--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" wrote: > > > > > > Om Jeezus X-mas, they've been chanting it wrong all this time! > > > Well then, no wonder. > > > > > > saha nau avatu . > > > saha nau bhunaktu . > > > saha viiryaM karavaavahai . > > > tejasvi nau; > > > adhiitam astu maa vidviSaavahai . > > > > > > > That's pada-paaTha (word-reading), so to speak. > > The saMhitaa-paaTha goes like this: > > > > saha naav avatu . saha nau bhunaktu . saha viiryaM karavaavahai . > > tejasvi naav adhiitam astu maa vidviSaavahai . > > > > That is, before a *vowel*, 'nau' changes to 'naav', > > without any effect on the *semantic* level. > > > > This seems to be the most accurate translation I could > find quickly: > > Om ! May He protect us both together; may He nourish us both together; > May we work conjointly with great energy, > May our study be vigorous and effective; > May we not mutually dispute (or may we not hate any). >
Oh, so that's the correct translation. For us meditators here, it reads really well substituting in `Unified Field. It's beautiful even if it is not the way Maharishi and Bevan used it. Om ! May the Unified Field protect us both together; may It nourish us both together; May we work conjointly with great energy, May our study be vigorous and effective; May we not mutually dispute (or may we not hate any). > May He protect (avatu) us both (nau [~now] accusative *dual*) together > (saha); > may He nourish (bhunaktu) us both (nau) together (saha); > May we work (karavaavahai) conjointly (saha) > with great energy (viiryam), > May our study be (adhiitam [study] astu [may (it) be]) > vigorous-and-effective (tejasvi); > May we not (maa: 'we' in the verb ->) mutually-dispute (vidviSaavahai) > (or may we not hate any: vidviSaavahai). >
