 |
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|
"Om bhUrbhuvass(u)va:" is not technically part of the Gayatri mantra
proper. It only serves as an introduction to the mantra, as described in
many upanishads, e.g. bRhadAraNyaka, maitrAyaNI etc. Even with adding
the u in suva:, you do not get 8 syllables, because the visargas should
not be counted as full syllables, although most southern Indians (I am
one too) pronounce it that way.
Remember that the Gayatri has 24 syllables in total, which is usually
split as 8 times 3. From tat savitur ... to pracodayAt, there are 3
lines, with 8 syllables each, making up 24 syllables totally. Therefore,
the total number of syllables in Om bhUrbhuvassuva: is not a matter of
concern at all.
> And I feel that the 2nd line "that savithur..... should be read with Om
> before to fulfill the meter requirement
You are probably thinking of the second line as "tat savitur vareNyam,"
which gives only seven syllables. Traditionally, the number of syllables
is made to tally to 8, by adding an implied "i" sound, to make it "tat
savitur vareN(i)yam." Do not add an Om at the beginning. There is a lot
of evidence from the upanishads that there is an implied i in many such
conjunct consonants. For example, the word satyam is routinely split as
sat + ti+ yam, in many texts.
Finally, regional variations in pronunciations of Vedic mantras are well
accepted in the tradition. The pronunciations of a Kashmiri pundit and a
Malayali nambudiri represent two extremes, and both have more than a
thousand years of tradition behind them.
Vidyasankar
|
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|