The efficacy of the mantra is a different issue from the consideration of the meaning of the mantra..
It cannot be said that Puranas and epics are just stories, because history starts from the period of myths and often the activities of an era is reconstructed from such myths..
Claiming that some practices are authentic when one likes them and dismissing certain things as fiction just because it is not according to ones own notions is not conducive to objectivity...
For one person Periyavaal may be great and for another some other personality may be great..
A story or superstition does not become valid just because Periyaval or anyone just said it..
The Naradas statement is in conformity with Kalisantharana Upanishad, but that Upanishad, although some Vaishava sect would take it as gospel truth, is not accepted among the principal upanishads..
If I know Sanskrit and am crafty enough I can also coin a mantram and call it authentic..
Moolamantrams of certain man gods even have appeared.
And in one place it was stated that the Hare Rama mantram was not of much phonetic importance like kleem etc..
But what is the basis to claim that only strange words will have phonetic impact..?
Kleem or Hreem as well as Hare Rama etc both may be having tantric value or both may be of little use.. But to claim that one type is better than the other at one place does not appear to be right..
One can make an argument.. but a consistent view should be taken.. At least I believe so..
No comments:
Post a Comment