reversal of order of mahamantra

[Guest guest]

The website T. Harikrishnan quoted (in Digest Number 812) introduces a

suggestion of why it was supposedly reversed with "One story has it that..."

 

Unless and until evidence from sastra or from an accepted acharya is quoted,

such stories cannot be accepted as authoritative, and may actually cause

embarrasment if challenged in the course of preaching, e.g.,

 

"What is the source of that contention?"

 

"A story on a website."

[Guest guest]

achintya, "Bhakti Vikasa Swami"

<Bhakti.Vikasa.Swami@p...> wrote:

> The website T. Harikrishnan quoted (in Digest Number 812)

introduces a

> suggestion of why it was supposedly reversed with "One story has it

that..."

>

> Unless and until evidence from sastra or from an accepted acharya

is quoted,

> such stories cannot be accepted as authoritative, and may actually

cause

> embarrasment if challenged in the course of preaching, e.g.,

>

> "What is the source of that contention?"

>

> "A story on a website."

 

Just to clarify one thing: I don't think T. HariKrishnan quoted the

website as an explanation for the mahaamantra's reversal. Rather, he

was enquiring as to whether or not the story quoted there was

correct. As far as I know, the source for the story is one Agrahya

das, former moderator of soc.religion.vaishnava and a disciple of

Srila Prabhupada who lives in the Northeast. But I have never seen

this story substantiated by any aachaarya.

 

It does seem out of character for any of our aachaaryas, what to

speak of Lord Chaitanya Himself, to change any mantra from the Vedas

when the entire Vedas are regarded as sacred and not to be changed.

The story referred to has never been verified by any evidence, and as

such I would recommend that we consider it to be hearsay until we get

some kind of verification for it.

 

Although it is true that shruti-mantras are only to be chanted by the

twice-born, in the case of the Hare Krishna Mahaa-mantra this

restriction has been lifted by the Upanishad itself, which states

that there are no rules for the chanting of the mantra:

 

punar naaradaH paprachchha bhagavan ko'sya vidhir iti|

ta.m hovaacha naasya vidhir iti |

sarvadaa shuchir ashuchir vaa paThan brahmaNaH saalokataa.m

samiipataa.m saruupataa.m saayujya.m eti || kalisantaarana up - 3 ||

 

Again Naarada asked, "O glorious one, what are the rules for chanting

this mantra?" Brahmaa replied, "There are no rules. Even if he is

impure, a devotee who chants this mantra becomes pure. He attains the

kinds of liberation known as saalokya, samiipya, saruupya, and

saayujya." (kalisantaaraNa upaniShad 3)

 

The mantra then goes on to describe how various sinners (such as

those who murders brahmins) can become free of their sin by chanting

of this mantra. Clearly then, the mantra as described in the shruti

text is not intended for those already initiated into spiritual life,

but for all kinds of people including gross sinners. Thus, there

would be no need to change the mantra in order to make it a non-

shruti mantra.

 

As far as T. HariKrishnan's (excellent name!) very appropriate

question as to why the mahaamantra is reversed at all, I can only

point out that there might be more than one recension of the

Kalisantaarana Upanishad. My family is from Andhra Pradesh, and there

the mantra is chanted as Hare Raama Hare Raama.... Hare Krishna Hare

Krishna also. But the Upanishad translated by Kushakratha dasa has

the mantra in the order chanted by Gaudiiya Vaishnavas. When I next

go to India, I am planning to research this issue by acquiring as

many North and South Indian editions of the Kalisantaarana Upanishad

as possible.

 

yours,

 

- K