In another thread, Max and Kinnera have been arguing about chanting and correct pronunciation of Vedic hymns from hindu scriptures like Rig Veda. Kinnera says that since correct pronunciation of Vedic hymns is so important in the Hindu tradition the chanting of Rig Vedic hymns will sound the same across India providing the person doing the chanting has undergone proper education and training in how one ought to chant/pronounce the Vedic hymns. Max disagrees. He thinks a pandit from Uttar Pradesh will chant a Rig Vedic hymn differently from a pandit from Tamil Nadu.

In my opinion, Kinnera is right. As Kinnera rightly points out, if Max heard a pandit from Tamil Nadu chanting a Vedic hymn differently from a pandit in Uttar Pradesh one of the pandits did not undergo proper training/education on how to chant the Vedic hymns properly.

kinnera wrote:

Thanks Kinnera. These regionalists who would have us believe that Rig Vedic Hymns are chanted differently by north indians and south indians are ignoramuses of the first order.

One other person who has been claiming that Vedic hymns are chanted differently by south indian pandits than by north indian pandits is none other than Charvaka--who has publicly admitted that his own uncle is a priest who does not know proper sanskrit and does not chant the Vedic hymns properly.

SatyaVeda: All about the Veda

As per my Veda Guru :
... There are variations between Vedic Chanting between North and South India as well as across the various mathams. Each sampradayam (tradition) is correct in its own context.

this is from the same website that rashmun posted something a while back. while i don't think this is the last word (i'd rather read a well research article by an academic, rather than a casual article by a pontiff), it's worth reading. this is the late matAthipathi of the kanchi matam, an ascetic of great veneration on both sides of my family.


vedic vocalization and regional languages.

http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/hinduism-forum/173936-varibility-pronounciation-vedic-chanting.html

Greetings-

I know the Vedic tradition places emphasis on correct pronounciation

of mantras especially. Is there consistencey from place to place on
this or are there regional "accents" of mantra pronounciation? I would
imagine among the populace there would be, but is there more
consistency at the level of priests?

thank you for any information that you can share-


Dante Rosati


---

Indeed there are what one might call standardized regional
styles of Vedic recitation for the same text. For example, the
Maharashtrians, Tamils, and Keralites each have their own
distinct styles of reciting the Rigveda. The same goes for other
texts.

Madhav Deshpande
---

With regard to the Kerala recitation of Veda having
the l sound in lieu of the t sound mentioned by
Professor Deshpande, it can be seen that this also is
not confined to Veda. As documented by Kunjunni Raja,
the Malayali pronunciation in the following examples
would illustrate this
Vatsalya-valsalya
tatparya-talparya
tatkala-talkala
I think the pronunciation of Vasat as vasaL is also a
typical Kerala variation.
While it is possible that the mother tongue pull may
be a reason for regional variation, the vedic chanting
influencing regional languages must also be not ruled
out.The malayalam dialect of central Kerala Namboodiri
Brahmins seems to show traces of some vedic accent
C.Rajendran

=====

Dr.C.Rajendran
Professor of Sanskrit
University of Calicut
Calicut University P.O
Kerala 673 635 Phone: 0494-2401144
Residential address:28/1097,Rajadhani Kumaran Nair Road,
Chevayur, Calicut Kerala 673 017 Phone: 0495-2354 624

---

Finally, from the ultimate arbiter of these matters, my good friend Rashmun: a wikipedia article can help us in forming a tentative view but it certainly cannot be the final word on any historical issue particularly a controversial issue.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:this is from the same website that rashmun posted something a while back. while i don't think this is the last word (i'd rather read a well research article by an academic, rather than a casual article by a pontiff), it's worth reading. this is the late matAthipathi of the kanchi matam, an ascetic of great veneration on both sides of my family.


vedic vocalization and regional languages.

I was about to post this!

Since Rashmun prefers copy-pastes, here are some highlighted copy-pastes.

If we relate certain characteristics of the different languages of India to how Vedic chanting differs syllabically from region to region, we will discover the important fact that the genius of each of these tongues and the differences between them are based on how the Vedas are chanted in these regions. I make here certain observations based on my own philological researches.

"Hindu Dharma" is a book which contains English translation of certain invaluable and engrossing speeches of Sri Sri Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi MahaSwamiji (at various times during the years 1907 to 1994).

Here is the Kerala Namboothiri point of view:

It is compulsory for Rigvedi Namboothiris to learn Rigvedam text by-heart, following the rules of "Udaatham", "Anudaatham", "Swaritham", etc. In other words, the prescribed sound control and time periods for and between every letter and every word had to be strictly adhered to. Though every Braahmanan in the country does follow such rules - with minor regional variations -, the Namboothiri chanting became world-famous perhaps owing to the strict adherence of their chanting rules.

The thing to note here is that brahmins of every region have strict rules about the correct way to chant those verses. However, the precise rules in each region have minor variations. In other words, what is correct differs from region to region. The great tradition of Hinduism is that there is no single, exclusively correct way to do anything -- all these variations are correct in their own ways.

Rashmun,
That is by far the worst conclusion drawn in the history of CH. i agree 100 percent with max here. ignoramuses? really? now, is that dhakini for "since i have no way of proving any of what i said, i am just going to throw that in"?

there is also very simple logic. the way we speak our own languages is different from the way our grandparents spoke it two generations ago, let alone centuries back. there is no chance that things have not undergone change when passed down through multiple regions, through multiple tongues, and through multiple generations by word of mouth for crying out loud! no chance. to expect otherwise is amazingly naive. i know devout hindus have this highly romantic notion of their scriptures being preserved in the most pristine form. i wouldn't like to deliberately tread on beliefs like that, but when this is being asserted as the real thing in a discussion board like this, it needs to be thoroughly rebuffed.

Impedimenta wrote:Rashmun,
That is by far the worst conclusion drawn in the history of CH. i agree 100 percent with max here. ignoramuses? really? now, is that dhakini for "since i have no way of proving any of what i said, i am just going to throw that in"?

i am definitely going to study this issue in further detail because it is of interest to me. But notice the words i am enlarging and contemplate a little bit on them:



Divine sound


The insistence on preserving pronunciation and accent as accurately
as possible is related to the belief that the potency of the mantras
lies in their sound when pronounced. The shakhas thus have the purpose of preserving knowledge of uttering divine sound originally cognized by the rishis.

Portions of the Vedantic literature elucidate the use of sound as a spiritual tool. They assert that the entire cosmic creation began with sound: "By His utterance came the universe." (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.2.4). The Vedanta-sutras add that ultimate liberation comes from sound as well (anavrittih shabdat).

Primal sound is referred to as Shabda Brahman – "God as word". Closely related to this is the concept of Nada Brahman – "God as sound". Nada, a Sanskrit word meaning "sound, noise", is related to the term nadī, "river", figuratively denoting the stream of consciousness – a concept that goes back to the Rig Veda, the most ancient of the Vedas^{[citation needed]}.
Thus, the relationship between sound and consciousness has long been
recorded in India's ancient literature. Vedic texts, in fact, describe
transcending sound as the pre-eminent means for attaining higher,
spiritual consciousness.
Mantras, or sacred sounds, are used to pierce through sensual, mental and intellectual levels of existence (all lower strata of consciousness) for the purpose of purification and spiritual enlightenment. "By sound vibration one becomes liberated" (Vedanta-sutra 4.22).....


UNESCO proclaimed the tradition of Vedic chant a Masterpiece of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity on November 7, 2003.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_chant

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:there is also very simple logic. the way we speak our own languages is different from the way our grandparents spoke it two generations ago, let alone centuries back. there is no chance that things have not undergone change when passed down through multiple regions, through multiple tongues, and through multiple generations by word of mouth for crying out loud! no chance. to expect otherwise is amazingly naive. i know devout hindus have this highly romantic notion of their scriptures being preserved in the most pristine form. i wouldn't like to deliberately tread on beliefs like that, but when this is being asserted as the real thing in a discussion board like this, it needs to be thoroughly rebuffed.

I agree with your conclusion. But I also find the methods they devised to keep the oral tradition going with as little distortion as possible quite fascinating. If you take all pre-printing-press knowledge, and assess it in terms of signal-to-loss ratio over any given amount of time, the vedas are probably head and shoulders above anything else in human history. It is truly remarkable for a vast country like India with all its languages and geographical barriers, there are no alternative written versions of the Rg Veda (as far as I am aware). It would be really interesting to find out whether the vedic chants of Kambhoja, Champa, Java, etc. stayed close to the original text. Balinese Hinduism today didn't seem to have the same level of vedic orthodoxy in it from my limited observation.

For the techniques used for ensuring true fidelity of transmission, check this out if you are interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_chant#Styles_of_memorization

cool! i don't think i ever questioned the actual text but only the vocalization. that had to be influenced by the native language of the chanter.

i plan to spend some time this summer here:

http://acharya.iitm.ac.in/sanskrit/tutor.html

I wrote the following to someone i know who has a very sound knowledge and command over sanskrit.

---
the wikipedia page on Vedic chanting says there is a certain rigidity in
the pronunciation of Vedic hymns because the potency of the Mantras
is
believed to lie in their sound when prounounced, but Madhav Deshpande
says that there exist many regional variations in how even the Rig
Vedic hymns are pronounced. Could you please comment on this issue?

--

The insistence on preserving pronunciation and accent as accurately
as possible is related to the belief that the potency of the mantras
lies in their sound when pronounced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_chant

----


Basically, Sanskrit is regionally pronounced by using the phonetic
resources of the mother-tongues of the reciters. Thus, hardly any
recitation reflects the three-way distinction of s, z, and .s. The
bengali recitation merges v and b, the Behari recitation has s for all
sibilants etc. Beyond this, there are some inexplicable changes such
as the final 't's being changed to 'l's in Kerala Nambudiri
recitation. 'pracodayaat' becomes 'pracodayaal'. Further the
rendering of the accents significantly differs regionally. The Kerala
recitation contains what seems like vibrating or repeating patterns:
deva.m being recited as deva.m.m.m, etc. The high and low notes in
Maharashtrian recitation differ by a much smaller gap than what one
sees in Tamil recitation of the Rigveda. Most of these regionally
standardized modes of recitation are post-Praatizaakhya developments
and hence are not officially recorded in the form of explicit
descriptions. However, they are recognized by the reciters. Best
wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/hinduism-forum/173936-varibility-pronounciation-vedic-chanting.html

----------
this was the response i got:

There is no real conflict between the two proposals. Each tradition is
free to believe that what it recites retains the potency. Although the
reciters do not assert this freedom frequently or even entertain
it consciously (since very few of them go beyond their small circles and
there is a widespread acceptance of the possibility of ;saakhaa
variation among the Vaidikas all over India), they will assert it (in
different words) when confronted with what you have written to me. The
intention behind the traditional teaching about the potency of mantras
is not to deny that there is regional variation or variation in what is
actually found on the ground but to reduce the scope for variation. They
had no means to decide *in absolute terms* about *the original* sounds
of the mantras (the most they could do was to go back to the time of the
Praati;saakhyas) Therefore, engaging in a discussion of whose
recitation is authentic was not only an indeterminate pursuit; it is
also something inimical to social harmony.

Thrissur: A national workshop on teaching and practice of Vedic traditions of Kerala began here on Wednesday.

Addressing the function, poet Akkitham Achuthan Namboodiri said the
main objective of the workshop was to preserve Kerala’s unique Vedic
chanting methods.

“It’s very lively and totally different from other chanting styles,” he said.

In his presidential address, G. C. Tripathi, Head of the Kalakosh
Division, Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts (IGNCA), New Delhi,
said that historical and cultural traditions of Kerala were a model for
the rest of the country.

“Entire country looks up to Kerala for its rich heritage in Veda, music and other classical art forms,” he said.

Vishnu Narayanan Namboodiri congratulated the children who have enrolled at the Brahmaswam Matham for Vedic studies.

“In spite of lack of patronage from the Government, the Vedic
tradition has survived in India. It is part of India’s culture ,” he
said.

T. N. Dharmadhikari, former director, Vaidika Samsodhana Madala, Pune, delivered the keynote address.

The three-day workshop, organised by IGNCA and Vedic Research Centre,
Vadakke Matham Brahmaswam, aims to create awareness about Kerala’s
traditional Vedic chanting methods and techniques used by Vedic Pundits
of Rig Veda, Yajur Veda and Sama Veda. Vedic scholars from various parts
of the county are participating in the sessions.

On the inaugural day, Pandits from Panjal, near here, demonstrated the Jaiminiya Sama traditions of Namboodiris.

Nellikkattil Mamannu Neelakandan Namboodiri, Nellikkattil Mamannu
Vasudevan Namboodiri, Thottam Aryan Namboodiri and Thottam Narayanan
Namboodiri demonstrated this tradition of Samaveda, practised in Panjal.

Thiruvenkida Natha Sharma and his students presented Jaiminiya
tradition. Gopala Vadhyar and his students from Puthukkode Agraharam,
Palakkad, presented Kauthuma Sama tradition practiced by Tamil Pundits.
The workshop will conclude on Friday.


http://www.hindu.com/2008/11/13/stories/2008111352840300.htm

I just saved a bunch of money by switching
my car insurance to Gieco.

Richard Hed wrote:I just saved a bunch of money by switching
my car insurance to Gieco.

gulti does ulti (TM)**

** trademark under license from rashmun-ul-nizami enterprises

Rashmun wrote:Thrissur:

“It’s very lively and totally different from other chanting styles,” he said.

do you even read what you post? what does this statement above say? he is essentially admitting that there are differences amongst vocalizations. do i have to tell you that the words different and difference have the same etymological roots? or that chant means vocalization? doh!

so you have not disproven my thesis that there are differences in vocalization styles. in fact you're just posting more evidence FOR it. wtf is wrong with you?

and what exactly is the point of all this cut and paste? if you want to debate stop vomiting from other websites and address the central q.

and once you get to plural, i.e. traditions, as opposed to the singular, the debate is over and you have lost. get it?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Thrissur:

“It’s very lively and totally different from other chanting styles,” he said.

do you even read what you post? what does this statement above say? he is essentially admitting that there are differences amongst vocalizations. do i have to tell you that the words different and difference have the same etymological roots? or that chant means vocalization? doh!

so you have not disproven my thesis that there are difference in vocalization styles. in fact you're just posting more evidence FOR it. wtf is wrong with you?

yes, i admit i was wrong on this point. on the other hand, you were wrong in claiming that there is a difference between north indian and south indian styles as if there are only two styles. there is probably as much difference between the namboodari style and tamil style as there is between namboodari style and UP style.

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Thrissur:

“It’s very lively and totally different from other chanting styles,” he said.

do you even read what you post? what does this statement above say? he is essentially admitting that there are differences amongst vocalizations. do i have to tell you that the words different and difference have the same etymological roots? or that chant means vocalization? doh!

so you have not disproven my thesis that there are difference in vocalization styles. in fact you're just posting more evidence FOR it. wtf is wrong with you?

yes, i admit i was wrong on this point. on the other hand, you were wrong in claiming that there is a difference between north indian and south indian styles as if there are only two styles. there is probably as much difference between the namboodari style and tamil style as there is between namboodari style and UP style.

i'm trying REALLY hard to control my temper here and you're not helping. did i say that there were only two styles? did i now? i said i have heard the rig veda chanted in my maternal ancestral home and i said it sounded VERY different from northindian intonations which i heard on a tape somewhere once. those are my two samples. i don't think i then concluded that these are the only two possibilities. that conclusion is your own.

eta: in fact when i wrote that i was well aware of the nambUthiri fellows and their claim that theirs is the original and the only correct way (at least some of them say it with nonchalance).

this topic needs to go on http://vocaroo.com/.

Just record and paste the link.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Thrissur:

“It’s very lively and totally different from other chanting styles,” he said.

do you even read what you post? what does this statement above say? he is essentially admitting that there are differences amongst vocalizations. do i have to tell you that the words different and difference have the same etymological roots? or that chant means vocalization? doh!

so you have not disproven my thesis that there are difference in vocalization styles. in fact you're just posting more evidence FOR it. wtf is wrong with you?

yes, i admit i was wrong on this point. on the other hand, you were wrong in claiming that there is a difference between north indian and south indian styles as if there are only two styles. there is probably as much difference between the namboodari style and tamil style as there is between namboodari style and UP style.

i'm trying REALLY hard to control my temper here and you're not helping. did i say that there were only two styles? did i now? i said i have heard the rig veda chanted in my maternal ancestral home and i said it sounded VERY different from northindian intonations which i heard on a tape somewhere once. those are my two samples. i don't think i then concluded that these are the only two possibilities. that conclusion is your own.

eta: in fact when i wrote that i was well aware of the nambUthiri fellows and their claim that theirs is the original and the only correct way (at least some of them say it with nonchalance).

Sorry it was Charvaka who had said what i attributed to you.

charvaka wrote:
Actually the pronunciation of vedic chants varies between north and
south, while pronunciations of southern Indians tend to be quite
similar, per my limited exposure.

https://such.forumotion.com/t263p650-what-are-you-cooking-having-cooked-eating-today#46989

Rashmun wrote:yes, i admit i was wrong on this point.

What was the word again? Ignoramus or ignoranus?

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:yes, i admit i was wrong on this point.

What was the word again? Ignoramus or ignoranus?

not only was i wrong, but you were also wrong when you claimed the following:

charvaka wrote:
Actually the pronunciation of vedic chants varies between north and
south, while pronunciations of southern Indians tend to be quite
similar, per my limited exposure.

the difference is that i am openly admitting my mistake while you are not.

Rashmun wrote:the difference is that i am openly admitting my mistake while you are not.

The difference is that I didn't shoot my mouth and call other people ignoramuses when the ignorance was on my part.

I am glad that there is more diversity in this matter than I had noticed personally. I have heard the Rg Veda chanted in the UP style, and it sounded quite different from the style I heard growing up. Then there was the style I heard at Tamil and Kanndiga brahmin weddings -- those sounded a lot like what I heard growing up. You perhaps thought it all sounds the same because you didn't have exposure to other styles beyond your own.

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:the difference is that i am openly admitting my mistake while you are not.

The difference is that I didn't shoot my mouth and call other people ignoramuses when the ignorance was on my part.

I am glad that there is more diversity in this matter than I had noticed personally. I have heard the Rg Veda chanted in the UP style, and it sounded quite different from the style I heard growing up. Then there was the style I heard at Tamil and Kanndiga brahmin weddings -- those sounded a lot like what I heard growing up. You perhaps thought it all sounds the same because you didn't have exposure to other styles beyond your own.

i said what i did because i know that the correct pronunciation of the Vedic chant is very important.


The insistence on preserving pronunciation and accent as accurately
as possible is related to the belief that the potency of the mantras
lies in their sound when pronounced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_chant

On the other hand, the sanskrit expert with who i corresponded (see my earlier post in this thread) says that a deliberate attempt has been made to reduce any variation. He also says that there is no real conflict between the two proposals (of slight regional variations across India and no variation across India).

Your claim that there is a difference in the style of chanting in north india and south india, and that the way of chanting in south india is very similar, is borne out of ignorance and/or incorrect observation and it smacks of promoting a regional divide on the basis of north india vs south india.

charvaka wrote:
Actually the pronunciation of vedic chants varies between north and
south, while pronunciations of southern Indians tend to be quite
similar, per my limited exposure.

Rashmun wrote:On the other hand, the sanskrit expert with who i corresponded (see my earlier post in this thread) says that a deliberate attempt has been made to reduce any variation. He also says that there is no real conflict between the two proposals (of slight regional variations across India and no variation across India).

You need to learn to read carefully. What your expert correspondent is telling you is that there is no conflict between two notions: "regional variations" and "importance of precise pronunciation." As your correspondent says, "each tradition is free to believe that what it recites retains the potency."

He is not telling you that there is no conflict between "regional variations" and "no variations." If you doubt me, ask him for a clarification. Also try giving him a link to this thread, and tell him that you are Rashmun.

Hope that helps.

panini press wrote:

Rashmun wrote:On the other hand, the sanskrit expert with who i corresponded (see my earlier post in this thread) says that a deliberate attempt has been made to reduce any variation. He also says that there is no real conflict between the two proposals (of slight regional variations across India and no variation across India).

You need to learn to read carefully. What your expert correspondent is telling you is that there is no conflict between two notions: "regional variations" and "importance of precise pronunciation." As your correspondent says, "each tradition is free to believe that what it recites retains the potency."

He is not telling you that there is no conflict between "regional variations" and "no variations." If you doubt me, ask him for a clarification. Also try giving him a link to this thread, and tell him that you are Rashmun.

Hope that helps.

How typical of you to twist the statements of other people. By 'two proposals' the expert is referring to the following two proposals which i gave him and which i give below again together with his response. When i said 'rigidity in pronunciation of Vedic hymn' i meant 'No variation'.

---
the wikipedia page on Vedic chanting says there is a certain rigidity in
the pronunciation of Vedic hymns because the potency of the Mantras
is
believed to lie in their sound when prounounced, but Madhav Deshpande
says that there exist many regional variations in how even the Rig
Vedic hymns are pronounced. Could you please comment on this issue?

--

The insistence on preserving pronunciation and accent as accurately
as possible is related to the belief that the potency of the mantras
lies in their sound when pronounced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_chant

----


Basically, Sanskrit is regionally pronounced by using the phonetic
resources of the mother-tongues of the reciters. Thus, hardly any
recitation reflects the three-way distinction of s, z, and .s. The
bengali recitation merges v and b, the Behari recitation has s for all
sibilants etc. Beyond this, there are some inexplicable changes such
as the final 't's being changed to 'l's in Kerala Nambudiri
recitation. 'pracodayaat' becomes 'pracodayaal'. Further the
rendering of the accents significantly differs regionally. The Kerala
recitation contains what seems like vibrating or repeating patterns:
deva.m being recited as deva.m.m.m, etc. The high and low notes in
Maharashtrian recitation differ by a much smaller gap than what one
sees in Tamil recitation of the Rigveda. Most of these regionally
standardized modes of recitation are post-Praatizaakhya developments
and hence are not officially recorded in the form of explicit
descriptions. However, they are recognized by the reciters. Best
wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/hinduism-forum/173936-varibility-pronounciation-vedic-chanting.html

----------
this was the response i got:

There is no real conflict between the two proposals. Each tradition is
free to believe that what it recites retains the potency. Although the
reciters do not assert this freedom frequently or even entertain
it consciously (since very few of them go beyond their small circles and
there is a widespread acceptance of the possibility of ;saakhaa
variation among the Vaidikas all over India), they will assert it (in
different words) when confronted with what you have written to me. The
intention behind the traditional teaching about the potency of mantras
is not to deny that there is regional variation or variation in what is
actually found on the ground but to reduce the scope for variation. They
had no means to decide *in absolute terms* about *the original* sounds
of the mantras (the most they could do was to go back to the time of the
Praati;saakhyas) Therefore, engaging in a discussion of whose
recitation is authentic was not only an indeterminate pursuit; it is
also something inimical to social harmony.

i don't believe there is a deliberate intent on anyone's part to change the vocalization of the vedas. in fact the intent is quite possibly the opposite. my point was, at the risk of using the double negative, that it is impossible not to allow one's own native language influence the way one vocalizes other languages, be it english or sanskrit.