> > > > *       *> > > > Â> > > > After making this correction as requested by that> > > > gentleman, it remained in my mind. But I did not ask anyone to> > > chant that> > > > mantra.> > > > Â> > > > When I was teaching in my class how to count> > > > letters and words in mantras and see devata sthana, I used > several> > > examples. I> > > > even used things like "god is great" as mantras. Basically, any> > > pattern of> > > > sounds repeated in the mind over a time has an effect and I was> > > > demonstrating some technicalities related to that. So any> > > combination of sounds> > > > can be used as an example. As one of the examples, I used this> > > guessed Sanskrit> > > > version of Tara mantra that was stuck in my mind.> > > > Â> > > > Best> > > > regards,> > > > Narasimha> > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -> ----> > > ----> > > > Do> > > > a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ homam> > > > Do> > > > Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > tarpana> > > > Spirituality:> > > > http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom> > > > Free> > > > Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. net> > > > Free> > > > Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst rologer.org> > > > Sri> > > > Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan nath.org> > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -> ----> > > ----Â> > > > Â> > > > sohamsa@ .com, "Arpad Joo"> > > > <panchasila@ ..> wrote:> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Hare Rama> > > > Krishna,> > > > >> > > > > Namaste Mr. Narasimha:> > > > >> > > > > I realise that> > > > you cannot answer every mail, due to your workload. I> > > > > â€" and I am sure I> > > > speak for everyone here- appreciate this. We are> > > > > ALL busy.I am also glad> > > > that you usually identify your sources. This is> > > > > a good and laudable> > > > practice.> > > > >> > > > > As you have written in your post:> > > > >> > > > >> > > > "If I made any lapse, please bring it to attention and I will be> > > > > very> > > > happy to correct myself."> > > > >> > > > > So ,here it is:> > > > >> > > > > Just> > > > very simply- under what authority have you changed the venerable> > > > > and> > > > ancient Tara Mantra: "OM TARE TUTTARE TURE SVAHA, "into Om> > > > > Tare Dustarye> > > > Turye Svaha- or something like that....> > > > >> > > > > Since this mangled form> > > > has been published on your website (maintained> > > > > by your students), may I> > > > take the opportunity to ask you to identify> > > > > your scriptural source for> > > > this...that is â€"if you have any.> > > > >> > > > > I have asked the same question> > > > now several times, over a period of some> > > > > months now.> > > > >> > > > > I> > > > await your answer....> > > > >> > > > > Thank you Sir> > > > >> > > > > With deep> > > > respect to all> > > > >> > > > > sohamsa@ .com, "Narasimha> > > > P.V.R. Rao" <pvr@> wrote:> > > > > >> > > > > > Namaste Sir,> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > People should realize that I have no time to reply to all> > > > emails> > > > > addressed to me.> > > > > >> > > > > > I MAY mention mantras> > > > that I got from other people or books without> > > > > referring to the> > > > source.> > > > > >> > > > > > But, when it comes to astrology, I ensure> > > > whenever teaching my own> > > > > research that it is identified as such. I> > > > identify what was taught by my> > > > > gurus, what I found in the words of> > > > rishis unambiguously, what I> > > > > extrapolated from those words and what I> > > > thought of by myself. I am> > > > > usually thorough in identifying the source> > > > and type of astrological> > > > > knowledge I share with others. If I made any> > > > lapse, please bring it to> > > > > attention and I will be very happy to correct> > > > myself.> > > > > >> > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu,> > > > > >> > > > Narasimha> > > > > >> > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -> ----> > > ----> > > > > >> > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > homam> > > > >> > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/> > > tarpana> > > > >> > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom> > > > >> > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. > net> > > > >> > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst > rologer.org> > > > >> > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan > nath.org> > > > > >> > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -> ----> > > ----> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, "Arpad Joo"> > > > panchasila@ wrote:> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hare> > > > Rama Krishna,> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dear Narasimha,> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > It is the> > > > principle.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Please allow me to quote from> > > > your recent post:> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > "It seemed to me like several teachings that were not> > > > identified> > > > > > > explicitly as either research or parampara> > > > knowledge may actually be> > > > > > > his(Pt.S.Rath) research."> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > "On several> > > > occasions, I privately requested him (Pandit Sanjay> > > > > > > Rath) to> > > > acknowledge whether a specific teaching was strictly from> > > > > > >> > > > parampara or his own research/extrapolat ion. On each occasion, > he> > > > >> > > > just> > > > > > > smiled and evaded the question. I told him that it is> > > > important to> > > > > me> > > > > > > and perhaps others to know which> > > > knowledge is from parampara and> > > > > which> > > > > > > knowledge is his> > > > own research and requested that he should clarify> > > > > when> > > > > > >> > > > teaching new things.> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > From his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was> > > > mixing up> > > > > the> > > > > > > two, though some people may be assuming> > > > that anything from him not> > > > > > > explicitly identified as research> > > > is from parampara. As a seeker of> > > > > > > knowledge who has a good> > > > level of belief in the knowledge coming> > > > > from> > > > > > > Sri> > > > Achyutananda, this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things> > > > > > >> > > > particularly challenging for me." (The underline is from me.)> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > I have a similar> > > > problem with you. I have asked you a question> > > > > > > -several times> > > > now- to identify the scriptural basis of a Mantra> > > > > > > which you> > > > teach publicly to your students. Mantras are at least as> > > > > > >> > > > serious an issue (if not more) than a Sanskrit Shloka of > Parasara.> > > > >> > > > Since> > > > > > > you have consistently evaded the answer to my question,I> > > > am forced> > > > > to> > > > > > > come to the following> > > > conclusion-either:> > > > > > >> > > > > > > 1. You cannot identify> > > > the scriptural source of the Mantra which you> > > > > > > teach.> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > 2. This mantra was given to you in a "parampara" or> > > > (worse)> > > > > > >> > > > > > > 3. You have made up a mantra to suit> > > > your purpose.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > 4. You mix up the source of an> > > > authentic Mantra, with personal> > > > > > > revelation/research or> > > > "parampara".> > > > > > >> > > > > > > 5. The Mantra which you have> > > > taught to your students is falsified.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > (I> > > > reckon ALL of the above)> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > It is always advisable to adhere and follow consistently> > > > to the> > > > > > > principles of what one preaches (see above)> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > Please feel free to challenge me (shotgun> > > > approach)to quote the> > > > > > > "chapter and verse"-in the original, to> > > > support my argument.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > It is one thing to> > > > accuse someone ( a brilliant authority on these> > > > > > >> > > > subjects-Pt. S.Rath!)of mixing up Rishi's words,parampara, > personal> > > > > >> > > > > research etc ,carelessly, and then failing to apply the same> > > > >> > > > standards> > > > > > > to oneself.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > I> > > > have another name for this:> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Hypocrisy.> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > As I said before: it IS the Principle.> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > With deep respect to all:> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > AJ> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > P.S. Moreover,it is> > > > my personal belief, that if we add up all the> > > > > > > "Jyotish"> > > > knowledge of all the members on this list, (and I include> > > > > you> > > > >> > > > > > and me here as well)> > > > > > >> > > > > > > we may not> > > > amount to more than- let's say- 5% of what Pt.Sanjay Rath> > > > > > >> > > > knows.Just to keep things in perspective.> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, "Narasimha> > > > P.V.R. Rao" <pvr@> wrote:> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Namaste Sundeep and others,> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > Or if they were,> > > > > > > > > were they just deluding themselves?> > > > Were they simply predicting> > > > > > > > > correctly because of> > > > their spiritual strength? If so, we might> > > > > as> > > > > > > > >> > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea leaves up in the> > > > >> > > > air> > > > > > > > > and predict using spiritual strength,> > > > no?> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Let us take a step back. Some> > > > of the SJC gurus and some other> > > > > people> > > > > > > at SJC were> > > > once using 7 chara karakas and arudha padas as taught by> > > > > Sri> > > > >> > > > > > KN Rao. Some of them were happy and found them working. When> > > > they> > > > > came> > > > > > > to SJC, they switched and found things> > > > working better. The> > > > > bottomline is> > > > > > > that their knowledge> > > > was incomplete before, but contained some> > > > > useful> > > > > > > stuff> > > > nevertheless.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I am pretty sure> > > > there are a lot of mistakes in our understanding> > > > > even> > > > > > >> > > > now. The bottomline is that our knowledge is incomplete now, but> > > > > >> > > > > contains some useful stuff nevertheless.> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > One more thing: Not all knowledge is equally critical in> > > > our> > > > > practical> > > > > > > predictions.> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > Suppose I predict someone's marriage or promotion.> > > > Whether I see> > > > > D-9> > > > > > > or D-10 for marriage is critical.> > > > Whether I see D-10 or D-12 for> > > > > > > promotion is critical. Whether> > > > I use TA dasa with TP charts or not> > > > > is> > > > > > > critical.> > > > Whether I take the 6th or 7th house for marriage is> > > > > critical.> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > But, if I evaluate the argalas on 7th> > > > house or UL incorrectly, it> > > > > may> > > > > > > be masked off in the> > > > other things I consider. If I use a wrong> > > > > planet as> > > > > > > DK> > > > or AmK or PK, again it may be masked off in the other things I> > > > > > >> > > > consider. After all, we consider multiple factors and make a> > > > >> > > > prediction> > > > > > > when there is an agreement between several> > > > factors.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thus, we use a lot of> > > > knowledge and techniques and some of them> > > > > > > critical and some of> > > > them are less critical in our predictions. Our> > > > > > > predictions are> > > > due to multiple factors and not just one.> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > Bottomline on the negative side: We have some incorrect> > > > knowledge.> > > > > > > Though this may make some uncomfortable, this is> > > > the truth.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Bottomline on the> > > > positive side: We have a decent body of> > > > > knowledge> > > > > > > with> > > > a good degree of reliability and, when we combine multiple> > > > > > >> > > > techniques, we are in a good shape a good percentage of times! > The> > > > >> > > > same> > > > > > > is true with others outside our parampara also (like Sri> > > > KN Rao's> > > > > > > followers), though the degree of correctness may be> > > > different with> > > > > > > different techniques used by them.> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > And relatedly, note that all this suddenly> > > > puts a lot of> > > > > parampara> > > > > > > > > knowledge in> > > > question. An average person like me treats> > > > > parampara> > > > > > >> > > > > > knowledge with respect because one naturally assumes that > this> > > > >> > > > > > > > knowledge has been tested over the generations.> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Apart from knowledge in a parampara getting> > > > corrupted in time,> > > > > there> > > > > > > is another issue - knowledge> > > > not from a parampara may be> > > > > misunderstood> > > > > > > to be from a> > > > parampara.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I subjectively found a> > > > lot of difference between some of Sanjay> > > > > ji's> > > > > > > initial> > > > teachings like Tithi Pravesha and Narayana dasa and some of> > > > > his> > > > >> > > > > > later teachings. The initial teachings were simple, logical> > > > and> > > > > > > beautiful, but I was not convinced by several teachings> > > > later on. I> > > > > had> > > > > > > a strong suspicion that some of those> > > > teachings were Sanjay ji's own> > > > > > > research/extrapolat ions. It> > > > seemed to me like several teachings that> > > > > > > were not identified> > > > explicitly as either research or parampara> > > > > knowledge> > > > > > >> > > > may actually be his research.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I> > > > did not hide my suspicion from him. I mentioned it privately to> > > > >> > > > him.> > > > > > > On several occasions, I privately requested him to> > > > acknowledge> > > > > whether a> > > > > > > specific teaching was strictly> > > > from parampara or his own> > > > > > > research/extrapolat ion. On each> > > > occasion, he just smiled and evaded> > > > > the> > > > > > > question. I> > > > told him that it is important to me and perhaps others> > > > > to> > > > > >> > > > > know which knowledge is from parampara and which knowledge is > his> > > > >> > > > own> > > > > > > research and requested that he should clarify when> > > > teaching new> > > > > things.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > From> > > > his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was mixing> > > > > up> > > > >> > > > > > the two, though some people may be assuming that anything > from> > > > him> > > > > not> > > > > > > explicitly identified as research is from> > > > parampara. As a seeker of> > > > > > > knowledge who has a good level of> > > > belief in the knowledge coming> > > > > from> > > > > > > Sri Achyutananda,> > > > this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things> > > > > > > particularly> > > > challenging for me.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa calculation) , into the trash> > > > >> > > > can,> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Regarding drigdasa> > > > calculation, Sanjay ji privately told me> > > > > several> > > > > > > years> > > > back that he was taught drigdasa along with so many other> > > > > dasas> > > > in> > > > > > > one afternoon and that he just took very brief notes on so> > > > many> > > > > things> > > > > > > at once. He said there could have beem> > > > confusion or mistakes in> > > > > > > drigdasa. Given this uncertainty, it> > > > is not impossible that what he> > > > > > > finally taught is different> > > > from Achyutananda' s teaching.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Parasara's verses on drigdasa were translated the same way by > all> > > > > >> > > > > translators I saw. And I have not deviated from Santhanam > etc. I> > > > >> > > > only> > > > > > > supplemented it with a small rule related to> > > > interpretation. Thus,> > > > > what> > > > > > > I shared on drigdasa> > > > calculations is not just my own independent> > > > > > > interpretation,> > > > but an interpretation of Santhanam and Sharma too.> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu,> > > > > > > >> > > > Narasimha> > > > > > > >> > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -> ----> > > ----> > > > > >> > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/> > > homam> > > > >> > > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst > rologer.org/> > > tarpana> > > > >> > > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- > wisdom> > > > >> > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. > home.comcast.> > > net> > > > >> > > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst> > > rologer.org> > > > >> > > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan> > > nath.org> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -> ----> > > ----> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com,> > > > "vedicastrostudent"> > > > > vedicastrostudent@> > > > > > > wrote:> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimhaji (and> > > > Vistiji),> > > > > > > > > While I cant question Narasimhaji' s> > > > scholarship, it is clear> > > > > that> > > > > > > > > these kind of> > > > issues question the very root of parampara> > > > > knowledge> > > > > > >> > > > > > if not astrology itself. The silence (from SJC Gurus and> > > > >> > > > Sanjayji)> > > > > > > > > surprises me.> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > In scientific subjects, if a new theory comes> > > > up that> > > > > contradicts> > > > > > > > > an old one, it must> > > > either be a generalization of the old theory> > > > > > > > > (e.g.> > > > Einstein's theory of relativity (new) is not in> > > > > contradiction> > > > >> > > > > > > > with Newton's theory (old) at speeds far less than the> > > speed> > > > of> > > > > > > > > light), or at the very least it must explain why> > > > the old theory> > > > > > > > > correctly predicted in some cases, or> > > > if the old theory didnt> > > > > even> > > > > > > > > do that, then> > > > why the old theory's observations were wrong> > > > > (since> > > > > > >> > > > > > those wrong observations supported the old theory).> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > In this case, Narasimhaji has simply> > > > thrown the entire CK> > > > > > > > > replacement theory into the> > > > trash can. Which immediately begs> > > > > the> > > > > > > > >> > > > question: So are Sanjayji's explanations of Alan Leo's and> > > > >> > > > Mahatma> > > > > > > > > Gandhi's charts, in his AK paper, wrong?> > > > Narasimhaji, after your> > > > > new> > > > > > > > > found knowledge,> > > > you must either conclude that the events in> > > > > one's> > > > > > > >> > > > > life (i.e. total change of motivation and direction in life, > not> > > > >> > > > > > > > present in most people's life) that Sanjayji has> > > > hitherto> > > > > explained> > > > > > > > > using AK replacement, do> > > > not exist i.e Sanjayji was merely> > > > > deluding> > > > > > > > >> > > > himself, OR that they are explained by some other astrological> > > > > > >> > > > > > combination. So far, in the new scheme of things, you havent> > > > >> > > > > > > > volunteered any astrological combination that explains > ALL> > > > and> > > > > ONLY> > > > > > > > > those events that have so far been> > > > explained by Sanjayji as CK> > > > > > > > > replacement. I quote> > > > directly from Sanjayji's paper, Section 3.1> > > > > -> > > > > > > >> > > > > "The carakaraka being replaced gives us an idea of the area of> > > > >> > > > life> > > > > > > > > where a major unheaval is expected to occur> > > > while the slot,> > > > > which is> > > > > > > > > falling vacant,> > > > needs the strong support of Lord Siva in the> > > > > form of> > > > > > >> > > > > > a strong sthira karaka so that the concerned relation/aspect> > > > of> > > > > life> > > > > > > > > is not disturbed or destroyed.> > > > <some omitted>. The spiritual> > > > > impact> > > > > > > > >> > > > on the person is very strong if the AK, AMK or BK are> > > > >> > > > involved..".> > > > > > > > > Please clarify your position on> > > > this.> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > And relatedly,> > > > note that all this suddenly puts a lot of> > > > > parampara> > > > > > >> > > > > > knowledge in question. An average person like me treats> > > > >> > > > parampara> > > > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one> > > > naturally assumes that this> > > > > > > > > knowledge has been> > > > tested over the generations. As an example,> > > > > how> > > > > > > >> > > > > do I build confidence that one day some one wont come up with > a> > > > >> > > > key> > > > > > > > > undiscovered precursor verse of Parasara that> > > > unambiguously says> > > > > "In> > > > > > > > > all my remaining> > > > verses, when I say Rahu I actually mean Jupiter> > > > > and> > > > > > >> > > > > > when I say Jupiter, I actually mean Rahu", and in doing so> > > > >> > > > trashes> > > > > > > > > all current knowledge. The way I build that> > > > confidence is that I> > > > > see> > > > > > > > > that the current> > > > knowledge WORKS IN PRACTICE. Since it WORKS IN> > > > > > > > >> > > > PRACTICE, I know that the probability of discovering such a> > > > > verse> > > > is> > > > > > > > > next to nil. And Narasimhaji, now that you have> > > > thrown CK> > > > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa> > > > calculation) , into the trash> > > > > can,> > > > > > > > > it makes> > > > me wonder - Were Sanjay Rathji, his Guru Pt Kasinath> > > > > > > > >> > > > Rathji, or his Guru Pt Jagannath Rathji, and their Gurus, were> > > > >> > > > they> > > > > > > > > all using this knowledge previously AT ALL or> > > > NOT? Or if they> > > > > were,> > > > > > > > > were they just> > > > deluding themselves? Were they simply predicting> > > > > > > > >> > > > correctly because of their spiritual strength? If so, we might> > > > >> > > > as> > > > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea> > > > leaves up in the> > > > > air> > > > > > > > > and predict using> > > > spiritual strength, no?> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > Regards,> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > Sundeep> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Get your preferred Email name!> > > > Now you can @ymail.com and @rocketmail.com.> > > > http://mail.promotions./newdomains/aa/> > > >> > >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Dear Arpad, Thank you so much for sharing your experiences. I am somewhat like the Thai lady as my pronunciation leaves a great deal to be desired however I do like to think my sincerity is wholesome and as complete as my simple mind can make it. Bless you for giving such encouragement to another ‘tin-ear! Phyllis Chubb sohamsa [sohamsa ] On Behalf Of Arpad Joo November 6, 2008 9:01 AM sohamsa Re: Tara mantra Hare Rama Krishna, Dear SS, Dear SS, I don't know…I do not have the answers. Please allow me tell you a story, which has happened to me, many,many years ago. In the 1970s, I received Gayatri diksha from Brahmachari Omkardas (now Swami). A few months after that, he sent me up to Uttarakashi, actually above the village, somewhere between Gangotri and Uttarakashi. I have had many wondrous experiences there, which I will not detail here. Suffice it to say, that 2 yogis,very advanced yogis- both of them have done several Gayatri Purascharanas already, endowed with siddhis and wisdom- took me under their tutelage and further " polished " my Gayatri. I will never forget this. One day, in particular, at a beautiful spot at the bank of the river Ganges they started " working on " my Sanskrit pronounciation with regards to Gayatri. They worked on me (and on these few lines of 24 syllables) for nearly 3 hours! Now, I would like to tell you that I am a professional musician with superb training, in the classical sense.I have had voice training every day, since the age of six (Sundays excepted).I play several instruments and have performed by now more the 1,500 concerts all over the world. I have- what is known -as perfect pitch.Made some 50+++ CDs. Etc Well, I am a thoroughly trained musician, and can reproduce virtually any sound, sing anything and pronounce anything well. And even then, it took these 2 adepts 3 hours of grilling, until they were fully satisfied, that my Gayatri chanting is perfect. I have also learned, of course, that there are many, many ways to chant Gayatri, in various ragas. This is a vidya in itself.I sometimes have the feeling that I can make even an inert stone or a boulder weep, when Gayatri is sung in Bhairavi Raga… Many people believe that the traditional vedic 3 note chanting is the only way.This is probably, because this is what people know and can " do " . (unfortunately, because of Bollywood, people start to believe that the hip gyrations of Sharukh Khan is authentic Indian classical dancing, and the popular hindi song " chori,chori, chupkeh, chupkeh " is equal to Ravi Shankar.I actually heard this from some teary eyed Japanese fans). To come to my point: yes ,pronounciation is VERY important. Vitally important. But if people just can't do it then…. What do you do? Forbid them to chant a mantra? I think I have narrated a story which I have experienced in Thailand. There the lady manager of the Hotel (Manohra) approached me, with a curious request. She has observed me meditating in the mornings beneath a large Ganapati statue, in the swimming pool (of all places). She asked me to correct her mantra (actually she said: mantla). After working with her on her pronounciation, for a long time,the final, final, final " end product " , which she was able to do, sounded like, and I am not kidding here: " Hele Klisna, Hele Klisna, Klisna, Klisna, Hele Hele, Hele Lama, Hele Lama, Lama Lama, Hele Hele… " But…. When she chanted it, tears streamed down on her cheeks, and she had a beatific smile, with full faith, and devotion- which is so rare to see- this Thai Buddhist lady chanted and chanted…. I realized of course, that the Divine mother was teaching me a lesson in devotion- through this Thai lady, humbling me and putting my " hybris " into the right place (dust bin). I touched her feet and said: Mother, go ahead, you have everything. So,what is important?Perfect pronounciation or devotion? Method and exactness of " vidya " or faith? Let me try to answer this in another way. In the 4th century (some 1,600 years ago by now), St. Benedict , the founder of western monastic Christianity coined a motto for his monks –which they retained to this day: " ora and labora " . This a loaded phrase and as more meaning than appears on the surface, but loosely translated means: " pray AND work " . Later on, I believe other Benedictines enlarged the meaning considerably, explaining that you must PRAY (ORA)(with such utter devotion and intensity)AS IF EVERYTHING is dependent on Prayer- AND you must WORK (LABORA) (with such devotion and intensity) AS IF EVERYTHING is dependent on Work. In a similar way my thinking on mantras runs like this: We must pronounce the mantras with such exactness as if everything and all effectiveness is dependent on the correct pronounciation/intonation AND, we must have such devotion and faith as if everything is dependent on the correct " bhava'. I don't know, if I made any sense here….just a few thoughts With deep respect to All AJ sohamsa , " Soul Sadhak " <soulsadhak wrote: > > Dear Arpad, > > This is a very interesting acount you have given. It also raises a > rhetoric question whether water ceases to exist as water if called > paani, aab etc. This is so far as gross items go. > > For mantras that act at a subtle level there can be 2 veiws or more: > > 1. Correct pronunciation is a must (why then is there emphasis on the > same while reciting vedas etc.) - or else rakshati and bhakshati can > yeild different results (wonder if someone really evaluated that) > > 2. Meaning/Essence of the mantra should be understood and the effect > thus proceeds from there. > > Both veiws may be right in their own way. > > A prayer may have no words, yet can be effective. > > Example of Valmiki reciting Mara-Mara is popular - whichever category > that one falls in! > > Thanx for your time. > > Best Regards, > SS > > > > sohamsa , " Arpad Joo " panchasila@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hare Rama Krishna, > > > > Dera Soul Sadhak > > > > > > > > There are certain linguistical groups which have definite > disabilities > > in pronouncing certain words and sounds. This is not only with > regards > > to Sanskrit mantras. > > > > I still recall (somewhat ashamed now) how we used to " torture " > > Japanese students in Vienna, Austria at the " Hochschule " with > > the german word for " Beethoven Competition " - that is > > " Beethovenwettbewerb " . It provided endless source of laughter > > > > how the hapeless and unsuspecting Japanese music students grappled > with > > the word (it's a mouthful anyway).Just ask any native Japanese > > speaker to pronounce a simple word like " Violin " .You will be > > amazed what comes out of his/her mouth. > > > > And again,I used to ask my Tibetan Lama friend- an accomplished > adept > > with some amazing yogic abilities- to pronounce for me > > " Ushnishasitatapatra " - after all, this is a puja they do (to > > avert calamities.)Try as hard as he was able,and he REALLY tried, > the > > end result was always a very mangled version of this word. > > > > Tibetans,Japanese,Koreans,Chinese,Mongolians etc language groups > have > > grave difficulties in pronouncing two consonants together such as : > > > > DM (as in Padma), sounds like Peme > > > > JR (as in Vajra),- Benzar > > > > RM (as in Rama)- in Thailand people cheerfully say " Lamayana " > > for Ramayana. > > > > Sometimes a reversal of vowels happen in some mantras, such as the > > Tibetan version of " Shantim Kuru " - as Shintam Kuru > > > > SV- (as in Svaha), Soha. > > > > This type of linguistical malajustment and mispronounciation is not > > exactly the monopoly of these above mentioned language groups. > > > > If you listen to (most, but not all)native Tamil pujaris, you will > also > > hear some pretty amazing Sanskrit pronounciation, such as : > > > > Siti Vinayagar (that is: Siddhi Vinayaka) > > > > Saturthi (that is Chaturti),Abishegam (Abisheka) etc. > > > > Once , some time ago I have asked a Tamil pujari friend to give Maha > > Mrityunjaya Mantra to another friend of mine. Well, how he has > > pronounced this venerable and ancient mantra was totally > unrecognizable > > (to me at least). > > > > There are, of course,amongst the educated class of Tibetan yogis, > quite > > a number of them, who have excellent Sanskrit pronounciation. > > > > I am reminded of a story of the famous scholar Sakya Pandita, who > has > > lived a few hundred years ago. Once, traveling through the high > Tibetan > > mountains, he has overheard some yogi, in retreat reciting the > > " Kilaya " mantra, something like this: " OM Chilaya etc… " > > So, he stopped, and somewhat condescendingly explained the old yogi, > > that his pronounciation is totally wrong. Thereupon the old yogi > just > > simply said, OK, let me try your version. He recited " OM Kilaya > > etc… " , and threw his dagger into the air. Nothing happened. Hm, > > this is strange, he said, let me try my version. So he recited : " OM > > Chilaya… " then he threw his dagger again into the air- and it burst > > into flames. Sakya Pandita was humbled. The great sanskrit scholar > was > > taught a real lesson about saddhana. > > > > I recall, that the superb Sanskrit scholar, Dr. Usharbudh Arya (now > > Swami Veda Bharati) narrated, that his own guru (Swami Rama of the > > Himalayas, no less) asked him to pronounce certain mantras > differently > > (especially bija mantras), explaining to him, that in VALID yogic > > pronounciation, mantras will sound different). Now, here was a " bona > > fide " great scholar, who is (still is) a world renown expert of > > Sanskrit. He told us, how difficult it was for him to accept this > > " yogic pronounciation " as a Sanskrit scholar. (but ,of course he > > did). > > > > So, the question is, do the effectiveness of the pujas, as > conducted by > > some of the Tamil speaking pujaris, when they " shortchange " (to > > put it mildly) mantras, decrease or diminish in anyway? Do the > Tibetan > > tantric pujas lose their effectiveness because some of the Lamas > (again > > not all) mispronounce words? > > > > Experience shows otherwise…. > > > > > > > > With deep respect to all > > > > > > > > AJ > > > > (the repeated advice to me was: " since you can do it well, and can > > pronounce perfectly- you must do it perfectly) " > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa , " Soul Sadhak " <soulsadhak@> wrote: > > > > > > There is an obvious variation in the way certain words are > > > pronounced/written) between sanskrit and buddhist (among them > tibetan > > > and japanese) texts. Though i am nowhere near to ascholar in these > > > texts, the versions that i have come across a couple of words are: > > > > > > AUM (OM) ~ Ong > > > Hum ~ Hung > > > Padme ~ Peme > > > Svaaha ~ soha (so ha) > > > dharma ~ dhamma > > > > > > " Om Mani Padme Hum " is often seen written as " Om Mani Peme Hung " > > > " Om Ah hum vajra guru padma siddhi hum " ~ " Om ah hung vajra guru > pema > > > siddhi hung " > > > " dharmam sharanam gachchaami " ~ " dhammam sharanam gachchaami " > > > " om soham " ~ " ong so-hung " ! > > > > > > It may quite be possible that " turye " 4th - beyond the 3 states) > is > > > converted to " ture " . The essence of the mantra seems most probably > > > be praying to Tara, who ferries across, to the state beyond (the > 3) > > > i.e. the 4th. > > > > > > > > > sohamsa , manoj sharma swastik_astro@ > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > JAI MAA > > > > > > > > Narasimha ji > > > > > > > > Sadar Pranam > > > > > > > > Guru ji i have a Mantra Kosha printed by Kalyan mandir prakashan > > > Allahbad. they quote this mantra from Tara Bhagti Sudharnava of > > > Gandharva sanhita, this mantra ends with Swahaa the mantra is om > tare > > > tattare ture swaha. they also publish same mantra without extra > half > > > ta in tatare from brhama sanhita. sir the publishers mainly > published > > > the Shakta & tantra material, they also have good knowledge of das > > > mahavidya tantra also. > > > > > > > > if i make a mistake then plz forgive me & bless me. > > > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 3/11/08, Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@ wrote: > > > > Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@ > > > > Tara mantra (Re: Parampara Knowledge) > > > > sohamsa > > > > Monday, 3 November, 2008, 1:17 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste, > > > >  > > > > Someone I respect who was doing Tara sadhana asked > > > > me about this mantra many years back. He quoted a mantra > called " om > > > taare > > > > tuttare ture sohaa " from apparently some Buddhist texts. He > tried > > > it for while > > > > and strongly suspected that it was wrong. He thought it was > > > originally a > > > > Sanskrit mantra and practice of this mantra for many > generations by > > > people not > > > > knowing Sanskrit resulted in a corruption in time. He sought my > > > help and asked > > > > me to guess what the original Sanskrit version could be. He > wanted > > > to do sadhana > > > > using the original Sanskrit version guessed by me. > > > >  > > > > Obviously, the text I gave above has no meaning in > > > > Sanskrit. > > > >  > > > > I *guessed* that tuttare may originally have been > > > > dustare. The word " dustaraa " means unconquerable or invincible. > The > > > word ture > > > > does have a meaning, but I guessed that it was probably turye > after > > > the previous > > > > word. The word " turyaa " means the supreme power beyond all > states > > > of existence. > > > > The word sohaa must of course be swaahaa. Thus, I guessed that > the > > > original > > > > Sanskrit version may have been " om taare dustare turye svaahaa " > and > > > gave it to > > > > that gentleman. This was simply my speculation at the request of > > > that > > > > gentleman. > > > >  > > > > *       > > > > *       * > > > >  > > > > After making this correction as requested by that > > > > gentleman, it remained in my mind. But I did not ask anyone to > > > chant that > > > > mantra. > > > >  > > > > When I was teaching in my class how to count > > > > letters and words in mantras and see devata sthana, I used > several > > > examples. I > > > > even used things like " god is great " as mantras. Basically, any > > > pattern of > > > > sounds repeated in the mind over a time has an effect and I was > > > > demonstrating some technicalities related to that. So any > > > combination of sounds > > > > can be used as an example. As one of the examples, I used this > > > guessed Sanskrit > > > > version of Tara mantra that was stuck in my mind. > > > >  > > > > Best > > > > regards, > > > > Narasimha > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > ---- > > > ---- > > > > Do > > > > a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ homam > > > > Do > > > > Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > tarpana > > > > Spirituality: > > > > http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > > > > Free > > > > Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. net > > > > Free > > > > Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst rologer.org > > > > Sri > > > > Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan nath.org > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > ---- > > > ---- > > > >  > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Arpad Joo " > > > > <panchasila@ ..> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hare Rama > > > > Krishna, > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Mr. Narasimha: > > > > > > > > > > I realise that > > > > you cannot answer every mail, due to your workload. I > > > > > †" and I am sure I > > > > speak for everyone here- appreciate this. We are > > > > > ALL busy.I am also glad > > > > that you usually identify your sources. This is > > > > > a good and laudable > > > > practice. > > > > > > > > > > As you have written in your post: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " If I made any lapse, please bring it to attention and I will be > > > > > very > > > > happy to correct myself. " > > > > > > > > > > So ,here it is: > > > > > > > > > > Just > > > > very simply- under what authority have you changed the venerable > > > > > and > > > > ancient Tara Mantra: " OM TARE TUTTARE TURE SVAHA, " into Om > > > > > Tare Dustarye > > > > Turye Svaha- or something like that.... > > > > > > > > > > Since this mangled form > > > > has been published on your website (maintained > > > > > by your students), may I > > > > take the opportunity to ask you to identify > > > > > your scriptural source for > > > > this...that is †" if you have any. > > > > > > > > > > I have asked the same question > > > > now several times, over a period of some > > > > > months now. > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > await your answer.... > > > > > > > > > > Thank you Sir > > > > > > > > > > With deep > > > > respect to all > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Narasimha > > > > P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > People should realize that I have no time to reply to all > > > > emails > > > > > addressed to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > I MAY mention mantras > > > > that I got from other people or books without > > > > > referring to the > > > > source. > > > > > > > > > > > > But, when it comes to astrology, I ensure > > > > whenever teaching my own > > > > > research that it is identified as such. I > > > > identify what was taught by my > > > > > gurus, what I found in the words of > > > > rishis unambiguously, what I > > > > > extrapolated from those words and what I > > > > thought of by myself. I am > > > > > usually thorough in identifying the source > > > > and type of astrological > > > > > knowledge I share with others. If I made any > > > > lapse, please bring it to > > > > > attention and I will be very happy to correct > > > > myself. > > > > > > > > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu, > > > > > > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > ---- > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > homam > > > > > > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > > tarpana > > > > > > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. > net > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst > rologer.org > > > > > > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan > nath.org > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > ---- > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Arpad Joo " > > > > panchasila@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hare > > > > Rama Krishna, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please allow me to quote from > > > > your recent post: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " It seemed to me like several teachings that were not > > > > identified > > > > > > > explicitly as either research or parampara > > > > knowledge may actually be > > > > > > > his(Pt.S.Rath) research. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " On several > > > > occasions, I privately requested him (Pandit Sanjay > > > > > > > Rath) to > > > > acknowledge whether a specific teaching was strictly from > > > > > > > > > > > parampara or his own research/extrapolat ion. On each occasion, > he > > > > > > > > > just > > > > > > > smiled and evaded the question. I told him that it is > > > > important to > > > > > me > > > > > > > and perhaps others to know which > > > > knowledge is from parampara and > > > > > which > > > > > > > knowledge is his > > > > own research and requested that he should clarify > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > teaching new things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was > > > > mixing up > > > > > the > > > > > > > two, though some people may be assuming > > > > that anything from him not > > > > > > > explicitly identified as research > > > > is from parampara. As a seeker of > > > > > > > knowledge who has a good > > > > level of belief in the knowledge coming > > > > > from > > > > > > > Sri > > > > Achyutananda, this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things > > > > > > > > > > > particularly challenging for me. " (The underline is from me.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have a similar > > > > problem with you. I have asked you a question > > > > > > > -several times > > > > now- to identify the scriptural basis of a Mantra > > > > > > > which you > > > > teach publicly to your students. Mantras are at least as > > > > > > > > > > > serious an issue (if not more) than a Sanskrit Shloka of > Parasara. > > > > > > > > > Since > > > > > > > you have consistently evaded the answer to my question,I > > > > am forced > > > > > to > > > > > > > come to the following > > > > conclusion-either: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. You cannot identify > > > > the scriptural source of the Mantra which you > > > > > > > teach. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. This mantra was given to you in a " parampara " or > > > > (worse) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. You have made up a mantra to suit > > > > your purpose. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. You mix up the source of an > > > > authentic Mantra, with personal > > > > > > > revelation/research or > > > > " parampara " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. The Mantra which you have > > > > taught to your students is falsified. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (I > > > > reckon ALL of the above) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is always advisable to adhere and follow consistently > > > > to the > > > > > > > principles of what one preaches (see above) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please feel free to challenge me (shotgun > > > > approach)to quote the > > > > > > > " chapter and verse " -in the original, to > > > > support my argument. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is one thing to > > > > accuse someone ( a brilliant authority on these > > > > > > > > > > > subjects-Pt. S.Rath!)of mixing up Rishi's words,parampara, > personal > > > > > > > > > > > research etc ,carelessly, and then failing to apply the same > > > > > > > > > standards > > > > > > > to oneself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > have another name for this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hypocrisy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I said before: it IS the Principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With deep respect to all: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. Moreover,it is > > > > my personal belief, that if we add up all the > > > > > > > " Jyotish " > > > > knowledge of all the members on this list, (and I include > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > and me here as well) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we may not > > > > amount to more than- let's say- 5% of what Pt.Sanjay Rath > > > > > > > > > > > knows.Just to keep things in perspective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Narasimha > > > > P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Sundeep and others, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or if they were, > > > > > > > > > were they just deluding themselves? > > > > Were they simply predicting > > > > > > > > > correctly because of > > > > their spiritual strength? If so, we might > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea leaves up in the > > > > > > > > > air > > > > > > > > > and predict using spiritual strength, > > > > no? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let us take a step back. Some > > > > of the SJC gurus and some other > > > > > people > > > > > > > at SJC were > > > > once using 7 chara karakas and arudha padas as taught by > > > > > Sri > > > > > > > > > > > KN Rao. Some of them were happy and found them working. When > > > > they > > > > > came > > > > > > > to SJC, they switched and found things > > > > working better. The > > > > > bottomline is > > > > > > > that their knowledge > > > > was incomplete before, but contained some > > > > > useful > > > > > > > stuff > > > > nevertheless. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am pretty sure > > > > there are a lot of mistakes in our understanding > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > now. The bottomline is that our knowledge is incomplete now, but > > > > > > > > > > > contains some useful stuff nevertheless. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One more thing: Not all knowledge is equally critical in > > > > our > > > > > practical > > > > > > > predictions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suppose I predict someone's marriage or promotion. > > > > Whether I see > > > > > D-9 > > > > > > > or D-10 for marriage is critical. > > > > Whether I see D-10 or D-12 for > > > > > > > promotion is critical. Whether > > > > I use TA dasa with TP charts or not > > > > > is > > > > > > > critical. > > > > Whether I take the 6th or 7th house for marriage is > > > > > critical. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if I evaluate the argalas on 7th > > > > house or UL incorrectly, it > > > > > may > > > > > > > be masked off in the > > > > other things I consider. If I use a wrong > > > > > planet as > > > > > > > DK > > > > or AmK or PK, again it may be masked off in the other things I > > > > > > > > > > > consider. After all, we consider multiple factors and make a > > > > > > > > > prediction > > > > > > > when there is an agreement between several > > > > factors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus, we use a lot of > > > > knowledge and techniques and some of them > > > > > > > critical and some of > > > > them are less critical in our predictions. Our > > > > > > > predictions are > > > > due to multiple factors and not just one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bottomline on the negative side: We have some incorrect > > > > knowledge. > > > > > > > Though this may make some uncomfortable, this is > > > > the truth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bottomline on the > > > > positive side: We have a decent body of > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > with > > > > a good degree of reliability and, when we combine multiple > > > > > > > > > > > techniques, we are in a good shape a good percentage of times! > The > > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > is true with others outside our parampara also (like Sri > > > > KN Rao's > > > > > > > followers), though the degree of correctness may be > > > > different with > > > > > > > different techniques used by them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And relatedly, note that all this suddenly > > > > puts a lot of > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > knowledge in > > > > question. An average person like me treats > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one naturally assumes that > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge has been tested over the generations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apart from knowledge in a parampara getting > > > > corrupted in time, > > > > > there > > > > > > > is another issue - knowledge > > > > not from a parampara may be > > > > > misunderstood > > > > > > > to be from a > > > > parampara. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I subjectively found a > > > > lot of difference between some of Sanjay > > > > > ji's > > > > > > > initial > > > > teachings like Tithi Pravesha and Narayana dasa and some of > > > > > his > > > > > > > > > > > later teachings. The initial teachings were simple, logical > > > > and > > > > > > > beautiful, but I was not convinced by several teachings > > > > later on. I > > > > > had > > > > > > > a strong suspicion that some of those > > > > teachings were Sanjay ji's own > > > > > > > research/extrapolat ions. It > > > > seemed to me like several teachings that > > > > > > > were not identified > > > > explicitly as either research or parampara > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > may actually be his research. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > did not hide my suspicion from him. I mentioned it privately to > > > > > > > > > him. > > > > > > > On several occasions, I privately requested him to > > > > acknowledge > > > > > whether a > > > > > > > specific teaching was strictly > > > > from parampara or his own > > > > > > > research/extrapolat ion. On each > > > > occasion, he just smiled and evaded > > > > > the > > > > > > > question. I > > > > told him that it is important to me and perhaps others > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > know which knowledge is from parampara and which knowledge is > his > > > > > > > > > own > > > > > > > research and requested that he should clarify when > > > > teaching new > > > > > things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From > > > > his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was mixing > > > > > up > > > > > > > > > > > the two, though some people may be assuming that anything > from > > > > him > > > > > not > > > > > > > explicitly identified as research is from > > > > parampara. As a seeker of > > > > > > > knowledge who has a good level of > > > > belief in the knowledge coming > > > > > from > > > > > > > Sri Achyutananda, > > > > this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things > > > > > > > particularly > > > > challenging for me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa calculation) , into the trash > > > > > > > > > can, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding drigdasa > > > > calculation, Sanjay ji privately told me > > > > > several > > > > > > > years > > > > back that he was taught drigdasa along with so many other > > > > > dasas > > > > in > > > > > > > one afternoon and that he just took very brief notes on so > > > > many > > > > > things > > > > > > > at once. He said there could have beem > > > > confusion or mistakes in > > > > > > > drigdasa. Given this uncertainty, it > > > > is not impossible that what he > > > > > > > finally taught is different > > > > from Achyutananda' s teaching. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parasara's verses on drigdasa were translated the same way by > all > > > > > > > > > > > translators I saw. And I have not deviated from Santhanam > etc. I > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > supplemented it with a small rule related to > > > > interpretation. Thus, > > > > > what > > > > > > > I shared on drigdasa > > > > calculations is not just my own independent > > > > > > > interpretation, > > > > but an interpretation of Santhanam and Sharma too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu, > > > > > > > > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > ---- > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > > homam > > > > > > > > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst > rologer.org/ > > > tarpana > > > > > > > > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- > wisdom > > > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. > home.comcast. > > > net > > > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst > > > rologer.org > > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan > > > nath.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > ---- > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, > > > > " vedicastrostudent " > > > > > vedicastrostudent@ > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimhaji (and > > > > Vistiji), > > > > > > > > > While I cant question Narasimhaji' s > > > > scholarship, it is clear > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > these kind of > > > > issues question the very root of parampara > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > > if not astrology itself. The silence (from SJC Gurus and > > > > > > > > > Sanjayji) > > > > > > > > > surprises me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In scientific subjects, if a new theory comes > > > > up that > > > > > contradicts > > > > > > > > > an old one, it must > > > > either be a generalization of the old theory > > > > > > > > > (e.g. > > > > Einstein's theory of relativity (new) is not in > > > > > contradiction > > > > > > > > > > > > > with Newton's theory (old) at speeds far less than the > > > speed > > > > of > > > > > > > > > light), or at the very least it must explain why > > > > the old theory > > > > > > > > > correctly predicted in some cases, or > > > > if the old theory didnt > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > do that, then > > > > why the old theory's observations were wrong > > > > > (since > > > > > > > > > > > > > those wrong observations supported the old theory). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In this case, Narasimhaji has simply > > > > thrown the entire CK > > > > > > > > > replacement theory into the > > > > trash can. Which immediately begs > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > question: So are Sanjayji's explanations of Alan Leo's and > > > > > > > > > Mahatma > > > > > > > > > Gandhi's charts, in his AK paper, wrong? > > > > Narasimhaji, after your > > > > > new > > > > > > > > > found knowledge, > > > > you must either conclude that the events in > > > > > one's > > > > > > > > > > > > > life (i.e. total change of motivation and direction in life, > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > present in most people's life) that Sanjayji has > > > > hitherto > > > > > explained > > > > > > > > > using AK replacement, do > > > > not exist i.e Sanjayji was merely > > > > > deluding > > > > > > > > > > > > > himself, OR that they are explained by some other astrological > > > > > > > > > > > > > combination. So far, in the new scheme of things, you havent > > > > > > > > > > > > > volunteered any astrological combination that explains > ALL > > > > and > > > > > ONLY > > > > > > > > > those events that have so far been > > > > explained by Sanjayji as CK > > > > > > > > > replacement. I quote > > > > directly from Sanjayji's paper, Section 3.1 > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > > " The carakaraka being replaced gives us an idea of the area of > > > > > > > > > life > > > > > > > > > where a major unheaval is expected to occur > > > > while the slot, > > > > > which is > > > > > > > > > falling vacant, > > > > needs the strong support of Lord Siva in the > > > > > form of > > > > > > > > > > > > > a strong sthira karaka so that the concerned relation/aspect > > > > of > > > > > life > > > > > > > > > is not disturbed or destroyed. > > > > <some omitted>. The spiritual > > > > > impact > > > > > > > > > > > > > on the person is very strong if the AK, AMK or BK are > > > > > > > > > involved.. " . > > > > > > > > > Please clarify your position on > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And relatedly, > > > > note that all this suddenly puts a lot of > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge in question. An average person like me treats > > > > > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one > > > > naturally assumes that this > > > > > > > > > knowledge has been > > > > tested over the generations. As an example, > > > > > how > > > > > > > > > > > > > do I build confidence that one day some one wont come up with > a > > > > > > > > > key > > > > > > > > > undiscovered precursor verse of Parasara that > > > > unambiguously says > > > > > " In > > > > > > > > > all my remaining > > > > verses, when I say Rahu I actually mean Jupiter > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > when I say Jupiter, I actually mean Rahu " , and in doing so > > > > > > > > > trashes > > > > > > > > > all current knowledge. The way I build that > > > > confidence is that I > > > > > see > > > > > > > > > that the current > > > > knowledge WORKS IN PRACTICE. Since it WORKS IN > > > > > > > > > > > > > PRACTICE, I know that the probability of discovering such a > > > > > verse > > > > is > > > > > > > > > next to nil. And Narasimhaji, now that you have > > > > thrown CK > > > > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa > > > > calculation) , into the trash > > > > > can, > > > > > > > > > it makes > > > > me wonder - Were Sanjay Rathji, his Guru Pt Kasinath > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rathji, or his Guru Pt Jagannath Rathji, and their Gurus, were > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > all using this knowledge previously AT ALL or > > > > NOT? Or if they > > > > > were, > > > > > > > > > were they just > > > > deluding themselves? Were they simply predicting > > > > > > > > > > > > > correctly because of their spiritual strength? If so, we might > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea > > > > leaves up in the > > > > > air > > > > > > > > > and predict using > > > > spiritual strength, no? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sundeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Get your preferred Email name! > > > > Now you can @ymail.com and @rocketmail.com. > > > > http://mail.promotions./newdomains/aa/ > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.6/1769 - Release 11/5/2008 7:17 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2008 Report Share Posted November 7, 2008 Om Gurave Namah! What a wonderful message from Shri Arpad! Bhava is more important than the pronunciation. We cannot have a Balmiki otherwise. Best wisehs Sunil sohamsa , " Phyllis Chubb " <phyllischubb wrote: > > Dear Arpad, > > > > Thank you so much for sharing your experiences. I am somewhat like the Thai lady as my pronunciation leaves a great deal to be desired however I do like to think my sincerity is wholesome and as complete as my simple mind can make it. > > > > Bless you for giving such encouragement to another ‘tin-ear! > > > > Phyllis Chubb > > > > sohamsa [sohamsa ] On Behalf Of Arpad Joo > November 6, 2008 9:01 AM > sohamsa > Re: Tara mantra > > > > Hare Rama Krishna, > > Dear SS, > > Dear SS, > > > > I don't know…I do not have the answers. > > Please allow me tell you a story, which has happened to me, many,many years ago. In the 1970s, I received Gayatri diksha from Brahmachari Omkardas (now Swami). A few months after that, he sent me up to Uttarakashi, actually above the village, somewhere between Gangotri and Uttarakashi. I have had many wondrous experiences there, which I will not detail here. Suffice it to say, that 2 yogis,very advanced yogis- both of them have done several Gayatri Purascharanas already, endowed with siddhis and wisdom- took me under their tutelage and further " polished " my Gayatri. I will never forget this. One day, in particular, at a beautiful spot at the bank of the river Ganges they started " working on " my Sanskrit pronounciation with regards to Gayatri. They worked on me (and on these few lines of 24 syllables) for nearly 3 hours! > > Now, I would like to tell you that I am a professional musician with superb training, in the classical sense.I have had voice training every day, since the age of six (Sundays excepted).I play several instruments and have performed by now more the 1,500 concerts all over the world. I have- what is known -as perfect pitch.Made some 50+++ CDs. Etc > > Well, I am a thoroughly trained musician, and can reproduce virtually any sound, sing anything and pronounce anything well. > > And even then, it took these 2 adepts 3 hours of grilling, until they were fully satisfied, that my Gayatri chanting is perfect. > > I have also learned, of course, that there are many, many ways to chant Gayatri, in various ragas. This is a vidya in itself.I sometimes have the feeling that I can make even an inert stone or a boulder weep, when Gayatri is sung in Bhairavi Raga… > > Many people believe that the traditional vedic 3 note chanting is the only way.This is probably, because this is what people know and can " do " . > > (unfortunately, because of Bollywood, people start to believe that the hip gyrations of Sharukh Khan is authentic Indian classical dancing, and the popular hindi song " chori,chori, chupkeh, chupkeh " is equal to Ravi Shankar.I actually heard this from some teary eyed Japanese fans). > > To come to my point: yes ,pronounciation is VERY important. Vitally important. But if people just can't do it then…. What do you do? Forbid them to chant a mantra? > > I think I have narrated a story which I have experienced in Thailand. There the lady manager of the Hotel (Manohra) approached me, with a curious request. She has observed me meditating in the mornings beneath a large Ganapati statue, in the swimming pool (of all places). She asked me to correct her mantra (actually she said: mantla). > > After working with her on her pronounciation, for a long time,the final, final, final " end product " , which she was able to do, sounded like, and I am not kidding here: " Hele Klisna, Hele Klisna, Klisna, Klisna, Hele Hele, Hele Lama, Hele Lama, Lama Lama, Hele Hele… " > > But…. When she chanted it, tears streamed down on her cheeks, and she had a beatific smile, with full faith, and devotion- which is so rare to see- this Thai Buddhist lady chanted and chanted…. > > I realized of course, that the Divine mother was teaching me a lesson in devotion- through this Thai lady, humbling me and putting my " hybris " into the right place (dust bin). I touched her feet and said: Mother, go ahead, you have everything. > > So,what is important?Perfect pronounciation or devotion? Method and exactness of " vidya " or faith? > > Let me try to answer this in another way. In the 4th century (some 1,600 years ago by now), St. Benedict , the founder of western monastic Christianity coined a motto for his monks †" which they retained to this day: " ora and labora " . This a loaded phrase and as more meaning than appears on the surface, but loosely translated means: " pray AND work " . Later on, I believe other Benedictines enlarged the meaning considerably, explaining that you must PRAY (ORA)(with such utter devotion and intensity)AS IF EVERYTHING is dependent on Prayer- AND you must WORK (LABORA) (with such devotion and intensity) AS IF EVERYTHING is dependent on Work. > > In a similar way my thinking on mantras runs like this: > > We must pronounce the mantras with such exactness as if everything and all effectiveness is dependent on the correct pronounciation/intonation AND, we must have such devotion and faith as if everything is dependent on the correct " bhava'. > > I don't know, if I made any sense here….just a few thoughts > > > > With deep respect to All > > AJ > > > sohamsa , " Soul Sadhak " <soulsadhak@> wrote: > > > > Dear Arpad, > > > > This is a very interesting acount you have given. It also raises a > > rhetoric question whether water ceases to exist as water if called > > paani, aab etc. This is so far as gross items go. > > > > For mantras that act at a subtle level there can be 2 veiws or more: > > > > 1. Correct pronunciation is a must (why then is there emphasis on the > > same while reciting vedas etc.) - or else rakshati and bhakshati can > > yeild different results (wonder if someone really evaluated that) > > > > 2. Meaning/Essence of the mantra should be understood and the effect > > thus proceeds from there. > > > > Both veiws may be right in their own way. > > > > A prayer may have no words, yet can be effective. > > > > Example of Valmiki reciting Mara-Mara is popular - whichever category > > that one falls in! > > > > Thanx for your time. > > > > Best Regards, > > SS > > > > > > > > sohamsa , " Arpad Joo " panchasila@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hare Rama Krishna, > > > > > > Dera Soul Sadhak > > > > > > > > > > > > There are certain linguistical groups which have definite > > disabilities > > > in pronouncing certain words and sounds. This is not only with > > regards > > > to Sanskrit mantras. > > > > > > I still recall (somewhat ashamed now) how we used to " torture " > > > Japanese students in Vienna, Austria at the " Hochschule " with > > > the german word for " Beethoven Competition " - that is > > > " Beethovenwettbewerb " . It provided endless source of laughter > > > > > > how the hapeless and unsuspecting Japanese music students grappled > > with > > > the word (it's a mouthful anyway).Just ask any native Japanese > > > speaker to pronounce a simple word like " Violin " .You will be > > > amazed what comes out of his/her mouth. > > > > > > And again,I used to ask my Tibetan Lama friend- an accomplished > > adept > > > with some amazing yogic abilities- to pronounce for me > > > " Ushnishasitatapatra " - after all, this is a puja they do (to > > > avert calamities.)Try as hard as he was able,and he REALLY tried, > > the > > > end result was always a very mangled version of this word. > > > > > > Tibetans,Japanese,Koreans,Chinese,Mongolians etc language groups > > have > > > grave difficulties in pronouncing two consonants together such as : > > > > > > DM (as in Padma), sounds like Peme > > > > > > JR (as in Vajra),- Benzar > > > > > > RM (as in Rama)- in Thailand people cheerfully say " Lamayana " > > > for Ramayana. > > > > > > Sometimes a reversal of vowels happen in some mantras, such as the > > > Tibetan version of " Shantim Kuru " - as Shintam Kuru > > > > > > SV- (as in Svaha), Soha. > > > > > > This type of linguistical malajustment and mispronounciation is not > > > exactly the monopoly of these above mentioned language groups. > > > > > > If you listen to (most, but not all)native Tamil pujaris, you will > > also > > > hear some pretty amazing Sanskrit pronounciation, such as : > > > > > > Siti Vinayagar (that is: Siddhi Vinayaka) > > > > > > Saturthi (that is Chaturti),Abishegam (Abisheka) etc. > > > > > > Once , some time ago I have asked a Tamil pujari friend to give Maha > > > Mrityunjaya Mantra to another friend of mine. Well, how he has > > > pronounced this venerable and ancient mantra was totally > > unrecognizable > > > (to me at least). > > > > > > There are, of course,amongst the educated class of Tibetan yogis, > > quite > > > a number of them, who have excellent Sanskrit pronounciation. > > > > > > I am reminded of a story of the famous scholar Sakya Pandita, who > > has > > > lived a few hundred years ago. Once, traveling through the high > > Tibetan > > > mountains, he has overheard some yogi, in retreat reciting the > > > " Kilaya " mantra, something like this: " OM Chilaya etc… " > > > So, he stopped, and somewhat condescendingly explained the old yogi, > > > that his pronounciation is totally wrong. Thereupon the old yogi > > just > > > simply said, OK, let me try your version. He recited " OM Kilaya > > > etc… " , and threw his dagger into the air. Nothing happened. Hm, > > > this is strange, he said, let me try my version. So he recited : " OM > > > Chilaya… " then he threw his dagger again into the air- and it burst > > > into flames. Sakya Pandita was humbled. The great sanskrit scholar > > was > > > taught a real lesson about saddhana. > > > > > > I recall, that the superb Sanskrit scholar, Dr. Usharbudh Arya (now > > > Swami Veda Bharati) narrated, that his own guru (Swami Rama of the > > > Himalayas, no less) asked him to pronounce certain mantras > > differently > > > (especially bija mantras), explaining to him, that in VALID yogic > > > pronounciation, mantras will sound different). Now, here was a " bona > > > fide " great scholar, who is (still is) a world renown expert of > > > Sanskrit. He told us, how difficult it was for him to accept this > > > " yogic pronounciation " as a Sanskrit scholar. (but ,of course he > > > did). > > > > > > So, the question is, do the effectiveness of the pujas, as > > conducted by > > > some of the Tamil speaking pujaris, when they " shortchange " (to > > > put it mildly) mantras, decrease or diminish in anyway? Do the > > Tibetan > > > tantric pujas lose their effectiveness because some of the Lamas > > (again > > > not all) mispronounce words? > > > > > > Experience shows otherwise…. > > > > > > > > > > > > With deep respect to all > > > > > > > > > > > > AJ > > > > > > (the repeated advice to me was: " since you can do it well, and can > > > pronounce perfectly- you must do it perfectly) " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa , " Soul Sadhak " <soulsadhak@> wrote: > > > > > > > > There is an obvious variation in the way certain words are > > > > pronounced/written) between sanskrit and buddhist (among them > > tibetan > > > > and japanese) texts. Though i am nowhere near to ascholar in these > > > > texts, the versions that i have come across a couple of words are: > > > > > > > > AUM (OM) ~ Ong > > > > Hum ~ Hung > > > > Padme ~ Peme > > > > Svaaha ~ soha (so ha) > > > > dharma ~ dhamma > > > > > > > > " Om Mani Padme Hum " is often seen written as " Om Mani Peme Hung " > > > > " Om Ah hum vajra guru padma siddhi hum " ~ " Om ah hung vajra guru > > pema > > > > siddhi hung " > > > > " dharmam sharanam gachchaami " ~ " dhammam sharanam gachchaami " > > > > " om soham " ~ " ong so-hung " ! > > > > > > > > It may quite be possible that " turye " 4th - beyond the 3 states) > > is > > > > converted to " ture " . The essence of the mantra seems most probably > > > > be praying to Tara, who ferries across, to the state beyond (the > > 3) > > > > i.e. the 4th. > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa , manoj sharma swastik_astro@ > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > JAI MAA > > > > > > > > > > Narasimha ji > > > > > > > > > > Sadar Pranam > > > > > > > > > > Guru ji i have a Mantra Kosha printed by Kalyan mandir prakashan > > > > Allahbad. they quote this mantra from Tara Bhagti Sudharnava of > > > > Gandharva sanhita, this mantra ends with Swahaa the mantra is om > > tare > > > > tattare ture swaha. they also publish same mantra without extra > > half > > > > ta in tatare from brhama sanhita. sir the publishers mainly > > published > > > > the Shakta & tantra material, they also have good knowledge of das > > > > mahavidya tantra also. > > > > > > > > > > if i make a mistake then plz forgive me & bless me. > > > > > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 3/11/08, Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@ wrote: > > > > > Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@ > > > > > Tara mantra (Re: Parampara Knowledge) > > > > > sohamsa > > > > > Monday, 3 November, 2008, 1:17 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste, > > > > >  > > > > > Someone I respect who was doing Tara sadhana asked > > > > > me about this mantra many years back. He quoted a mantra > > called " om > > > > taare > > > > > tuttare ture sohaa " from apparently some Buddhist texts. He > > tried > > > > it for while > > > > > and strongly suspected that it was wrong. He thought it was > > > > originally a > > > > > Sanskrit mantra and practice of this mantra for many > > generations by > > > > people not > > > > > knowing Sanskrit resulted in a corruption in time. He sought my > > > > help and asked > > > > > me to guess what the original Sanskrit version could be. He > > wanted > > > > to do sadhana > > > > > using the original Sanskrit version guessed by me. > > > > >  > > > > > Obviously, the text I gave above has no meaning in > > > > > Sanskrit. > > > > >  > > > > > I *guessed* that tuttare may originally have been > > > > > dustare. The word " dustaraa " means unconquerable or invincible. > > The > > > > word ture > > > > > does have a meaning, but I guessed that it was probably turye > > after > > > > the previous > > > > > word. The word " turyaa " means the supreme power beyond all > > states > > > > of existence. > > > > > The word sohaa must of course be swaahaa. Thus, I guessed that > > the > > > > original > > > > > Sanskrit version may have been " om taare dustare turye svaahaa " > > and > > > > gave it to > > > > > that gentleman. This was simply my speculation at the request of > > > > that > > > > > gentleman. > > > > >  > > > > > *       > > > > > *       * > > > > >  > > > > > After making this correction as requested by that > > > > > gentleman, it remained in my mind. But I did not ask anyone to > > > > chant that > > > > > mantra. > > > > >  > > > > > When I was teaching in my class how to count > > > > > letters and words in mantras and see devata sthana, I used > > several > > > > examples. I > > > > > even used things like " god is great " as mantras. Basically, any > > > > pattern of > > > > > sounds repeated in the mind over a time has an effect and I was > > > > > demonstrating some technicalities related to that. So any > > > > combination of sounds > > > > > can be used as an example. As one of the examples, I used this > > > > guessed Sanskrit > > > > > version of Tara mantra that was stuck in my mind. > > > > >  > > > > > Best > > > > > regards, > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > > Do > > > > > a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ homam > > > > > Do > > > > > Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > tarpana > > > > > Spirituality: > > > > > http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > > > > > Free > > > > > Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. net > > > > > Free > > > > > Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst rologer.org > > > > > Sri > > > > > Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan nath.org > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > >  > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Arpad Joo " > > > > > <panchasila@ ..> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hare Rama > > > > > Krishna, > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Mr. Narasimha: > > > > > > > > > > > > I realise that > > > > > you cannot answer every mail, due to your workload. I > > > > > > †" and I am sure I > > > > > speak for everyone here- appreciate this. We are > > > > > > ALL busy.I am also glad > > > > > that you usually identify your sources. This is > > > > > > a good and laudable > > > > > practice. > > > > > > > > > > > > As you have written in your post: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " If I made any lapse, please bring it to attention and I will be > > > > > > very > > > > > happy to correct myself. " > > > > > > > > > > > > So ,here it is: > > > > > > > > > > > > Just > > > > > very simply- under what authority have you changed the venerable > > > > > > and > > > > > ancient Tara Mantra: " OM TARE TUTTARE TURE SVAHA, " into Om > > > > > > Tare Dustarye > > > > > Turye Svaha- or something like that.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Since this mangled form > > > > > has been published on your website (maintained > > > > > > by your students), may I > > > > > take the opportunity to ask you to identify > > > > > > your scriptural source for > > > > > this...that is †" if you have any. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have asked the same question > > > > > now several times, over a period of some > > > > > > months now. > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > await your answer.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you Sir > > > > > > > > > > > > With deep > > > > > respect to all > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Narasimha > > > > > P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > People should realize that I have no time to reply to all > > > > > emails > > > > > > addressed to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I MAY mention mantras > > > > > that I got from other people or books without > > > > > > referring to the > > > > > source. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, when it comes to astrology, I ensure > > > > > whenever teaching my own > > > > > > research that it is identified as such. I > > > > > identify what was taught by my > > > > > > gurus, what I found in the words of > > > > > rishis unambiguously, what I > > > > > > extrapolated from those words and what I > > > > > thought of by myself. I am > > > > > > usually thorough in identifying the source > > > > > and type of astrological > > > > > > knowledge I share with others. If I made any > > > > > lapse, please bring it to > > > > > > attention and I will be very happy to correct > > > > > myself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu, > > > > > > > > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > homam > > > > > > > > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > > > tarpana > > > > > > > > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > > > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. > > net > > > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst > > rologer.org > > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan > > nath.org > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Arpad Joo " > > > > > panchasila@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hare > > > > > Rama Krishna, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the > > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please allow me to quote from > > > > > your recent post: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " It seemed to me like several teachings that were not > > > > > identified > > > > > > > > explicitly as either research or parampara > > > > > knowledge may actually be > > > > > > > > his(Pt.S.Rath) research. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " On several > > > > > occasions, I privately requested him (Pandit Sanjay > > > > > > > > Rath) to > > > > > acknowledge whether a specific teaching was strictly from > > > > > > > > > > > > > parampara or his own research/extrapolat ion. On each occasion, > > he > > > > > > > > > > > just > > > > > > > > smiled and evaded the question. I told him that it is > > > > > important to > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > and perhaps others to know which > > > > > knowledge is from parampara and > > > > > > which > > > > > > > > knowledge is his > > > > > own research and requested that he should clarify > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > teaching new things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was > > > > > mixing up > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > two, though some people may be assuming > > > > > that anything from him not > > > > > > > > explicitly identified as research > > > > > is from parampara. As a seeker of > > > > > > > > knowledge who has a good > > > > > level of belief in the knowledge coming > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > Sri > > > > > Achyutananda, this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things > > > > > > > > > > > > > particularly challenging for me. " (The underline is from me.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have a similar > > > > > problem with you. I have asked you a question > > > > > > > > -several times > > > > > now- to identify the scriptural basis of a Mantra > > > > > > > > which you > > > > > teach publicly to your students. Mantras are at least as > > > > > > > > > > > > > serious an issue (if not more) than a Sanskrit Shloka of > > Parasara. > > > > > > > > > > > Since > > > > > > > > you have consistently evaded the answer to my question,I > > > > > am forced > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > come to the following > > > > > conclusion-either: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. You cannot identify > > > > > the scriptural source of the Mantra which you > > > > > > > > teach. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. This mantra was given to you in a " parampara " or > > > > > (worse) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. You have made up a mantra to suit > > > > > your purpose. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. You mix up the source of an > > > > > authentic Mantra, with personal > > > > > > > > revelation/research or > > > > > " parampara " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. The Mantra which you have > > > > > taught to your students is falsified. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (I > > > > > reckon ALL of the above) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is always advisable to adhere and follow consistently > > > > > to the > > > > > > > > principles of what one preaches (see above) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please feel free to challenge me (shotgun > > > > > approach)to quote the > > > > > > > > " chapter and verse " -in the original, to > > > > > support my argument. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is one thing to > > > > > accuse someone ( a brilliant authority on these > > > > > > > > > > > > > subjects-Pt. S.Rath!)of mixing up Rishi's words,parampara, > > personal > > > > > > > > > > > > > research etc ,carelessly, and then failing to apply the same > > > > > > > > > > > standards > > > > > > > > to oneself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > have another name for this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hypocrisy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I said before: it IS the Principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With deep respect to all: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. Moreover,it is > > > > > my personal belief, that if we add up all the > > > > > > > > " Jyotish " > > > > > knowledge of all the members on this list, (and I include > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > and me here as well) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we may not > > > > > amount to more than- let's say- 5% of what Pt.Sanjay Rath > > > > > > > > > > > > > knows.Just to keep things in perspective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Narasimha > > > > > P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Sundeep and others, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or if they were, > > > > > > > > > > were they just deluding themselves? > > > > > Were they simply predicting > > > > > > > > > > correctly because of > > > > > their spiritual strength? If so, we might > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea leaves up in the > > > > > > > > > > > air > > > > > > > > > > and predict using spiritual strength, > > > > > no? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let us take a step back. Some > > > > > of the SJC gurus and some other > > > > > > people > > > > > > > > at SJC were > > > > > once using 7 chara karakas and arudha padas as taught by > > > > > > Sri > > > > > > > > > > > > > KN Rao. Some of them were happy and found them working. When > > > > > they > > > > > > came > > > > > > > > to SJC, they switched and found things > > > > > working better. The > > > > > > bottomline is > > > > > > > > that their knowledge > > > > > was incomplete before, but contained some > > > > > > useful > > > > > > > > stuff > > > > > nevertheless. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am pretty sure > > > > > there are a lot of mistakes in our understanding > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > now. The bottomline is that our knowledge is incomplete now, but > > > > > > > > > > > > > contains some useful stuff nevertheless. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One more thing: Not all knowledge is equally critical in > > > > > our > > > > > > practical > > > > > > > > predictions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suppose I predict someone's marriage or promotion. > > > > > Whether I see > > > > > > D-9 > > > > > > > > or D-10 for marriage is critical. > > > > > Whether I see D-10 or D-12 for > > > > > > > > promotion is critical. Whether > > > > > I use TA dasa with TP charts or not > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > critical. > > > > > Whether I take the 6th or 7th house for marriage is > > > > > > critical. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if I evaluate the argalas on 7th > > > > > house or UL incorrectly, it > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > be masked off in the > > > > > other things I consider. If I use a wrong > > > > > > planet as > > > > > > > > DK > > > > > or AmK or PK, again it may be masked off in the other things I > > > > > > > > > > > > > consider. After all, we consider multiple factors and make a > > > > > > > > > > > prediction > > > > > > > > when there is an agreement between several > > > > > factors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus, we use a lot of > > > > > knowledge and techniques and some of them > > > > > > > > critical and some of > > > > > them are less critical in our predictions. Our > > > > > > > > predictions are > > > > > due to multiple factors and not just one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bottomline on the negative side: We have some incorrect > > > > > knowledge. > > > > > > > > Though this may make some uncomfortable, this is > > > > > the truth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bottomline on the > > > > > positive side: We have a decent body of > > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > with > > > > > a good degree of reliability and, when we combine multiple > > > > > > > > > > > > > techniques, we are in a good shape a good percentage of times! > > The > > > > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > is true with others outside our parampara also (like Sri > > > > > KN Rao's > > > > > > > > followers), though the degree of correctness may be > > > > > different with > > > > > > > > different techniques used by them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And relatedly, note that all this suddenly > > > > > puts a lot of > > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > knowledge in > > > > > question. An average person like me treats > > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one naturally assumes that > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge has been tested over the generations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apart from knowledge in a parampara getting > > > > > corrupted in time, > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > is another issue - knowledge > > > > > not from a parampara may be > > > > > > misunderstood > > > > > > > > to be from a > > > > > parampara. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I subjectively found a > > > > > lot of difference between some of Sanjay > > > > > > ji's > > > > > > > > initial > > > > > teachings like Tithi Pravesha and Narayana dasa and some of > > > > > > his > > > > > > > > > > > > > later teachings. The initial teachings were simple, logical > > > > > and > > > > > > > > beautiful, but I was not convinced by several teachings > > > > > later on. I > > > > > > had > > > > > > > > a strong suspicion that some of those > > > > > teachings were Sanjay ji's own > > > > > > > > research/extrapolat ions. It > > > > > seemed to me like several teachings that > > > > > > > > were not identified > > > > > explicitly as either research or parampara > > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > > may actually be his research. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > did not hide my suspicion from him. I mentioned it privately to > > > > > > > > > > > him. > > > > > > > > On several occasions, I privately requested him to > > > > > acknowledge > > > > > > whether a > > > > > > > > specific teaching was strictly > > > > > from parampara or his own > > > > > > > > research/extrapolat ion. On each > > > > > occasion, he just smiled and evaded > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > question. I > > > > > told him that it is important to me and perhaps others > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > know which knowledge is from parampara and which knowledge is > > his > > > > > > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > research and requested that he should clarify when > > > > > teaching new > > > > > > things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From > > > > > his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was mixing > > > > > > up > > > > > > > > > > > > > the two, though some people may be assuming that anything > > from > > > > > him > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > explicitly identified as research is from > > > > > parampara. As a seeker of > > > > > > > > knowledge who has a good level of > > > > > belief in the knowledge coming > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > Sri Achyutananda, > > > > > this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things > > > > > > > > particularly > > > > > challenging for me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa calculation) , into the trash > > > > > > > > > > > can, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding drigdasa > > > > > calculation, Sanjay ji privately told me > > > > > > several > > > > > > > > years > > > > > back that he was taught drigdasa along with so many other > > > > > > dasas > > > > > in > > > > > > > > one afternoon and that he just took very brief notes on so > > > > > many > > > > > > things > > > > > > > > at once. He said there could have beem > > > > > confusion or mistakes in > > > > > > > > drigdasa. Given this uncertainty, it > > > > > is not impossible that what he > > > > > > > > finally taught is different > > > > > from Achyutananda' s teaching. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parasara's verses on drigdasa were translated the same way by > > all > > > > > > > > > > > > > translators I saw. And I have not deviated from Santhanam > > etc. I > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > supplemented it with a small rule related to > > > > > interpretation. Thus, > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > I shared on drigdasa > > > > > calculations is not just my own independent > > > > > > > > interpretation, > > > > > but an interpretation of Santhanam and Sharma too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > > > homam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst > > rologer.org/ > > > > tarpana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- > > wisdom > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. > > home.comcast. > > > > net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst > > > > rologer.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan > > > > nath.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, > > > > > " vedicastrostudent " > > > > > > vedicastrostudent@ > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimhaji (and > > > > > Vistiji), > > > > > > > > > > While I cant question Narasimhaji' s > > > > > scholarship, it is clear > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > these kind of > > > > > issues question the very root of parampara > > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if not astrology itself. The silence (from SJC Gurus and > > > > > > > > > > > Sanjayji) > > > > > > > > > > surprises me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In scientific subjects, if a new theory comes > > > > > up that > > > > > > contradicts > > > > > > > > > > an old one, it must > > > > > either be a generalization of the old theory > > > > > > > > > > (e.g. > > > > > Einstein's theory of relativity (new) is not in > > > > > > contradiction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with Newton's theory (old) at speeds far less than the > > > > speed > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > light), or at the very least it must explain why > > > > > the old theory > > > > > > > > > > correctly predicted in some cases, or > > > > > if the old theory didnt > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > do that, then > > > > > why the old theory's observations were wrong > > > > > > (since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those wrong observations supported the old theory). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In this case, Narasimhaji has simply > > > > > thrown the entire CK > > > > > > > > > > replacement theory into the > > > > > trash can. Which immediately begs > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > question: So are Sanjayji's explanations of Alan Leo's and > > > > > > > > > > > Mahatma > > > > > > > > > > Gandhi's charts, in his AK paper, wrong? > > > > > Narasimhaji, after your > > > > > > new > > > > > > > > > > found knowledge, > > > > > you must either conclude that the events in > > > > > > one's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > life (i.e. total change of motivation and direction in life, > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > present in most people's life) that Sanjayji has > > > > > hitherto > > > > > > explained > > > > > > > > > > using AK replacement, do > > > > > not exist i.e Sanjayji was merely > > > > > > deluding > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > himself, OR that they are explained by some other astrological > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combination. So far, in the new scheme of things, you havent > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > volunteered any astrological combination that explains > > ALL > > > > > and > > > > > > ONLY > > > > > > > > > > those events that have so far been > > > > > explained by Sanjayji as CK > > > > > > > > > > replacement. I quote > > > > > directly from Sanjayji's paper, Section 3.1 > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " The carakaraka being replaced gives us an idea of the area of > > > > > > > > > > > life > > > > > > > > > > where a major unheaval is expected to occur > > > > > while the slot, > > > > > > which is > > > > > > > > > > falling vacant, > > > > > needs the strong support of Lord Siva in the > > > > > > form of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a strong sthira karaka so that the concerned relation/aspect > > > > > of > > > > > > life > > > > > > > > > > is not disturbed or destroyed. > > > > > <some omitted>. The spiritual > > > > > > impact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on the person is very strong if the AK, AMK or BK are > > > > > > > > > > > involved.. " . > > > > > > > > > > Please clarify your position on > > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And relatedly, > > > > > note that all this suddenly puts a lot of > > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge in question. An average person like me treats > > > > > > > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one > > > > > naturally assumes that this > > > > > > > > > > knowledge has been > > > > > tested over the generations. As an example, > > > > > > how > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > do I build confidence that one day some one wont come up with > > a > > > > > > > > > > > key > > > > > > > > > > undiscovered precursor verse of Parasara that > > > > > unambiguously says > > > > > > " In > > > > > > > > > > all my remaining > > > > > verses, when I say Rahu I actually mean Jupiter > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when I say Jupiter, I actually mean Rahu " , and in doing so > > > > > > > > > > > trashes > > > > > > > > > > all current knowledge. The way I build that > > > > > confidence is that I > > > > > > see > > > > > > > > > > that the current > > > > > knowledge WORKS IN PRACTICE. Since it WORKS IN > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PRACTICE, I know that the probability of discovering such a > > > > > > verse > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > next to nil. And Narasimhaji, now that you have > > > > > thrown CK > > > > > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa > > > > > calculation) , into the trash > > > > > > can, > > > > > > > > > > it makes > > > > > me wonder - Were Sanjay Rathji, his Guru Pt Kasinath > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rathji, or his Guru Pt Jagannath Rathji, and their Gurus, were > > > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > all using this knowledge previously AT ALL or > > > > > NOT? Or if they > > > > > > were, > > > > > > > > > > were they just > > > > > deluding themselves? Were they simply predicting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correctly because of their spiritual strength? If so, we might > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea > > > > > leaves up in the > > > > > > air > > > > > > > > > > and predict using > > > > > spiritual strength, no? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sundeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Get your preferred Email name! > > > > > Now you can @ymail.com and @rocketmail.com. > > > > > http://mail.promotions./newdomains/aa/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.6/1769 - Release Date: 11/5/2008 7:17 AM > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2008 Report Share Posted November 7, 2008 Namasthe: This post and the earlier one on the same thread brought tears to my eyes. To me it has gone beyond the pronunciation issue. I have managed to get clarity on some other dilemma that's been on my head for some time. Thank you. P.S. You are not just a good musician, you also seem to be a very good writer. May God bless. sohamsa , " Arpad Joo " <panchasila wrote: > > > Hare Rama Krishna, > > Dear SS, > > Dear SS, > > > > I don't know…I do not have the answers. > > Please allow me tell you a story, which has happened to me, many,many > years ago. In the 1970s, I received Gayatri diksha from Brahmachari > Omkardas (now Swami). A few months after that, he sent me up to > Uttarakashi, actually above the village, somewhere between Gangotri and > Uttarakashi. I have had many wondrous experiences there, which I will > not detail here. Suffice it to say, that 2 yogis,very advanced yogis- > both of them have done several Gayatri Purascharanas already, endowed > with siddhis and wisdom- took me under their tutelage and further > " polished " my Gayatri. I will never forget this. One day, in > particular, at a beautiful spot at the bank of the river Ganges they > started " working on " my Sanskrit pronounciation with regards to > Gayatri. They worked on me (and on these few lines of 24 syllables) for > nearly 3 hours! > > Now, I would like to tell you that I am a professional musician with > superb training, in the classical sense.I have had voice training every > day, since the age of six (Sundays excepted).I play several instruments > and have performed by now more the 1,500 concerts all over the world. I > have- what is known -as perfect pitch.Made some 50+++ CDs. Etc > > Well, I am a thoroughly trained musician, and can reproduce virtually > any sound, sing anything and pronounce anything well. > > And even then, it took these 2 adepts 3 hours of grilling, until they > were fully satisfied, that my Gayatri chanting is perfect. > > I have also learned, of course, that there are many, many ways to chant > Gayatri, in various ragas. This is a vidya in itself.I sometimes have > the feeling that I can make even an inert stone or a boulder weep, when > Gayatri is sung in Bhairavi Raga… > > Many people believe that the traditional vedic 3 note chanting is the > only way.This is probably, because this is what people know and can > " do " . > > (unfortunately, because of Bollywood, people start to believe that the > hip gyrations of Sharukh Khan is authentic Indian classical dancing, and > the popular hindi song " chori,chori, chupkeh, chupkeh " is equal > to Ravi Shankar.I actually heard this from some teary eyed Japanese > fans). > > To come to my point: yes ,pronounciation is VERY important. Vitally > important. But if people just can't do it then…. What do you do? > Forbid them to chant a mantra? > > I think I have narrated a story which I have experienced in Thailand. > There the lady manager of the Hotel (Manohra) approached me, with a > curious request. She has observed me meditating in the mornings beneath > a large Ganapati statue, in the swimming pool (of all places). She asked > me to correct her mantra (actually she said: mantla). > > After working with her on her pronounciation, for a long time,the > final, final, final " end product " , which she was able to do, > sounded like, and I am not kidding here: " Hele Klisna, Hele Klisna, > Klisna, Klisna, Hele Hele, Hele Lama, Hele Lama, Lama Lama, Hele > Hele… " > > But…. When she chanted it, tears streamed down on her cheeks, and > she had a beatific smile, with full faith, and devotion- which is so > rare to see- this Thai Buddhist lady chanted and chanted…. > > I realized of course, that the Divine mother was teaching me a lesson in > devotion- through this Thai lady, humbling me and putting my > " hybris " into the right place (dust bin). I touched her feet and > said: Mother, go ahead, you have everything. > > So,what is important?Perfect pronounciation or devotion? Method and > exactness of " vidya " or faith? > > Let me try to answer this in another way. In the 4th century (some 1,600 > years ago by now), St. Benedict , the founder of western monastic > Christianity coined a motto for his monks –which they retained to > this day: " ora and labora " . This a loaded phrase and as more > meaning than appears on the surface, but loosely translated means: > " pray AND work " . Later on, I believe other Benedictines enlarged > the meaning considerably, explaining that you must PRAY (ORA)(with such > utter devotion and intensity)AS IF EVERYTHING is dependent on Prayer- > AND you must WORK (LABORA) (with such devotion and intensity) AS IF > EVERYTHING is dependent on Work. > > In a similar way my thinking on mantras runs like this: > > We must pronounce the mantras with such exactness as if everything and > all effectiveness is dependent on the correct pronounciation/intonation > AND, we must have such devotion and faith as if everything is dependent > on the correct " bhava'. > > I don't know, if I made any sense here….just a few thoughts > > > > With deep respect to All > > AJ > > > sohamsa , " Soul Sadhak " soulsadhak@ wrote: > > > > Dear Arpad, > > > > This is a very interesting acount you have given. It also raises a > > rhetoric question whether water ceases to exist as water if called > > paani, aab etc. This is so far as gross items go. > > > > For mantras that act at a subtle level there can be 2 veiws or more: > > > > 1. Correct pronunciation is a must (why then is there emphasis on the > > same while reciting vedas etc.) - or else rakshati and bhakshati can > > yeild different results (wonder if someone really evaluated that) > > > > 2. Meaning/Essence of the mantra should be understood and the effect > > thus proceeds from there. > > > > Both veiws may be right in their own way. > > > > A prayer may have no words, yet can be effective. > > > > Example of Valmiki reciting Mara-Mara is popular - whichever category > > that one falls in! > > > > Thanx for your time. > > > > Best Regards, > > SS > > > > > > > > sohamsa , " Arpad Joo " panchasila@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hare Rama Krishna, > > > > > > Dera Soul Sadhak > > > > > > > > > > > > There are certain linguistical groups which have definite > > disabilities > > > in pronouncing certain words and sounds. This is not only with > > regards > > > to Sanskrit mantras. > > > > > > I still recall (somewhat ashamed now) how we used to " torture " > > > Japanese students in Vienna, Austria at the " Hochschule " with > > > the german word for " Beethoven Competition " - that is > > > " Beethovenwettbewerb " . It provided endless source of laughter > > > > > > how the hapeless and unsuspecting Japanese music students grappled > > with > > > the word (it's a mouthful anyway).Just ask any native Japanese > > > speaker to pronounce a simple word like " Violin " .You will be > > > amazed what comes out of his/her mouth. > > > > > > And again,I used to ask my Tibetan Lama friend- an accomplished > > adept > > > with some amazing yogic abilities- to pronounce for me > > > " Ushnishasitatapatra " - after all, this is a puja they do (to > > > avert calamities.)Try as hard as he was able,and he REALLY tried, > > the > > > end result was always a very mangled version of this word. > > > > > > Tibetans,Japanese,Koreans,Chinese,Mongolians etc language groups > > have > > > grave difficulties in pronouncing two consonants together such as : > > > > > > DM (as in Padma), sounds like Peme > > > > > > JR (as in Vajra),- Benzar > > > > > > RM (as in Rama)- in Thailand people cheerfully say " Lamayana " > > > for Ramayana. > > > > > > Sometimes a reversal of vowels happen in some mantras, such as the > > > Tibetan version of " Shantim Kuru " - as Shintam Kuru > > > > > > SV- (as in Svaha), Soha. > > > > > > This type of linguistical malajustment and mispronounciation is not > > > exactly the monopoly of these above mentioned language groups. > > > > > > If you listen to (most, but not all)native Tamil pujaris, you will > > also > > > hear some pretty amazing Sanskrit pronounciation, such as : > > > > > > Siti Vinayagar (that is: Siddhi Vinayaka) > > > > > > Saturthi (that is Chaturti),Abishegam (Abisheka) etc. > > > > > > Once , some time ago I have asked a Tamil pujari friend to give Maha > > > Mrityunjaya Mantra to another friend of mine. Well, how he has > > > pronounced this venerable and ancient mantra was totally > > unrecognizable > > > (to me at least). > > > > > > There are, of course,amongst the educated class of Tibetan yogis, > > quite > > > a number of them, who have excellent Sanskrit pronounciation. > > > > > > I am reminded of a story of the famous scholar Sakya Pandita, who > > has > > > lived a few hundred years ago. Once, traveling through the high > > Tibetan > > > mountains, he has overheard some yogi, in retreat reciting the > > > " Kilaya " mantra, something like this: " OM Chilaya etc… " > > > So, he stopped, and somewhat condescendingly explained the old yogi, > > > that his pronounciation is totally wrong. Thereupon the old yogi > > just > > > simply said, OK, let me try your version. He recited " OM Kilaya > > > etc… " , and threw his dagger into the air. Nothing happened. Hm, > > > this is strange, he said, let me try my version. So he recited : " OM > > > Chilaya… " then he threw his dagger again into the air- and it > burst > > > into flames. Sakya Pandita was humbled. The great sanskrit scholar > > was > > > taught a real lesson about saddhana. > > > > > > I recall, that the superb Sanskrit scholar, Dr. Usharbudh Arya (now > > > Swami Veda Bharati) narrated, that his own guru (Swami Rama of the > > > Himalayas, no less) asked him to pronounce certain mantras > > differently > > > (especially bija mantras), explaining to him, that in VALID yogic > > > pronounciation, mantras will sound different). Now, here was a " bona > > > fide " great scholar, who is (still is) a world renown expert of > > > Sanskrit. He told us, how difficult it was for him to accept this > > > " yogic pronounciation " as a Sanskrit scholar. (but ,of course he > > > did). > > > > > > So, the question is, do the effectiveness of the pujas, as > > conducted by > > > some of the Tamil speaking pujaris, when they " shortchange " (to > > > put it mildly) mantras, decrease or diminish in anyway? Do the > > Tibetan > > > tantric pujas lose their effectiveness because some of the Lamas > > (again > > > not all) mispronounce words? > > > > > > Experience shows otherwise…. > > > > > > > > > > > > With deep respect to all > > > > > > > > > > > > AJ > > > > > > (the repeated advice to me was: " since you can do it well, and can > > > pronounce perfectly- you must do it perfectly) " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa , " Soul Sadhak " <soulsadhak@> wrote: > > > > > > > > There is an obvious variation in the way certain words are > > > > pronounced/written) between sanskrit and buddhist (among them > > tibetan > > > > and japanese) texts. Though i am nowhere near to ascholar in these > > > > texts, the versions that i have come across a couple of words are: > > > > > > > > AUM (OM) ~ Ong > > > > Hum ~ Hung > > > > Padme ~ Peme > > > > Svaaha ~ soha (so ha) > > > > dharma ~ dhamma > > > > > > > > " Om Mani Padme Hum " is often seen written as " Om Mani Peme Hung " > > > > " Om Ah hum vajra guru padma siddhi hum " ~ " Om ah hung vajra guru > > pema > > > > siddhi hung " > > > > " dharmam sharanam gachchaami " ~ " dhammam sharanam gachchaami " > > > > " om soham " ~ " ong so-hung " ! > > > > > > > > It may quite be possible that " turye " 4th - beyond the 3 states) > > is > > > > converted to " ture " . The essence of the mantra seems most probably > > > > be praying to Tara, who ferries across, to the state beyond (the > > 3) > > > > i.e. the 4th. > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa , manoj sharma swastik_astro@ > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > JAI MAA > > > > > > > > > > Narasimha ji > > > > > > > > > > Sadar Pranam > > > > > > > > > > Guru ji i have a Mantra Kosha printed by Kalyan mandir prakashan > > > > Allahbad. they quote this mantra from Tara Bhagti Sudharnava of > > > > Gandharva sanhita, this mantra ends with Swahaa the mantra is om > > tare > > > > tattare ture swaha. they also publish same mantra without extra > > half > > > > ta in tatare from brhama sanhita. sir the publishers mainly > > published > > > > the Shakta & tantra material, they also have good knowledge of das > > > > mahavidya tantra also. > > > > > > > > > > if i make a mistake then plz forgive me & bless me. > > > > > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 3/11/08, Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@ wrote: > > > > > Narasimha P.V.R. Rao pvr@ > > > > > Tara mantra (Re: Parampara Knowledge) > > > > > sohamsa > > > > > Monday, 3 November, 2008, 1:17 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste, > > > > >  > > > > > Someone I respect who was doing Tara sadhana asked > > > > > me about this mantra many years back. He quoted a mantra > > called " om > > > > taare > > > > > tuttare ture sohaa " from apparently some Buddhist texts. He > > tried > > > > it for while > > > > > and strongly suspected that it was wrong. He thought it was > > > > originally a > > > > > Sanskrit mantra and practice of this mantra for many > > generations by > > > > people not > > > > > knowing Sanskrit resulted in a corruption in time. He sought my > > > > help and asked > > > > > me to guess what the original Sanskrit version could be. He > > wanted > > > > to do sadhana > > > > > using the original Sanskrit version guessed by me. > > > > >  > > > > > Obviously, the text I gave above has no meaning in > > > > > Sanskrit. > > > > >  > > > > > I *guessed* that tuttare may originally have been > > > > > dustare. The word " dustaraa " means unconquerable or invincible. > > The > > > > word ture > > > > > does have a meaning, but I guessed that it was probably turye > > after > > > > the previous > > > > > word. The word " turyaa " means the supreme power beyond all > > states > > > > of existence. > > > > > The word sohaa must of course be swaahaa. Thus, I guessed that > > the > > > > original > > > > > Sanskrit version may have been " om taare dustare turye svaahaa " > > and > > > > gave it to > > > > > that gentleman. This was simply my speculation at the request of > > > > that > > > > > gentleman. > > > > >  > > > > > *       > > > > > *       * > > > > >  > > > > > After making this correction as requested by that > > > > > gentleman, it remained in my mind. But I did not ask anyone to > > > > chant that > > > > > mantra. > > > > >  > > > > > When I was teaching in my class how to count > > > > > letters and words in mantras and see devata sthana, I used > > several > > > > examples. I > > > > > even used things like " god is great " as mantras. Basically, any > > > > pattern of > > > > > sounds repeated in the mind over a time has an effect and I > was > > > > > demonstrating some technicalities related to that. So any > > > > combination of sounds > > > > > can be used as an example. As one of the examples, I used this > > > > guessed Sanskrit > > > > > version of Tara mantra that was stuck in my mind. > > > > >  > > > > > Best > > > > > regards, > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > > Do > > > > > a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ homam > > > > > Do > > > > > Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > tarpana > > > > > Spirituality: > > > > > http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > > > > > Free > > > > > Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. net > > > > > Free > > > > > Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst rologer.org > > > > > Sri > > > > > Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan nath.org > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > >  > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Arpad Joo " > > > > > <panchasila@ ..> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hare Rama > > > > > Krishna, > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Mr. Narasimha: > > > > > > > > > > > > I realise that > > > > > you cannot answer every mail, due to your workload. I > > > > > > †" and I am sure I > > > > > speak for everyone here- appreciate this. We are > > > > > > ALL busy.I am also glad > > > > > that you usually identify your sources. This is > > > > > > a good and laudable > > > > > practice. > > > > > > > > > > > > As you have written in your post: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " If I made any lapse, please bring it to attention and I will be > > > > > > very > > > > > happy to correct myself. " > > > > > > > > > > > > So ,here it is: > > > > > > > > > > > > Just > > > > > very simply- under what authority have you changed the venerable > > > > > > and > > > > > ancient Tara Mantra: " OM TARE TUTTARE TURE SVAHA, " into Om > > > > > > Tare Dustarye > > > > > Turye Svaha- or something like that.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Since this mangled form > > > > > has been published on your website (maintained > > > > > > by your students), may I > > > > > take the opportunity to ask you to identify > > > > > > your scriptural source for > > > > > this...that is †" if you have any. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have asked the same question > > > > > now several times, over a period of some > > > > > > months now. > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > await your answer.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you Sir > > > > > > > > > > > > With deep > > > > > respect to all > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Narasimha > > > > > P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Sir, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > People should realize that I have no time to reply to all > > > > > emails > > > > > > addressed to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I MAY mention mantras > > > > > that I got from other people or books without > > > > > > referring to the > > > > > source. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, when it comes to astrology, I ensure > > > > > whenever teaching my own > > > > > > research that it is identified as such. I > > > > > identify what was taught by my > > > > > > gurus, what I found in the words of > > > > > rishis unambiguously, what I > > > > > > extrapolated from those words and what I > > > > > thought of by myself. I am > > > > > > usually thorough in identifying the source > > > > > and type of astrological > > > > > > knowledge I share with others. If I made any > > > > > lapse, please bring it to > > > > > > attention and I will be very happy to correct > > > > > myself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu, > > > > > > > > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > homam > > > > > > > > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > > > tarpana > > > > > > > > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- wisdom > > > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. home.comcast. > > net > > > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst > > rologer.org > > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan > > nath.org > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Arpad Joo " > > > > > panchasila@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hare > > > > > Rama Krishna, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimha, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the > > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please allow me to quote from > > > > > your recent post: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " It seemed to me like several teachings that were not > > > > > identified > > > > > > > > explicitly as either research or parampara > > > > > knowledge may actually be > > > > > > > > his(Pt.S.Rath) research. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " On several > > > > > occasions, I privately requested him (Pandit Sanjay > > > > > > > > Rath) to > > > > > acknowledge whether a specific teaching was strictly from > > > > > > > > > > > > > parampara or his own research/extrapolat ion. On each occasion, > > he > > > > > > > > > > > just > > > > > > > > smiled and evaded the question. I told him that it is > > > > > important to > > > > > > me > > > > > > > > and perhaps others to know which > > > > > knowledge is from parampara and > > > > > > which > > > > > > > > knowledge is his > > > > > own research and requested that he should clarify > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > > > teaching new things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was > > > > > mixing up > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > two, though some people may be assuming > > > > > that anything from him not > > > > > > > > explicitly identified as research > > > > > is from parampara. As a seeker of > > > > > > > > knowledge who has a good > > > > > level of belief in the knowledge coming > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > Sri > > > > > Achyutananda, this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things > > > > > > > > > > > > > particularly challenging for me. " (The underline is from me.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have a similar > > > > > problem with you. I have asked you a question > > > > > > > > -several times > > > > > now- to identify the scriptural basis of a Mantra > > > > > > > > which you > > > > > teach publicly to your students. Mantras are at least as > > > > > > > > > > > > > serious an issue (if not more) than a Sanskrit Shloka of > > Parasara. > > > > > > > > > > > Since > > > > > > > > you have consistently evaded the answer to my question,I > > > > > am forced > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > come to the following > > > > > conclusion-either: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. You cannot identify > > > > > the scriptural source of the Mantra which you > > > > > > > > teach. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. This mantra was given to you in a " parampara " or > > > > > (worse) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. You have made up a mantra to suit > > > > > your purpose. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. You mix up the source of an > > > > > authentic Mantra, with personal > > > > > > > > revelation/research or > > > > > " parampara " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. The Mantra which you have > > > > > taught to your students is falsified. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (I > > > > > reckon ALL of the above) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is always advisable to adhere and follow consistently > > > > > to the > > > > > > > > principles of what one preaches (see above) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please feel free to challenge me (shotgun > > > > > approach)to quote the > > > > > > > > " chapter and verse " -in the original, to > > > > > support my argument. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is one thing to > > > > > accuse someone ( a brilliant authority on these > > > > > > > > > > > > > subjects-Pt. S.Rath!)of mixing up Rishi's words,parampara, > > personal > > > > > > > > > > > > > research etc ,carelessly, and then failing to apply the same > > > > > > > > > > > standards > > > > > > > > to oneself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > have another name for this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hypocrisy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I said before: it IS the Principle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With deep respect to all: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. Moreover,it is > > > > > my personal belief, that if we add up all the > > > > > > > > " Jyotish " > > > > > knowledge of all the members on this list, (and I include > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > and me here as well) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we may not > > > > > amount to more than- let's say- 5% of what Pt.Sanjay Rath > > > > > > > > > > > > > knows.Just to keep things in perspective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, " Narasimha > > > > > P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Sundeep and others, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or if they were, > > > > > > > > > > were they just deluding themselves? > > > > > Were they simply predicting > > > > > > > > > > correctly because of > > > > > their spiritual strength? If so, we might > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea leaves up in the > > > > > > > > > > > air > > > > > > > > > > and predict using spiritual strength, > > > > > no? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let us take a step back. Some > > > > > of the SJC gurus and some other > > > > > > people > > > > > > > > at SJC were > > > > > once using 7 chara karakas and arudha padas as taught by > > > > > > Sri > > > > > > > > > > > > > KN Rao. Some of them were happy and found them working. When > > > > > they > > > > > > came > > > > > > > > to SJC, they switched and found things > > > > > working better. The > > > > > > bottomline is > > > > > > > > that their knowledge > > > > > was incomplete before, but contained some > > > > > > useful > > > > > > > > stuff > > > > > nevertheless. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am pretty sure > > > > > there are a lot of mistakes in our understanding > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > > > > now. The bottomline is that our knowledge is incomplete now, but > > > > > > > > > > > > > contains some useful stuff nevertheless. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One more thing: Not all knowledge is equally critical in > > > > > our > > > > > > practical > > > > > > > > predictions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suppose I predict someone's marriage or promotion. > > > > > Whether I see > > > > > > D-9 > > > > > > > > or D-10 for marriage is critical. > > > > > Whether I see D-10 or D-12 for > > > > > > > > promotion is critical. Whether > > > > > I use TA dasa with TP charts or not > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > critical. > > > > > Whether I take the 6th or 7th house for marriage is > > > > > > critical. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, if I evaluate the argalas on 7th > > > > > house or UL incorrectly, it > > > > > > may > > > > > > > > be masked off in the > > > > > other things I consider. If I use a wrong > > > > > > planet as > > > > > > > > DK > > > > > or AmK or PK, again it may be masked off in the other things I > > > > > > > > > > > > > consider. After all, we consider multiple factors and make a > > > > > > > > > > > prediction > > > > > > > > when there is an agreement between several > > > > > factors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus, we use a lot of > > > > > knowledge and techniques and some of them > > > > > > > > critical and some of > > > > > them are less critical in our predictions. Our > > > > > > > > predictions are > > > > > due to multiple factors and not just one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bottomline on the negative side: We have some incorrect > > > > > knowledge. > > > > > > > > Though this may make some uncomfortable, this is > > > > > the truth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bottomline on the > > > > > positive side: We have a decent body of > > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > with > > > > > a good degree of reliability and, when we combine multiple > > > > > > > > > > > > > techniques, we are in a good shape a good percentage of times! > > The > > > > > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > > is true with others outside our parampara also (like Sri > > > > > KN Rao's > > > > > > > > followers), though the degree of correctness may be > > > > > different with > > > > > > > > different techniques used by them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And relatedly, note that all this suddenly > > > > > puts a lot of > > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > knowledge in > > > > > question. An average person like me treats > > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one naturally assumes that > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge has been tested over the generations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apart from knowledge in a parampara getting > > > > > corrupted in time, > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > is another issue - knowledge > > > > > not from a parampara may be > > > > > > misunderstood > > > > > > > > to be from a > > > > > parampara. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I subjectively found a > > > > > lot of difference between some of Sanjay > > > > > > ji's > > > > > > > > initial > > > > > teachings like Tithi Pravesha and Narayana dasa and some of > > > > > > his > > > > > > > > > > > > > later teachings. The initial teachings were simple, logical > > > > > and > > > > > > > > beautiful, but I was not convinced by several teachings > > > > > later on. I > > > > > > had > > > > > > > > a strong suspicion that some of those > > > > > teachings were Sanjay ji's own > > > > > > > > research/extrapolat ions. It > > > > > seemed to me like several teachings that > > > > > > > > were not identified > > > > > explicitly as either research or parampara > > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > > may actually be his research. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > did not hide my suspicion from him. I mentioned it privately to > > > > > > > > > > > him. > > > > > > > > On several occasions, I privately requested him to > > > > > acknowledge > > > > > > whether a > > > > > > > > specific teaching was strictly > > > > > from parampara or his own > > > > > > > > research/extrapolat ion. On each > > > > > occasion, he just smiled and evaded > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > question. I > > > > > told him that it is important to me and perhaps others > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > know which knowledge is from parampara and which knowledge is > > his > > > > > > > > > > > own > > > > > > > > research and requested that he should clarify when > > > > > teaching new > > > > > > things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From > > > > > his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was mixing > > > > > > up > > > > > > > > > > > > > the two, though some people may be assuming that anything > > from > > > > > him > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > explicitly identified as research is from > > > > > parampara. As a seeker of > > > > > > > > knowledge who has a good level of > > > > > belief in the knowledge coming > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > Sri Achyutananda, > > > > > this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things > > > > > > > > particularly > > > > > challenging for me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa calculation) , into the trash > > > > > > > > > > > can, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding drigdasa > > > > > calculation, Sanjay ji privately told me > > > > > > several > > > > > > > > years > > > > > back that he was taught drigdasa along with so many other > > > > > > dasas > > > > > in > > > > > > > > one afternoon and that he just took very brief notes on so > > > > > many > > > > > > things > > > > > > > > at once. He said there could have beem > > > > > confusion or mistakes in > > > > > > > > drigdasa. Given this uncertainty, it > > > > > is not impossible that what he > > > > > > > > finally taught is different > > > > > from Achyutananda' s teaching. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Parasara's verses on drigdasa were translated the same way by > > all > > > > > > > > > > > > > translators I saw. And I have not deviated from Santhanam > > etc. I > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > supplemented it with a small rule related to > > > > > interpretation. Thus, > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > I shared on drigdasa > > > > > calculations is not just my own independent > > > > > > > > interpretation, > > > > > but an interpretation of Santhanam and Sharma too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Krishnaarpanamastu, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Narasimha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAst rologer.org/ > > > > homam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAst > > rologer.org/ > > > > tarpana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Spirituality: http://groups. / group/vedic- > > wisdom > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro. > > home.comcast. > > > > net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAst > > > > rologer.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagan > > > > nath.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - > > ---- > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa@ .com, > > > > > " vedicastrostudent " > > > > > > vedicastrostudent@ > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Narasimhaji (and > > > > > Vistiji), > > > > > > > > > > While I cant question Narasimhaji' s > > > > > scholarship, it is clear > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > these kind of > > > > > issues question the very root of parampara > > > > > > knowledge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if not astrology itself. The silence (from SJC Gurus and > > > > > > > > > > > Sanjayji) > > > > > > > > > > surprises me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In scientific subjects, if a new theory comes > > > > > up that > > > > > > contradicts > > > > > > > > > > an old one, it must > > > > > either be a generalization of the old theory > > > > > > > > > > (e.g. > > > > > Einstein's theory of relativity (new) is not in > > > > > > contradiction > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with Newton's theory (old) at speeds far less than the > > > > speed > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > light), or at the very least it must explain why > > > > > the old theory > > > > > > > > > > correctly predicted in some cases, or > > > > > if the old theory didnt > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > > > do that, then > > > > > why the old theory's observations were wrong > > > > > > (since > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > those wrong observations supported the old theory). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In this case, Narasimhaji has simply > > > > > thrown the entire CK > > > > > > > > > > replacement theory into the > > > > > trash can. Which immediately begs > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > question: So are Sanjayji's explanations of Alan Leo's and > > > > > > > > > > > Mahatma > > > > > > > > > > Gandhi's charts, in his AK paper, wrong? > > > > > Narasimhaji, after your > > > > > > new > > > > > > > > > > found knowledge, > > > > > you must either conclude that the events in > > > > > > one's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > life (i.e. total change of motivation and direction in life, > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > present in most people's life) that Sanjayji has > > > > > hitherto > > > > > > explained > > > > > > > > > > using AK replacement, do > > > > > not exist i.e Sanjayji was merely > > > > > > deluding > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > himself, OR that they are explained by some other astrological > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > combination. So far, in the new scheme of things, you havent > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > volunteered any astrological combination that explains > > ALL > > > > > and > > > > > > ONLY > > > > > > > > > > those events that have so far been > > > > > explained by Sanjayji as CK > > > > > > > > > > replacement. I quote > > > > > directly from Sanjayji's paper, Section 3.1 > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " The carakaraka being replaced gives us an idea of the area of > > > > > > > > > > > life > > > > > > > > > > where a major unheaval is expected to occur > > > > > while the slot, > > > > > > which is > > > > > > > > > > falling vacant, > > > > > needs the strong support of Lord Siva in the > > > > > > form of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a strong sthira karaka so that the concerned relation/aspect > > > > > of > > > > > > life > > > > > > > > > > is not disturbed or destroyed. > > > > > <some omitted>. The spiritual > > > > > > impact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on the person is very strong if the AK, AMK or BK are > > > > > > > > > > > involved.. " . > > > > > > > > > > Please clarify your position on > > > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And relatedly, > > > > > note that all this suddenly puts a lot of > > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > knowledge in question. An average person like me treats > > > > > > > > > > > parampara > > > > > > > > > > knowledge with respect because one > > > > > naturally assumes that this > > > > > > > > > > knowledge has been > > > > > tested over the generations. As an example, > > > > > > how > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > do I build confidence that one day some one wont come up with > > a > > > > > > > > > > > key > > > > > > > > > > undiscovered precursor verse of Parasara that > > > > > unambiguously says > > > > > > " In > > > > > > > > > > all my remaining > > > > > verses, when I say Rahu I actually mean Jupiter > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > when I say Jupiter, I actually mean Rahu " , and in doing so > > > > > > > > > > > trashes > > > > > > > > > > all current knowledge. The way I build that > > > > > confidence is that I > > > > > > see > > > > > > > > > > that the current > > > > > knowledge WORKS IN PRACTICE. Since it WORKS IN > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PRACTICE, I know that the probability of discovering such a > > > > > > verse > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > next to nil. And Narasimhaji, now that you have > > > > > thrown CK > > > > > > > > > > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa > > > > > calculation) , into the trash > > > > > > can, > > > > > > > > > > it makes > > > > > me wonder - Were Sanjay Rathji, his Guru Pt Kasinath > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rathji, or his Guru Pt Jagannath Rathji, and their Gurus, were > > > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > all using this knowledge previously AT ALL or > > > > > NOT? Or if they > > > > > > were, > > > > > > > > > > were they just > > > > > deluding themselves? Were they simply predicting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correctly because of their spiritual strength? If so, we might > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea > > > > > leaves up in the > > > > > > air > > > > > > > > > > and predict using > > > > > spiritual strength, no? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sundeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Get your preferred Email name! > > > > > Now you can @ymail.com and @rocketmail.com. > > > > > http://mail.promotions./newdomains/aa/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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.