Lord Ram not Lord Rama

[Guest guest]

Why is it that many people pronounce Lord Ram’s name as Rama (with the ‘a’)???

 

Even in the Back to Godhead pronunciation guide it says that the way to pronounce the Lord’s name is that it rhymes with drama?!?

 

It gets worse, many people, when singing kirtan sing ‘hoooooooraaaaaaaaay Raaamoh’

 

It is Lord Ram, not Lord Rama Not Lord Ramo (and whilst we are on the subject, its not Arjuna but Arjun).

 

Please don’t spoil the Lord’s beautiful name.

 

Jai Sri SitaRam

 

[vanamali]

Well, actually throughout India the pronunciation tends to differ.

 

In chanting/singing, BOTH ways are correct, depending on the rhythm of the text.

 

Hare Rama Hare Krishna is correct in one chant, but could also be Hare Ram Hare Krishan if you like (if you change the rhythm).

 

"He Ram He Ram" or "Raghupati Raghav(a) Raja Ram" is also correct.

 

 

However... if you consider that each letter in Sanskrit is actually a syllable and not just a single phoneme, then Raama is actually the correct pronunciation. Raa + ma.

 

As for "Ramo" I think people are simply having trouble pronouncing, but why do you want to make fun of them? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

Sri Rama Rama Rameti

Rame Rame Manorame

Sahasranama tat tulyam

Rama Nama Varanane

 

(It is correct in Sanskrit verse to have this eight syllable division. "Sri Ram Ram Rameti" only has six, so that is not appropriate. should be chanted "Sri Rama Rama Rameti...)

[theist]

I don't get into discussions over pronouncation styles. I did want to mention that the Lord's name cannot become spoiled under any circumstance. If He does appear it will be in an unspoiled condition.

 

But I know what you mean. We should be attentive as we chant.

 

An interesting question is raised. Which would be transcendentaly powerful, a purified devotee chanting the name of the Lord as Rama or Ramo or a professional reciter chanting in perfect form the sound Ram to receive his lunch from the assembled crowd?

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

Why is it that many people pronounce Lord Ram’s name as Rama (with the ‘a’)??? Even in the Back to Godhead pronunciation guide it says that the way to pronounce the Lord’s name is that it rhymes with drama?!? It gets worse, many people, when singing kirtan sing ‘hoooooooraaaaaaaaay Raaamoh’ It is Lord Ram, not Lord Rama Not Lord Ramo (and whilst we are on the subject, its not Arjuna but Arjun). Please don’t spoil the Lord’s beautiful name.

 

 

I don't want to offend you, but you are not very informed on the proper pronunciation of sanskrit words. You are accustomed to Hindi, where the word "Raama" is incorrectly pronounced as "Raam". And based on that ignorance you criticize others who are pronouncing these words properly.

 

Proper sanskrit pronunciation is preserved in the Southern parts of India, where Muslim influence is less (i.e. Urdu has not influenced the southern languages).

 

Every few months we have someone post this same thing about how no one knows how to properly pronounce the name of the Lord because they are "incorrectly" saying raama instead of raam. Its unfortunate that people who do not know the proper pronunciation would be foolish enough to criticize others for mispronunciation when they themselves are the one's mispronouncing the name of Rama.

 

And if when hearing bhaktas sing the names of the Lord the only thing you notice is the mistakes in their pronunciation, you will have a very long journey towards spiritual advancement.

[vanamali]

--------

And if when hearing bhaktas sing the names of the Lord the only thing you notice is the mistakes in their pronunciation, you will have a very long journey towards spiritual advancement.

 

---------

 

I agree. It's kind of like if somebody drew a picture of Sri Krishna, but did something in it you didn't like, like made the makara earrings too small, or the lotus eyes too big, would you say, "Oh, that's a disgusting picture!"

 

I think you probably just got a little over-excited, prabhu. Don't worry so much, chant His name the way you want, He will hear you, don't worry.

 

~Vanamali

[Guest guest]

HI..

Rama is Sanskrit

Ram is Hindi

Raman is tamil

All three are the same and noting is wrong.

Like wise

Narayana-Sanskrit

Narayan- Hindi

Narayanan - Tamil

Shiva-Sanskrit, Shiv- Hindi., Sivan- Tamil..

I am just giving examples of Indian languages and all of them have a common basic script that dates back to several thousands of years ago. If I am right, they all originated from Brahmi script. (I am sorry if I am wrong). In course of time when the grammar was written for each language, each language has its own way of pronouncing words by adding suffix that is unique for the language and hence the difference.

Its the bakthi that counts in chanting Lord's name more than the language what you use to talk to Baghwan.

Shyam

[Avinash]

The name of Lord Rama is pronounced as "raama".

How do you pronounce 'Ra' in 'Rajesh'? The same way you have to pronounce 'raa' in 'raama'.

How do you pronounce 'Ma' in 'Manoj'? The same way you have to pronounce 'ma' in 'raama'.

[sidd04mech]

In the International Alphabet of Sanskrit Translation (IAST) you can get your answer, where is the problem.

when you'll read the name in any Sanskrit book it is written as " राम" andin the IAST it is written as "rāma", you can see that there is a difference in 2nd character ( ā ) and 4th character ( a ) but most of the time it is not possible to write this with typewriter or in normal fonts in computer also. So people write it as "Rama" only and which is quite obvious. But If you see in this link how it is pronounced or any other site of IAST (Sanskrit alphabet, pronunciation and language) you can make the difference.

It is the same thing what Avinash is trying to say in the last post. When you put an (a) with any consonants it is spoken complete like in the nice example given above "Ma" in "Manoj" where it is really ( a ) but in "Rajesh" there should be ( ā )(as per IAST only). which you can see in any IAST reference. And in that same method it is written as ( rāma = राम ), (arjuna = अर्जुन ) , (kṛṣṇa = कृष्ण), ( Rāmāyaṇa = रामायण) , (Mahābhārata = महाभारत).

But again it is difficult to write ( ā ) all the time so we replace it with ( a ) and than obviously it is difficult to pronunciation it correctly.

But still I think it is just to know this things but not much important to discuss it and criticize each other. Even in the Sanskrit literature also names of Rāma and kṛṣṇa are being written and used in many different ways just to rhyme the words. So i'll say every one above is write in their own way.

[Amlesh]

Well, those who are acquainted with Hindi and has watched the Hindi serial Ramayan (Ramayana for those not used to hindi) or Mahabharat (Mahabharata) won't find it difficult to pronounce Ram instead of Rama. But whatever it is, the real intention of the Bhakt (Bhakta) that counts.

When the sweet Lord's name is taken with love, with or without the real pronunciation, He comes to the call.

[bmsuthar]

My friends:

I read all above comments. People who answers do not have the open heart. If someone is does not feel right about raamaa then treat them like a child. Be a bigger hearted person, open your heart and give them answer two ways. One, it is the bhava is important in the bhakti. And another way, is the gramatically wright or wrong. I never seen in sankskrit books written raamaa. I always saw raam. But, as far as I know little about grammer, but I do vishleshan of some mantras. I know this will be totally new to you. What is the Vishleshan. Vishleshan is where we break up each words into separate letters, then letters break into Swara and Vyanjan (Consonants and Vowels). According to that gramatical rule. Original Sanskrit Raama is like R + A = R (complete R) + A = Raa now Ma = M + A = Complete M. Therefore Raama = Raam. As the limitations to explain, i request my friends to extend your help and understand right way. I also wants to know the sanskrit books where it is written raamaa so I can change my understanding about it. Or someone can scan some text from sanskrit book and show the raamaa in stead of raam.

[Ravilochana]

There is no doubt about it, Rama's name should be pronounced, if one wants to be correct, as Raama. But then, however the Lord's name is pronounced, it sounds sweet.

[Amlesh]

Lost in Translation.

 

I think those born in the indian subcontinent, exposed to hindi, should be more tolerant, vis a vis, our friends alien to the hindi language.

I'll be more open hearted while saying that more of a hardwork is being done from those foreigners than the indian themselves for the preservation of the indian tradition.

[skdasddms]

Om Shri Radha Krishnabhyam Namo

 

Lord's name cannot be spoiled by someone chanting wrongly. Even Ratnakar chanted it Mara... Mara. God is all beautiful by himself. He can only be perceived by Bhakti. It is the Bhakti which matters. Someone chanting it correctly without Bhakti is of no use.

 

Om Shri Radha Krishnabhyam Namo

[bmsuthar]

Dear Sri Theist:

 

You are right. Name is name, it can not be changed. Our mantras, vedas, upanishads, etc. were passed on generations to generations through vocally. Even yajurvedi brahimins have hand signs for acurate pronounciations. Modern people or liberal people do not believe but Bhagawan's name and mantras are very strict about pronounciations. There is no compromise.

 

Now, going to Ram. Each Sanskrit letter has included 'a' in order to make that letter complete. Like R + a = complete R. Means R is incomplete until you add 'a'. So, same way to complete 'M' if we add 'a' to complete 'M' then it becomes 'M' + 'A' = 'M' complete M. This only for Grammatical knowledge it does not apply to pronounciation but some how people pronounce wrong way and made it like RAMAA. That is absolutely wrong. This trend started after introducing our spiritual Bhakti Vedanta to the Western. They changed all pronounciations. They are wrong and therefore they are not getting as much success as they should.

 

The word TAT = is TA + T = TAT because second T is half whereas RAM the 'M' is complete so to show complete 'M' - 'A' is added to 'M'.

 

My guru was a Bengali Mantra Yogi and he had taught Mantra Vijnan and Vishleshan System is a part of Mantra Vijnan and according to that we were used to chant mantras by separating Swar and Vyanjans for each letter of the mantra. Therefor RAM is equal to R + A + A + M + A. This is the authentic way I had learned this and explaining here. In Gujarati language RAMAA means the servant who does household cleaning etc. work. Do you want to turn RAM into that RAMAA the house servant. What I am trying to say is if you change the name it changes the meaning too. So, people, don't make my Lord Ram to Ramaa. It says that incomplete knowledge is a dangerous thing. I think people who had incomplete knowledge they change my Lord Ram into RAMAA - household servant. And if they worship this RAMAA what they can get, nothing. Then they will blame the Mantra Vijnan or the the Hindu Religion. Please don't play with Sanskrit language without enough knowledge about it.

Balwant

[Kantykot]

Ram , Rama, Ramo or near to the sound of Raam is all valid. Rama is narayan and he is the Purush or parent of all children. Schildren can mis pronounce but the parents knows what the child is saying or wanting. For e.g. a child is asking for an Orange but he say Organge and Rama knows what the child wants and the result will the correct in Ramas mind.

 

When you srite script in English "a" is silent. How would a speech impared person call Rama or ..aammaaa. and Rama understand his word of prayer.

 

So please give up on pronounciation and concentrate LORD you will find 1000 different names and pronounciation of Ram.

 

May Rama bless you.