Pronounciation of words.

[Don Penguinoini]

I watched a video in R.E today. They pronounced Buddha with the "A" and Rahul(a) with an "A" too, this must be wrong, when i say buddha i say Buddh Bhagwan. (he is still god to me)

What are your thoughts.

 

[lilithu]

I watched a video in R.E today. They pronounced Buddha with the "A" and Rahul(a) with an "A" too, this must be wrong, when i say buddha i say Buddh Bhagwan. (he is still god to me)

What are your thoughts.

Interesting. When I say Ganesh, I always drop the 'a' at the end. So much so that I've forgotten that it was there. But the Buddha is the Buddha to me. Would you still drop the 'a' if you don't add Bhagwan?

What I have noticed is people calling him the Boodah.


It's all good. Just accents.

 

[lunamoth]

Interesting. When I say Ganesh, I always drop the 'a' at the end. So much so that I've forgotten that it was there. But the Buddha is the Buddha to me. Would you still drop the 'a' if you don't add Bhagwan?

What I have noticed is people calling him the Boodah.


It's all good. Just accents.

Are we supposed to just call him 'Budd?'

 

[Lindsey-Loo]

I've always pronounced it like Boo-duh. So does everyone else I know around here. Maybe it's a regional thing?

 

[Omnichaotic]

I've always pronounced it Bud(as in "book") and dha(as in "the)

 

[Aupmanyav]

'Buddha' is correct.

"The transliterations in this articles are from direct Sanskrit, and not from Hindi. In Modern Hindi, the last vowel of राम which is called the schwa /ə/ (हिन्दी : अ ) is not pronounced. But in Sanskrit IT IS PRONOUNCED. Hence the spelling of Rama should be Rāma. In Hindi it would be Rām. So the Sanskrit names in this articles must continue as such. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Vedic)."

 

[anders]

'Buddha' is correct.

"The transliterations in this articles are from direct Sanskrit, and not from Hindi. In Modern Hindi, the last vowel of राम which is called the schwa /ə/ (हिन्दी : अ ) is not pronounced. But in Sanskrit IT IS PRONOUNCED. Hence the spelling of Rama should be Rāma. In Hindi it would be Rām. So the Sanskrit names in this articles must continue as such..."

To add a third dimension, even in books written by professors for an academic audience, you sometimes find a lack of consistency regarding Sanskrit/Pali/Hindi transcriptions. One common example is dharma/dhamma/dharm.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Dharm is definitely wrong. Dharma is Sanskrit, Dhamma is Pali.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Im not taling about spellings, i mean the way of saying it. I never say the a in gods names, unless you need them there, like Indra.

 

[Smoke]

Interesting. When I say Ganesh, I always drop the 'a' at the end. So much so that I've forgotten that it was there. But the Buddha is the Buddha to me. Would you still drop the 'a' if you don't add Bhagwan?

I used to say Ganesh-uh till I starting actually talking to Hindus. Now I'm so used to Ganesh that I had almost forgotten the "a" till you brought it up.

 

[lilithu]

Im not taling about spellings, i mean the way of saying it. I never say the a in gods names, unless you need them there, like Indra.

Yes, but the question is when do you "need" them there?

Which is why I asked you:
Would you still drop the 'a' (in Buddha) if you don't add Bhagwan?


And btw, in case I was unclear earlier, the mispronunciation of Buddha to which *I* was referring was the 'Boo' part, not the inclusion of the 'a.' Lots of people say "Boo-dah" but by my understanding it "should" be pronounced similar to how Omnichaotic described it.

I put "should" in quotes, because, like I said, it's just an accent thing. It's all good. :meditate:

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Without the bhagwan i would still say boodh. When the Brits came to India they took the spellings and said them as they were as spelt. I still think you should NEVER pronounce the "A", but then again there are exceptions.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Lilithu, not booda as in boot, a short u as in put. Then try to pronounce dh like in dharma, add a half dh. So Buddha without enlongating it to Aswan. But you already know the correct pronunciation, don't you?

Bhagawaana is a problem, though that is how it should be written. To many a's. Same problem in my grandson's name, Aaraadhya (will make it difficult for him to sign when he grows up), so I like to shorten it to Aradhya.

 

[zenzero]

Once again there is nothing RIGHT or WRONG.
The understanding of the word howsoever pronounced is important.
The essence of the commicated word if understood clearly - its perfect.
ALl words have SOUNDS and sounds are vibrations used as mantras.
The effect of these sound vibrations is not from outside but to be directed inwards towards one's own centre and slowly the vibrations reverbrates throughout the BeIng and has its effect on the person using it.
Love & rgds

 

[Don Penguinoini]

There is always a wrong, there wrong most of the time when there is an "A" at the end of the name...

 

[Valjean]

Pronunciation depends on what language you are speaking or quoting from. Is it Jesus or Yeshua?
My Mexican neighbors say "Hay-soos". In France the final sibilant is silent.

Are you speaking conventional English or trying to reproduce the name his parents would have used?

In classical Sanskrit consonants carry an "~a," In Hindi and English the "a's" often dropped. I can't comment on Pali.
Right pronunciation depends on what you are trying to accomplish or what style you're trying to affect.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

When i say ravan, i dont say ravana (a brit add-on)I say it normally, withought the a.

 

[yakov91]

i pronounce Buddha, (Bud-A).