When I chant the Daimoku, I sometimes chant “Namu” and sometimes the “u” is unvoiced and it sounds like “Nam.” Doesn’t change the significance of my devotion to the Lotus Sutra with or without the “u.”
But when I write the Daimoku I always write “Namu,” because that’s how it’s spelled when you romanize the two Chinese characters Na and Mu.
In “The Journey on the Path to Righteousness,” the manual for the Shodaigyo practice, Namu is explained:
Journey of the Path to Righteousness, p 24-25Namu, as is written, is the character expressing the direction south, but, in this case, it does not mean south, or residing in the south. Characters used in this manner are commonly referred to as non-characters because the meaning of the characters is considered inconsequential. Rather, in this case, this is the transliteration of the Sanskrit word “Namah,” and can be defined as devotion (Kimyo or Kie). Two common definitions for these are: “I ask of” and “I offer up my life to”.
I’m not criticizing Narendra. In fact, I sincerely thank him for reading my posts on Facebook and taking the time to comment.
If anyone deserves criticism it’s the publishing arm of Soka Gakkai, which insists on “Nam Myoho Renge Kyo.” “Nam” is a phonetic contraction of “Namu,” they explain. But this phonetic contraction only applies for the Daimoku.
For example, the Soka Gakkai translation of On Repaying Debts of Gratitude (page 733) has this sentence:
Because I, Nichiren, chant and spread Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, the power of Namu-Amida-butsu will be like a moon waning, a tide running out, grass withering in autumn and winter, or ice melting in the sun. Watch and see!
Why the inconsistency? Would chanting Nam-Amida-butsu be more effective?
For me, the question of writing “Namu” vs “Nam” gets to the meaning of the Daimoku.
Namu-myoho-renge-kyo means “Devotion to the Wonderful (myo) Dharma (ho) of the Lotus (ren) Flower (ge) Sutra (kyo).”
Nam-myoho-renge-kyo means “Why will the name be Myoho.” (See Google’s translation of Nichiren’s Nativity.)