a problem of stotras and mantras online

May 26, 2007

Hindu stotras and mantras are in Sanskrit. We see online a lot of renderings of

these. One thing I have been noting is that the English renderings are mostly

faulty.(there are some that are very very accurate, I am not denying that)

The reasons are twofold:-

If the mantras are transcribed by north Indians, they use a hindiized Sanskrit

that distorts the mantras to such an extent that it is ludicrous.

Here is an example. This is from the " famous " siddhashram site where you " buy "

Sadhana and siddhi.

This is part of the " mantra " of Bagalaamukhi.

" Om Namo Bhagwati, Om Namo Veer Pratap Vijay Bhagwati Baglaamukhi! Mam

Sarvanindakaanaam Sarva Dushtaanaam Vaacham Mukham Padam Stambhay Jihvaam Mudray

Mudray, Buddhim Vinaashay Vinaashay Aparbuddhim Kuru Kuru, Atmavirodhinaam

Shatroonnaam Shiro, Lalaatam,Mukham,Netra,Karnna, Naasikoru,Paad, Annu-Annu,

Dantoshtth, Jihvaam, Taalu, Guhya, Gudaa, Katti, Jaanu, Sarvaangeshu... "

This is piteous!!

Bhagawati is Bhagwati; bagalamukhi is baglaamukhi; stambhaya is stambhay ;

mudraya is mudray veera is veer; maam is mam etc. etc. every line is a mistake.

Mantras are shabda pradhana and artha pradhaana. Both gets destroyed here. I

wonder what siddhi can come from reciting this you know what!! This “beauty” can

be seen at

http://www.siddhashram.org/s19981155c.shtml. The whole site is replete with

such beauties.

The other is Tamil oriented sites. As far as I know (I am not an authority) ka

in tamil takes the position of ka, kha, ga, kha, ~na. ca takes the plae of ca,

cha ja jha so on and soforth. Tamil is one of the ost anient (I think it is said

that it is the oldest living language) But the difference is indicated by

diacritical marks (am I right?? Tamil specialists may clarify). When

transliterating, they subconsciously use the common short form and this causes

distortion in sound and meaning.

Please!! I am not talking of any superiority, but just mentioning an issue

that has confronted me time and again and I am thinking aloud of its

consequences.

Here is an example

Namani kinthu granatha sthava loka thunde,

Nadambaram sprusathi danda dharasya dhanda,

Thallesa langitha bhavambu nidheeya thoyam,

Thannama samsmrutheriyam na puna sthuthisthe. 2

Sthava here should be stava??

“danda dharasya dhanda” should be ‘danda dharasya danda’ = I do not

understand the need to make the second ‘danda’ ‘dhanda’??? (Am I right ?? please

clarify those who know)

Sha is sa – that is also a common point seen. The result is a clear

pronunciation is just not possible and sometimes the recitation will come out as

gibberish. Then neither shabda shuddhi nor artha shudhi will be there and so

there will be anugraha. What the contributors should do, imho, is to put proper

Sanskrit text to accompany their contributions.

I am NOT challenging the sincerity of those who post these things on the net.

I am just saying lets have a common universal transliteration code so that the

sound comes out similarly whichever language is your mother tongue.

I hope the users of these sites will remember this pitfall when taking texts

from the net until we have a uniform method of transliteration.

Please forgive for any transgressions.

Be a PS3 game guru.

Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Games.

May 26, 2007

I totally agree with you. The main reason is lack of respect for the Mantras.

The North Indian if he makes the effort can easily say Bhagawati instead of

Bhagwati. Similarly the South Indian should be conscious that he is speaking

Sanskrit and not his own language. But this effort is not given. Easy money and

fame flow in through Mantras. So the ignorant can be fooled. There should be a

commonly accepted system of Transliteration and Pronunciation for Sanskrit to

English compatible with Microsoft Word which should be used by every one.

sankara menon <kochu1tz wrote: Hindu stotras and mantras

are in Sanskrit. We see online a lot of renderings of these. One thing I have

been noting is that the English renderings are mostly faulty.(there are some

that are very very accurate, I am not denying that)

May 26, 2007

I agree with you, Kochu, regarding Tamil transliterations.

Unless one obtains a sanskrit-tamil transliterated copy of any

stotra, or has an intuitive knowledge of proper pronunciation of

sanskrit terms, it is very difficult to get the correct form from

just tamil text alone.

Most of the time, I use sanskrit-tamil transliteration sequence to

learn the proper pronunciations. While diatrical marks (bold face

letters - which are commonly used to emphasize the harder consonant),

they are not fully expressive of the required sanskrit pronuciations.

E. g. " ka " and " ga " can be differentiated by diatrical marks, but the

subtlety between " ka " and " kha " and that between " ga " and " gha " need

to be known intuitively or by comparison with sanskrit texts.

In general, knowledge of at least reading and pronuncing sanskrit

text (w/o any influence from regional languages of India) is

essential in chanting the stotras/mantras.

G

PS: " ca " and " ja " can be diffentiated from by using sanskrit

derived letters and also there are specific letters for ksha, ha,

sha, ~na and nga etc.

, sankara menon <kochu1tz

wrote:

>

> The other is Tamil oriented sites. As far as I know (I am not an

authority) ka in tamil takes the position of ka, kha, ga, kha, ~na.

ca takes the plae of ca, cha ja jha so on and soforth. Tamil is one

of the ost anient (I think it is said that it is the oldest living

language) But the difference is indicated by diacritical marks (am I

right?? Tamil specialists may clarify). When transliterating, they

subconsciously use the common short form and this causes distortion

in sound and meaning.

May 27, 2007

Friends

I am not trying to justify Tamil way of pronouncing mantras, slokas etc.

For the persons who know only Tamil, there is the choice of using Tamil psalms

and prayers such as tiruvaachakam, tevaaram, abiraami-antaadi, tiruppugazh,

tiruarutpaa etc., which are as effective as Sanskrit slokas. As for mantras,

there are completely tamilised mantras such as given in tirumandiram of

Tirumoolar which are again as effective as, if not more, Sanskrit-mantras.

Since the discussion started on the mantras, I at least am of the belief that a

mere knowledge of Sanskrit knowledge is insufficient to properly pronounce

mantras. We learn the mantras from a proper Guru/ Acharya for years together

before getting the right intonation, deflection, accent and the way of

incantation. This cannot be learned from studying a book however well written it

is, correctly transliterated it is. This is precisely the reason why many of the

mantras are called 'Gurumukhaikavedyam'.

I certainly do not fault or discourage people who buy CDs where gayatri and

mrtyunjaya mantras are sung to a tune rather than according to the method of

vedic chant. Vedic chant also differs depending on the particular veda and the

particular recension.

The best is to approach an acharya of one's own sampradaya for learning these

and leave the rest to the acharya's care.

My two cents - JR

ganpra <ganpra wrote: I agree

with you, Kochu, regarding Tamil transliterations.