|WikiProject Hinduism / Mythology / Krishnaism||(Rated B-class, High-importance)|
|WikiProject India||(Rated B-class, Low-importance)|
This article states that the Gayatri mantra does not invoke the sun. This statement is partially true and partially false. The mantra in fact invokes the Solar Logos. Should this be corrected? 18.104.22.168 05:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Since nobody objected, I removed the 'cohesive translation' (it is not a translation at all but rather an elaboration on themes in the mantra) -- I suspect it was simply copied off some internet site. I do think it could have a place in the article, but it would need to be incorporated in a paragraph on the role of the mantra in hinduism etc. and also be provided with a specific source. Here it is or easy reference:
- Oh God! You are the Giver of Life, Remover of pain and sorrow, The Bestower of happiness, Oh! Creator of the Universe, May we receive your supreme sin-destroying light, May You guide our intellect in the right direction.
Dbachmann 09:02, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Would anyone be able to produce a more exact phonetic transliteration using SAMPA or IPA. It would be greatly appreciated. Oska 12:24, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)
- think this is unneccesary. With the exact transcription, you can get the phonetic value of each letter from Sanskrit. We can also remove the "roughly phonetical transliteration", I was just not bold enough to do it when I added the correct transliteration. dab 11:47, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
"There is also a Gayatri Yantra"
- when? where?
"Considered even more powerful."
- by whom? please give some sources. I could also draw a Gayatri with rabbits' ears on my desk and then write "there is also a Gayatri with rabbits' ears". dab 11:54, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- 1 Star of David
- 2 Redirecting Gayatrimantra here.
- 3 A bit more translation needed.
- 4 Correction in mantra for Devanagari script
- 5 Different translations
- 6 The "Solar Logos"
- 7 difference between Gayatri and Gayatri-Mantra
- 8 Popular culture
- 9 10 repetitions
- 10 "Origin" section copies content from website without permission
- 11 Links Question
- 12 Gayatri Mantra in World Religions
- 13 Revered by Buddhists?
- 14 This article is an abriged translation of Gayatri MahaVigyan published by Shantikunj Haridwar; does not cite anything beyond the said book.
- 15 Islamic View?
Star of David
- It contains the text of the mantra, an illustraion of the goddess Gayatri, surronded by the Star of David.
This seems unlikely, or at least, misphrased. And also misspelled.
indeed. I removed:
- There is also a Gayatri Yantra, which is a visual form of the mantra. Considered even more powerful. It contains the text of the mantra, an illustraion of the goddess Gayatri, surronded by the Star of David.
- To most people here in England, "hexagram" means Hexagram (I Ching). Anthony Appleyard 06:26, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
Redirecting Gayatrimantra here.
- Bhu Bhuva Svah
- Tat Savitur Varenyam
- Bhargo Devasya Dheemahee
- Dhiyo Yo Nah Prachodayaat
- The primordial creative sound
- The three worlds: earth, atmosphere, and heaven
- Adoration of the splendor that radiates from the Divine illumination
- A prayer for liberation through the light of the universal intelligence
This is perhaps the most popular of all vedic hymns. The term " Gayatri" refers to the meter in which the mantra is composed. It also refers to the Goddess Gayatri (with 5 heads). The hymn is addressed to the sungod and is a prayer for illumination. Traditionally the mantra was guarded to prevent it reaching lower castes and was passed from generation to generation by chanting it in the ears (by the father to the son in the sacred thread ceremony - the Upanayanam). Several people all over the world have wonderful experiences by chanting this powerful hymn.
A bit more translation needed.
The translation of the mantra does not say what "oṃ bhūr bhuvaḥ svaḥ" means. Anthony Appleyard 06:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- this is not straightforward. It is a magic formula even in the Yajurveda. oṃ means "AUM". "bhūr bhuvaḥ svaḥ" means "earth - air - heavens" (bhū means "becoming, being, existing", but also "world, earth"; bhuvaḥ means "air, athmosphere" , and svaḥ means "sun, sky, heavens"). We give this in the word-by-word glossary. The whole thing is interpreted as a triplet of triplets, (A-U-M) - (bhur-bhuvah-svah) - (pada a - pada b - pada c). dab (ᛏ) 09:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Correction in mantra for Devanagari script
It appears to me that the mantra in Devanagari (second line) is incorrect. It should have been "tat savitur" instead it looks like "tat savati".
Different translations of the Gayatri mantra can be found here (one of them I've added to the text of the mainarticle): http://wahiduddin.net/mantra/gayatri.htm Austerlitz 22.214.171.124 06:41, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
The "Solar Logos"
"The mantra in fact invokes the Solar Logos." somebody wrote. I had never heard that term, that's why I've looked for some information:
difference between Gayatri and Gayatri-Mantra
the word "Gayatri" itself does not mean "Gayatri mantra". Gayatri by itself means mother of the vedas but Gayatri mantra is the popularly known hymn. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 00:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC).
I have removed the random trivia, which is irrelevant to this article. If someone wants to write a encyclopedic section on cultural influence of the Gayatri mantra based on secondary sources, they should feel free to do so. Thanks. Abecedare 03:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
-- why is random trivia unimportant again? Since this is a site where we go to find out pretty much everything, why wouldn't random information be important? Perhaps even under a trivia section. If I wanted to find out about trivia, where should we go? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 17:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Totally agree. I've gone back and read the deleted Popular Culture section and it appears to me to be both interesting and relevant to an article on the Gayatri mantra to write about its influence on other forms of art (music, TV, etc.). While that section was a (fairly poorly written) list, I suggest that it was something which could have been built on (and marked as such) rather than a candidate for deletion. Too often on Wikipedia I find that people are willing to throw away useful and interesting information just because it is not yet encyclopedic. Wikipedia is huge and still relatively young. It will take decades for every section in every article to be encyclopedic, but it will take even longer if whenever somebody makes a start by putting in some bare bones information, that somebody else deletes it within a few months because it isn't immediately perfect! Bryces (talk) 00:29, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I have reverted an edit claiming that it can be repeated 10 times. Obviously it can be repeated any number of times, but I don't believe it is common practice. I have seen 9, 18, 54, and 108 bead malas, but never a 10-bead one. However, I am being quite bold reverting this, and if it is re-entered I will just add a fact tag. -- Q Chris (talk) 09:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
"Origin" section copies content from website without permission
The "Origin" section is directly copied from my website. Since I am forbidden to add a link to my site, how do I get credit for my content created by me? (see eaglespace.com/spirit/gayatri.php for verification). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajmanik (talk • contribs) 05:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- I am notifying admins, but it would seem to me that you have three options.
- Add your site as a reference. In the reference put "content from this site used with permission of the author". In my opinion if a site is valuable enough to lift content then it certainly is relevant enough to be referenced.
- Ignore the issue. Put something on your own site to credit yourself with being a source for the wikipedia article.
- Delete the offending comment from the article. This will leave wiki authors the option of researching and writing the section themselves or doing without it.
- In my view the first option is the preferable one. As the copyright owner you have the right to chose any one of them. Note that I am not a wikipedia admin, or a copyright lawyer so this has to be taken as personal opinion. If you want to take option one or three but need help actually editing please let me know.
- By the way, thank you for being constructive about this and not just deleting the section without consideration. By the way I like your site and will explore it further when I have time. -- Q Chris (talk) 12:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Option 1 would have been perfectly acceptable to me (and I would still prefer if we can revert to it - a link to my original would have been great but I feel funny about adding links to my own pages here at wikipedia) but it seems like the admin has chosen to go with Option 3. If you would like to reverse the change and add a reference, please go ahead.
I would appreciate any comments/suggestions that you have regarding my website. I am [slowly] learning and teaching myself about all these topics :-]
http://www.allbhajans.com/gayatri-mantra/ should a video with lyrics added on wikipedia just like its here on this page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 13:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Gayatri Mantra in World Religions
This section is original research with quoted taken out of context to try to back up this original research. I will revert it, as it is original research. Please feel free and share any thoughts below. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- The article builds upon the statement, "The Meaning of Gayatri Mantra Encompasses the Teachings of All Religions." From there it quotes from religious text in an attempt to back up such a claim. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:11, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- Comment After removing the POV pushing section on how, "The Meaning of Gayatri Mantra Encompasses the Teachings of All Religions," it has been restored. While there are references provided, they do not back up this claim - the world religion text DO NOT refer to Gayatri, this is somebody's original research - I dont know whose - but as it is unidentified and not germane to the article, I will revert it once more. If anybody has any questions, concerns or comments - please state them here. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 12:50, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Gayatri Mantra owes for its origin to the Rigveda. In fact it is the name of one of the meters used by the poets of the Rigveda for the composition of their verses. In Gayatri meter a verse is of one and a half line. Gayatri mantra is the verse 3.62.10 of the Rigveda composed by a poet of Jamdagni-family which reads as follows: “ tat saviturvarenyam bhargodevsya dhimahi: dhiyo yo nah prchodyat “. To this has been added later : “Om bhurbhuvah svah” Thus the Gayatri Mantra in its present form reads as:
“Om bhurbhuvah svah tat saviturvarenyam bhargodevsya dhimahi: dhiyo yo nah prchodyat”
Literally it means: “ May we acquire much desirable information about the destruction in the regions Bhu, Bhuvah and Svah from deva Savitar. May our narrations to people be hair-raising .”,The Hindu priests maintain that this is the most sacred verse and its chanting has great spritual significance. The spritual interpretations of this verse are in thousands. For word by word explaination see Dr. Nigam's blogg "Vedanand" on Gayatri Mantra. Bindul (talk) 10:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
1.Nigam, Brij (2003), Rigveda, The Rise of Aryan Power, p.5, Published by Swedix HB, Lidingoe, Sweden (www.swedix.org) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bindul (talk • contribs) 10:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Revered by Buddhists?
This comment: "revered by both Buddhists (not at least in the Theravada Buddhism tradition) and Hindus worldwide" really needs citation (and the bit in parentheses merits clarification). I don't know of any Buddhist traditions (except for maybe some New Agey universalist types, possibly?) that revere the Gayatri mantra. Not saying there aren't any, but if that claim is going to be made it needs citation in a bad way. Tendrel23 (talk) 9:21pm EST, 2 December 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 02:22, 3 December 2009 (UTC).
This article is an abriged translation of Gayatri MahaVigyan published by Shantikunj Haridwar; does not cite anything beyond the said book.
I suggest to flag this article and rewrite it with additional citation from outside the book. Also, passages are written carelessly with poor construction of sentences and sometimes reader gets lost in the words without understanding the meaning and message being conveyed by the author.
There are topics on "Anushthans" and "Kundlini Jagran" which I presume esoteric in nautre and due care has not been taken to write down the passages.
- If this is true then this is a copyright violation. I will flag appropraitely
Regarding the section on the "Islamic View" of Gayatri. Firstly, it's not clear where this is cited from. More importantly, this has no relevance to the topic whatsoever. Gayatri is a primarily Hindu topic and there seems to be no (scholarly, innocuous) purpose served by noting some minor and empirical view perhaps held by some Islamic people. It should be removed. ShyamSSanthanam (talk) 01:39, 20 August 2011 (UTC)