[Advaita-l] Question/Clarification on Chanting Vaidika mantras
rama.balasubramanian at gmail.com
Sun Nov 5 11:28:19 EST 2017
Thanks for pointing this out. I am going back and forth between rituals and
svaadhyaaya, so it can get a little confusing.
The Southern kaaNva school does not use show of hands even during
On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 9:41 AM Rajesh Benjwal via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> It is correct, as established in purva memansa, that only chanting
> correctly is enough to get the result of the mantra but saying
> that svara are as important as correct pronunciation to get the result is
> not correct. It is important to learn svara but it is not necessary to show
> savara to get the result of the karmakandam. Like in Shukla Yajurveda
> madhyandina shakha, which is my shakha, you show the svara by hand. When
> performing Abhisheka or during pooja or in yajna it is not necessary to
> show the svara, as your hands are busy so you cannot show svara, only
> correct pronunciation is required.
> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 6:03 PM, Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan via Advaita-l
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > Praveen, I think you have understood where I am coming from. However, I
> > think my understanding of the phala of "understanding meanings", etc., is
> > somewhat different.
> > I think we are going quite a bit away from the original question about
> > recitation issues, but that's ok. I'll just summarize some of the issues.
> > pUrva mImAmsA vs. vedAnta, usually fall in two camps. One is totally
> > against rituals and talks about the scientific vedAnta and the other is
> > vyAvahAre bhATTa nyAyaH camp. The latter is more close to the truth, but
> > there are many important differences between advaita and pUrva mImAmsA.
> > 1. By adR^iShTa phala, I am assuming you mean apUrva phala, where an
> > potency is posited via arthApatti to account for phala happening at
> > times. The adR^iShTa phala is a superset of this, including things like
> > what is the phala when you thresh grains versus sprinkling with water
> > First of all, apUrva phala is not even accepted by advaita. See the
> > to 3.2.38-41, especially at the end f 3.2.38, where shankara says:
> > "apUrvasya-acetanasya kAShTha-loShTa-samasya cetanena-apravR^ittitasya
> > pravR^itti-anupapatteH ****tat-astitve eva pramANa-abhAvAt***, and
> > Ishvara alone the phala-dAtA. There is no apUrva and shankara makes it
> > clear.
> > 2. You seem to be saying that fruit of knowledge of mantras and rituals
> > dR^iShTa in the sense of meditation, but that's only part of it. As per
> > chhAndogya, any ritual performed with knowledge gives more/better
> > Take for example, the shrI-sUkta-homa for dhana-vR^iddhi. Does it even
> > matter if my understanding of the mantras hiraNya-varNAm, etc., is only
> > dR^iShTa phala which you posit? if the aim is dhana, then it should not
> > matter to me whether I know the meanings, etc., if the apUrva is
> > However the upaniShad is saying that you would get better benefits by
> > knowing meanings, etc. The only logical interpretation in this case, is
> > that there would be more money coming to me or come sooner, but that is
> > "dR^iShTa-phala" either. It's just that I get better results. The strict
> > pUrva-mImAmsA interpretation of the chhAndogya passages would be as an
> > artha-vAda, due to their positing of apUrva, but vedAntins interpret it
> > literally. That would apply to cases when it's not regarding meditation
> > well.
> > 3. The non-acceptance of apUrva leads to a different way of interpreting
> > what rituals are and "knowledge" of rituals are. Two performance examples
> > are how can you deal with kAmya-karma and rituals like the shyena. The
> > reason why sheyna cannot be performed is much discussed in mImAmsA, but
> > advaitins would say that it can indeed be performed, but with certain
> > conditions, unlike the mImAmsaka-s. Similarly kAmya karma can and should
> > performed, but with the right attitude. A modern analysis of the mImAmsA
> > discussions on sheyna using deontic logic can be found in
> > https://www.logic.at/staff/agata/tableaux2015.pdf for those interested
> > this type of things. The vedAntins also differ from the mImAmsaka-s on
> > phrase "ya evam veda" frequently occurring in the taittirIya brAhmaNa
> > portions asserting same benefit from knowing how to do rituals vs.
> > doing them. vedAntin-s interpret this literally as well.
> > In spite of all this and it's indeed good to know meanings, it is wholly
> > irrelevant for *most* people due to the fact that they cannot do things
> > properly or recite properly. That's more important and is a huge
> > block. Knowing meanings cannot and will not obviate wrong chanting or
> > performance.
> > Rama
> > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l <
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > > Namaste Kartikji
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 10:26 AM, S Jayanarayanan via Advaita-l <
> > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Praveen R. Bhat bhatpraveen -at- gmail.com wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Therefore, knowing the meaning is secondary to the extent of being
> > >> almost moot.
> > >>
> > >> No, I'm saying that there is a significant effect of knowing the
> > >> of the Vedic Mantras that goes above and beyond merely chanting them.
> > >>
> > > To clarify, I know what you're saying. I was restating what Ramaji is
> > > saying and this was addressed to those who misunderstood his statement.
> > >
> > >
> > >> I've recited the Purusha Suktam many times (even earlier today), and
> > >> certainly gained from the knowledge of the meaning of (at least some
> > >> of) the Mantras.
> > >>
> > > Same here, but gaining the knowledge is a dRShTaphala while the
> > contention
> > > here is about adRShTaphala. I doubt that anyone will question the gain
> > > (dRShThaphala) in knowing the meaning (padArtha and vAkyArtha)! This
> > > dRShTaphala is gained even without chanting properly or without svara.
> > Just
> > > reading it and making an anvaya and/ or studying Sayanabhashya will get
> > us
> > > that. However, it will not get us adRShTa, what will is chanting
> > > with svara.
> > >
> > > In a nutshell: knowing the meaning of (a few of) the Veda Mantras may
> > >> be essential, but is surely beneficial! Yes, even to the Average
> > Devadatta!
> > >>
> > > Sure, and that benefit is dRShTaphala. I wonder if Ramaji differs
> > >
> > > gurupAdukAbhyAm,
> > > --Praveen R. Bhat
> > > /* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one
> > > That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> > >
> > > For assistance, contact:
> > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> > For assistance, contact:
> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> *Rajesh Benjwal*
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list