The Lord's Prayer & Mantras

[JeremiahShanti]

These are the exact words that Christ spoke when he taught his disciples how to pray. Through the centuries this Aramaic prayer has been translated to Ancient Greek to Modern Greek to Latin to English. So we Westerners got the watered down version. The King James version sounds so medival compared to the direct translation. May these words of Christ uplift you. Like Sanskrit, each syllable is loaded with meaning. Check out Dr. Neil Klotz’ books on this.

Abwoon d'bwa-shmaya
(King James Translation: Our Father, Who art in heaven)
(direct translation: O Breathing Life, Your Light is omnipresent)
Interesting note: this first line sounds like the famous "Om Namah Shivayah" mantra. I'm sure Christ was aware of that!

Nithqadesh shmakh
(KJT: Hallowed be Thy name)
(dt: Plant Your presence here so we feel only You)

Teytey malkuthakh
(KJT: Thy kingdom come)
(dt: What comes from Your awareness materializes instantly in this world)

Nehwey tzevyanach aykanna d'bwashmaya aph b'arha
(KJT: Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven)
(dt: May Your desires flow through us so we can unite heaven and earth)

Hawvlan lachma d'sunqanan yaomana
(KJT: Give us this day our daily bread)
(dt: In every moment, give us what we need to take the next human/evolutionary step)

Washboqlan haubayn wakh-tahayn aykanna daph kh-nan shwaqan l'khayyabayn
(KJT: And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.)
(dt: Untie our cords of failure (karma)as we release the failures of others that tie our hearts.)

Wela tahtlan l'nesyuna ela patzan min bisha
(KJT: And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil)
(dt: Do not let the surface (maya) of things delude us, but liberate us from our forgetfulness/unripeness)

Metol dilakhie malkutha wahayla wateshbukhta l'ahlam almin. Ameyn
(KJT:For Thine is the kingdom, power, and glory, forever. Amen)
dt: From Spirit arises every vision, power, and song from gathering to gathering. May our future actions grow from here. Amen/Aum

[Techne]

Please, what is the source of your direct translation?

[JeremiahShanti]

As I mentioned, it's Dr. Neil Klotz. He wrote a couple of books on the Aramaic language.

[Pawel]

Hi,
I really like this text, but as a seeking Christian I had some contact with transliteration of the Bible and I know the translation you give is clearly not correct. Even on wikipedia they mention that there are some mistranslated texts of Lords Prayer on internet: (put "Lords Prayer" on wiki search)

"The Lord's Prayer survives in the Aramaic language in the form given to it in the Syriac Peshitta version of the New Testament. The dialect of Syriac in which it is written is not the dialect that would have been spoken by Jesus of Nazareth or his followers.[21] Therefore, claims that the Peshitta Lord's Prayer is "the original" are incorrect: it too is translated from the Greek text of Matthew 6:9-13.

A very large number of "translations" of the "Aramaic Lord's Prayer" that stem from various mystic traditions and have little or no relation to the actual meaning of the Aramaic text are circulating on the Internet. Many of them expound various New Age themes and interpret the prayer far beyond what scholars and linguists believe is possible or honest.[22]"

[Pandara]

Dear JS,

Thanks for this, I find it most interesting. I am not going to question the correctness of the translations, authenticity etc. However my teacher was adament always that when we do mantra that we pronounce it correctly as she always explained that much of the power of the mantra is in the correct pronounciation. My problem with this is, exactly this, what is the correct pronounciation of the words for this mantra?

[zo_manik]

Pawel--

You could be right, but I would find other sources than wikipedia which has been known for falsified information. Anyone can create an account and fill in gaps before it is found out to be incorrect information. In fact, I have had friends go on and create listings for themselves using absurd and fantastic information that was obviously untrue. Professors won't even allow students to cite or reference Wiki-anything in their papers or discussions.

I would urge us all to move to other sources for our information.

[JeremiahShanti]

Christ spoke Aramaic, not Greek. The King James version really is a disservice to Aramaic culture. It's a language as elegant as Sanskrit. That's why you have all these swami's with different interpretations of the Bhagavad Gita. People who understand the root syllables of Aramaic will have their own interpretation. But the point really is-- Christ was a master beyond the King James version of Him. The old jewish dialect gives us a glimpse of how large minded He was.

[JeremiahShanti]

Pandara,

Aramaic is a dead language. So no one speaks it fluently or correctly. On Youtube, I've come across Eastern Orthodox choirs singing the Lord's prayer in Aramaic. Dr. Neil Klotz has produce some cd's too, but it sounds like a bunch of westerners singing. It's beautiful to listen nonetheless. I just chant it by feel (after learning the general sounds). You can feel how certain syllables resonate with your endocrine centers/chakras. When you start to find the right tones, you actually start developing a slight jewish twang in your singing voice!

[Pawel]

Hi zo_manik,

I realize wiki is not 100% verified source, but it has lots of valid information and if double checked with other sources is really great help in learning.

I made little search and found two distinct groups of references: one having several "New age-poetry" translations of Lords Prayer and other group (usually translators from Aramaic) claiming that those translations are incorrect and supporting traditional translation (as in the Bible).

I understand that this "cosmic" text is inspiring and brings some freshness into this prayer. But I'm bit upset that it happens at cost of original meaning. E.g.
"Abwoon d'bwa-shmaya
(King James Translation: Our Father, Who art in heaven)
(direct translation: O Breathing Life, Your Light is omnipresent)"

This "direct translation" neglects the fact, that word "father" was used in it specific meaning. It was a part of revolutionary view of Jesus on God: that he is like a father to us. This is deep. I think more deep than comparing God to breathing life or light (which has somehow less capacity of meaning).

Kind regards,
Pawel

[Pandara]

Namaste JS,

Thank you, I think as one meditates upon the words then yes one might reach an inner understanding and eventually a natural rythm of the words may flow from my lips.

Just another thought. Wether correct or not, I think the old translation is the more practical one and in the setup of a normal chruch service it certainly will flow easier over the lips of your average parishioner and appeal to their understanding. The original Aramaic one might again appeal to the person who meditates and who are interested in the mystical and occult teachings of Christianity.

[Hubert]

Listen to this.

If it's the Lords' prayer, you might find this interesting.

[JeremiahShanti]

The sacred word "Ab'woon" doesn't mean "father". It means "Giver of life". When you study the root syllables, it means more like "the Power that creates universes upon universes in every instant". Some would say that's more deep than "father". Ab'woon is like "Aum"-- it has a gigantic meaning.
The church view of God is very sexist. In many ancient cultures, God is seen as Mother. In those times, they respected women much more than the church. And it really is silly to think God is some long-bearded paternal being in an antiseptic corner of the universe calling all the shots. God is also maternal. Just look around how Mother Nature expresses the eternal Spirit.

[JeremiahShanti]

Pandara, namo namaha-

I agree the Aramaic tradition resonates most with us aspiring mystics. Christ & the Essenes were very large minded. It's almost as if the human mouth can't fully articulate the true meaning of a master's words. Even if I say "God", I can never fully define what that is.

Keep chanting! Even if it's without an Indian accent or a Jewish accent Krishna Das is not precise in his mantras, yet there's still a power in his singing that's hard to deny.

[Hubert]

Originally Posted by JeremiahShanti

The church view of God is very sexist. In many ancient cultures, God is seen as Mother. In those times, they respected women much more than the church. And it really is silly to think God is some long-bearded paternal being in an antiseptic corner of the universe calling all the shots. God is also maternal. Just look around how Mother Nature expresses the eternal Spirit.

One must have a superficial view of christian theology to say that it takes God as a bearded paternal figure. That is just a represantation for those who might need such a thing. What you say might be true for the all time "materialist" - I trust my senses only, I can use my senses only - people, and they might be the majority ... yet, one does not judge a religion by the thoughts and believes of the larger masses, but by it's theology. Show me just one example from any age, what proves that christian church fathers, theologians, saints thought and taught that God is Charlton Heston (God bless him) wearing a white toga. It is like believing that hindu gods have so many arms. These are representations. The cause of the paternal male figure represenation in art is because the hebrews were patristic, and they also were those who had only one God. Again, I don't think Moses really talked to Charlton Heston, or that hebrews were as narrow as we think they was (just think of Kabbala).

I have no problem as a christian with a maternal image of God, (one not missing from christianity mind you), but as God is not Charlton Heston, she is not Maia Morgenstern/Holy Mary either.

Just tried to draw the poison from the teeth they uncunsciously spit it. They really poison your very soul, you know, and it is a shame. Don't take it personal, I know it from personal experience, I ain't any better.
Aversion never helps in comprehending a phenomenon.

I am in love with the Eternal Feminine. Would I take her as God ? I rather take Her as an aspect of God. I have no trouble accepting that some might be in love with the Eternal Masculine the same way.

Emotion is more present in women, and will more present in men. Focusing on Anahatha, one might adress the divine as Her. Focusing on Manipura, on might adress the divine as Him. Focusing on Ajna, one might adress the divine as It. Not focusing but being free, one needs not to adress the divine because duality has ceased to exist.

PS. Thank you for starting this thread, it is very interesting.

[Techne]

Just because "Ab'woon" means "Giver of Life", doesn't mean that a 4-year old Jesus didn't shout "Ab'woon is home!!" when Joseph was back from carpentry. Pawel's point, that Jesus introduced familiarity, care, guidance, teaching, person-ality to the monotheistic relationship with God and expressed it with this prayer, is true, and not a fault of translation.
As you may have noticed, given your postings on childhood trauma, people's reactions to the word "father" will most likely depend on their experience of who that particular man was for them. Deep or shallow, Charlton Heston or Bill Cosby. It may have been risky for Jesus to do this, but the man did not lack courage.

Hubert, reading your posts is really good for me -- we are so different in our theology, but very similar in our understanding of compassion and (at least sometimes) grace.

[Pawel]

I've read bit more on this subject and I have following thoughts: translation is a tricky business. It should take into account several factors (like context, audience, nature of the message etc.). Not only some arbitrary rules and expectation that desired ideology is expressed in this text. For example, word omlet is composed of “Om” and “Let”. So when someone says “I want an omlet” in kitchen it doesn’t mean “I want to allow creative sound of universe to resonate within my being” but just simple fact that he is hungry. I think the similar case (that context is important) may be with Abwoon (which I learned is a sum of ab – like abba, common word for father and woon which means our). Jesus criticized people who are using prayer as obsessive tool for fulfilling personal desires and showing off and was therefore asked how people should pray, how to relate to God. So Jesus answer was “abwoon” – which was touching and warm message: relate to God like to your father. I guess it means with respect and love in general, but as Techne said it may be different for everyone and sadly traumatic for some… So I understand that sometimes this alternative translation may be more meaningful and true than original one…

[Hubert]

Read the Akashic record. That will settle it.

[JeremiahShanti]

Originally Posted by Hubert

One must have a superficial view of christian theology to say that it takes God as a bearded paternal figure. That is just a represantation for those who might need such a thing. What you say might be true for the all time "materialist" - I trust my senses only, I can use my senses only - people, and they might be the majority ... yet, one does not judge a religion by the thoughts and believes of the larger masses, but by it's theology. Show me just one example from any age, what proves that christian church fathers, theologians, saints thought and taught that God is Charlton Heston (God bless him) wearing a white toga. It is like believing that hindu gods have so many arms. These are representations. The cause of the paternal male figure represenation in art is because the hebrews were patristic .

First, I said "God is ALSO maternal." So I acknowledge both masculine & feminine aspects.

I've been through the Catholic school system, so I have a vantage point of church theology. Eventually, I became a yogi cleansed of dogma-- Yeah!!! Today's Christianity is really "Churchianity". I've witness this theology first hand. The church believes women aren't worthy enough to be priests, that Eve was a temptress, and Mary of Magdala was a prostitute- when it actuality, she was Christ's most advanced disciple. In my 14 years of Catholic school, I've never heard the priests acknowledge God as Mother. I always hear them refer to God as "Him" or "Father". Not ONCE in the feminine. So all these Catholics expect to see the supreme being as a man in the after life. But that's beside the point.

The point of this thread is- in order to better understand the words of a master, you have to understand the language. Why do so many swami's study Sanskrit or find it important to have a good Sanskrit tutor- it's because a powerful language like Sanskrit or Aramaic can help you pierce the surface of scripture.

Yeah, people can go through life thinking the King James version is the most perfect translation of Christ, but for most mystics, life is bigger than Churchianity.

Checkout Yogananda's version of the Bhagavad Gita (or at least the first Chapter), you'll see why understanding the root words of Sanskrit is important to a swami. Yes, people can look at the Bhagavad Gita literally & think it's some epic battle. But when you get into the language, you see it's about reclaiming your soul- there's something about Sanskrit that the English language can't capture. Aramaic deserves the same study from an expert linguist/swami.

Yeah, I'm surprise people would read my post or find it provocative. I thought only linguists would get into this!

[JeremiahShanti]

Originally Posted by Pawel

For example, word omlet is composed of “Om” and “Let”. So when someone says “I want an omlet” in kitchen it doesn’t mean “I want to allow creative sound of universe to resonate within my being” but just simple fact that he is hungry.

"Omlet" comes from the French word "amelette". There's a difference between splitting a word and knowing it's roots. To understand Aramaic, you have to know its roots.

Checkout Yogananda's studies on Sanskrit. There's a certain sacredness in old languages like Aramaic, Sanskrit, Hebrew... that English can't capture. That's the point of the post.

[Pawel]

Thank you, I will have a look at this book. I'm so skeptical because the philosophical meaning of this translation is so different from the image of Judaist culture and world-view shown throughout Bible and what I learned from other sources. I’m bit afraid that someone wants to force some ideology through this translation, to show that traditional understanding is wrong and shallow and people then spoke like Hindu yogis.
Ps. I just thought – if this translation is correct, then in order to be consistent, all Jesus words should be translated in such fashion (“blindly”, using just roots as sources of meaning) . God have mercy on person trying to figure out what Jesus wanted to say!

[Techne]

If a language has sacredness, it's because its speakers cared to speak about sacred things. It is my fervent hope that speakers of modern languages will develop such a care.

OK -- small conversation about the phrase "aspiring mystic" (8 posts up). I've always been partial to the mystics who aspired to humility and mundanity; within my context, it is quite counterproductive to aspire to be a mystic. If this is an interesting topic for anyone, please nab this paragraph to start a new thread.

[TonyTamer]

Sanskrit began in Silence, learned by rishis who listened with their hearts ,not the intermediary brain. I enjoyed this discussion and will endeavor to chant ( from the french," to sing " ) with my heart with as deep resonance as I can find while chanting. I do believe in original pronunciation but only as a support structure to the heart. Namaste

[TonyTamer]

Thanks JerimiahShanti for the translation.. my vision is enlarged and deepened by the vision of others.

[JeremiahShanti]

Originally Posted by TonyTamer

Thanks JerimiahShanti for the translation.. my vision is enlarged and deepened by the vision of others.

You're welcome, Tony. There's so many "gems" from the ancient world we've lost. Luckily, we're rediscovering them again.

[JeremiahShanti]

Originally Posted by TonyTamer

Sanskrit began in Silence, learned by rishis who listened with their hearts ,not the intermediary brain. I enjoyed this discussion and will endeavor to chant ( from the french," to sing " ) with my heart with as deep resonance as I can find while chanting. I do believe in original pronunciation but only as a support structure to the heart. Namaste

I keep hearing these wonderful legends about ancient languages. Rishis pronounced Sanskrit so perfectly, that whatever word they said materialized. (No wonder some take a vow of silence: ) Like if they said the Sanskrit word for "tree", a tree would grow before them. And the wise say everything in this universe is a variation of the word "Aum"-- "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God."

Funny thing about devotional chanting is that people sound better when they sing in Sanskrit, Tibetan, Hebrew... When they come from the heart, there's a certain presence about it. Checkout that Tina Turner video on YouTube when she's chanting in Tibetan. She was sort of put on the spot, yet she sounded ten times better than her usual soulful self.

Namo namaha

[TonyTamer]

Fantastic. Thanks, Tina Turner was inspiring and I never knew that about her. I guess this is off topic but I wonder if anyone has any thoughts about Poetic meters and chanting , like Iambic Pentameter and how it mimics the heartbeat. What are the meters and rythyms important to mantras ?

[JeremiahShanti]

Originally Posted by TonyTamer

Fantastic. Thanks, Tina Turner was inspiring and I never knew that about her. I guess this is off topic but I wonder if anyone has any thoughts about Poetic meters and chanting , like Iambic Pentameter and how it mimics the heartbeat. What are the meters and rythyms important to mantras ?

A monk told me that the ancients used the heartbeat to set tempo- they never used drums, so everything about chanting is from the heart. Wouldn't it be great if the world chanted together at the same time & ours hearts beat at the same tempo?

Here's the Tine Turner video. She gives a quick lesson on how Tibetans subdivide their chants. What's incredible is how the the syllables fall so perfectly on natural accents.

[coltech88]

As Neil Klotz points out, the Aramaic language is a more open-ended and poetic in nature as compared to the Greek language. Putting the Lord's Prayer into the more precise Greek language limits the interpretations and meanings of the Lord's Prayer as originally given. And, as Klotz points out, the sounds of Aramaic words have a tonal resonance that connects one to the source. The Orthodox Church still uses aramaic and has a more mystical interpretation of the scriptures, which is why it split with the Catholic Church so many years ago. I have studied his work and find it a fascinating study that adds a new dimension to the Lord's Prayer, going beyond the original Greek translation. I think we should all be grateful for the work Neil Klotz has done so we can go beyond the straight jacket of the Greek analytical mind.

[Hubert]

Originally Posted by JeremiahShanti

Rishis pronounced Sanskrit so perfectly, that whatever word they said materialized. (No wonder some take a vow of silence: ) Like if they said the Sanskrit word for "tree", a tree would grow before them.

And as I have learnt, this is a future step of human evolution. Meaning, we all will get there eventually. I wouldn't bet for it to happen in this life, though.

This is a very interesting idea. Let's take it a bit further. The rishi was a more developed being. He said tree, and voila, a tree sprung up.

Now, let's look around ... look the wonderful diversity of creation. Whose words are all those ?

[JeremiahShanti]

Originally Posted by Hubert

Now, let's look around ... look the wonderful diversity of creation. Whose words are all those ?

That's the vibration of Ab'woon !

And the 3rd line of the prayer- Teytey malkuthakh
(What comes from Your awareness materializes instantly in this world) really is the truth of this world.

You're right, Hubert. That has to be where the evolution of consciousness will lead us.