Guaranteed

[Guest guest]

Dinabandhu prabhu said (2003: 67):

 

 

 

Once, Srila Prabhupada was lecturing from his big Vyasasana in the new temple

room in Los Angeles. At the end of his lecture Srila Prabhupada said, “So if

you just follow these four regulative principles and chant sixteen rounds then

you will go back to home, back to Godhead. I guarantee it.” He paused and

looked around at all of us. Then he said again, “I guarantee it.”

 

 

 

 

 

Das, Siddhanta, ed., 2003. _Memories: Anecdotes of a Modern-Day Saint_ (Culver

Ciy: CHBooks)

[Guest guest]

 

I'm assuming when SP says 16 rounds, he means 16 rounds with absolutely no

offenses and impeccable quality. At first glance when I read the email, I

foolishly became glad thinking that this should be achievable, but, when I

thought more about it, then the standard was overwhelming. Of the few rounds

that I chant, I hardly hear the sound vibration even 5 times - so, I have a

long way to go. At the same time, I'm extremely proud of the high standards set

by our sastras and acharyas. SP has said Krishna is not so cheap, which means

neither His Holy name is.

 

On maha-mantra, I have a question - is there a sastric evidence (other

than Gaudiya scriptures) that gives the meaning of maha-mantra as told by

Gaudiyas (that Oh, Energy, Pls engage me in the Lord's service). The mantra

itself is found in Kal-santarana upanishad, but I don't think the meaning is

there. Awaiting replies.

 

Also, I once again request answers for my mail on Mayavadis as Mahajanas.  

 

in your service,

Aravind.

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Aravind Mohanram wrote:

> I'm assuming when SP says 16 rounds, he means 16 rounds with absolutely no

offenses and impeccable quality. At first glance when I read the email, I

foolishly became glad thinking that this should be achievable, but, when I

thought more about it, then the standard was overwhelming. Of the few rounds

that I chant, I hardly hear the sound vibration even 5 times - so, I have a long

way to go. At the same time, I'm extremely proud of the high standards set by

our sastras and acharyas. SP has said Krishna is not so cheap, which means

neither His Holy name is.>

 

Yes. On the other hand, it perhaps seems less overwhelming or discouraging if

we consider that it is ultimately just Krsna's causeless mercy that allows

anyone to go back to Godhead. In that sense, it's certain that even meeting

the highest standards ultimately guarantees nothing, which doesn't mean they can

be dispensed (cf. Gita, 16.23-4). But by the Divine grace of Lord Caitanya, the

most merciful form of the Lord, Krsna is wholly and immediately available to

everyone, and He and His name are nondifferent; He's free for the taking, if we

have but sufficient interest:

 

nanopacara-krta-pujanam arta-bandhoh

premnaiva bhakta-hrdayam sukha-vidrutam syat |

yavat ksud asti jathare jaratha pipasa

tavat sukhaya bhavato nanu bhaksya-peye ||

 

(Ramananda Raya continued) “‘As long as there is hunger and thirst within the

stomach, varieties of food and drink make one feel very happy. Similarly, when

the Lord is worshiped with pure love, the various activities performed in the

course of that worship awaken transcendental bliss in the heart of the devotee.’

 

 

 

> On maha-mantra, I have a question - is there a sastric evidence (other than

Gaudiya scriptures) that gives the meaning of maha-mantra as told by Gaudiyas

(that Oh, Energy, Pls engage me in the Lord's service). >

 

I don't know of anything that explicitly gives this, but neither does there seem

to be any such need, because the Gaudiya interpretation is based on the same

evidences as any other explanation, with perfect logic, and is therefore just as

strong. Does someone question the authority and prerogative of all these

previous acaryas?

 

MDd

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the reply.>Yes. On the other hand, it perhaps seems less overwhelming

or discouraging if we consider that it is ultimately just Krsna's causeless

mercy that allows anyone to go back to Godhead. In that sense, it's certain

that even meeting the highest standards ultimately guarantees nothing, which

doesn't mean they can be dispensed (cf. Gita, 16.23-4). But by the Divine grace

of Lord Caitanya, the most merciful form of the Lord, Krsna is wholly and

immediately available to everyone, and He and His name are nondifferent; He's

free for the taking, if we have but sufficient interest:

 

>>>Yes, I agree. But that sufficient interest (taste for the Holy name) will

come if we follow the standards properly, isn't that right? we have to qualify

ourselves to receive Lord Chaitanya's mercy, isn't that true? also, in this

light, I don't think I understand when it is said that His mercy is causeless,

any thoughts?I don't know of anything that explicitly gives this, but neither

does there seem to be any such need, because the Gaudiya interpretation is

based on the same evidences as any other explanation, with perfect logic, and

is therefore just as strong. Does someone question the authority and

prerogative of all these previous acaryas?

 

>>>I was answering a question on a forum where a person was saying that the

maha-mantra is just a combination of the Lord's names and does not carry any

real meaning and the meaning (and even the mantra in the form that we chant)

was "invented" by Chaitanya - in that I conveyed the meaning that we, the

followers of Chaitanya are aware of, but there were hardly any takers! -

ofcourse, it is not necessary that everyone in the world accepts everything we

say - but, when I was thinking about it, I was wondering how the system of

guru-sadhu-sastra holds here - and in other such cases where the guru gives a

completely new meaning not found in the sastra - so, this raises a few

questions,

 

* what exactly do we mean when we say that guru, sadhu and sastra should be in consonance

 

*when a statement/revelation by a guru/acharya is not found in revealed sastra,

which one should we repose faith in?

 

* what is the unique role of sadhus here? is a sadhu's role just to confirm what

the acharya and sastra say?

 

I was hearing SP saying that a bonafide guru is one who says nothing outside

that sastra - if that is the case, does it mean that one should give more

priority to the words of sastra than that of the guru.

 

I would be very grateful if learned members can enlighten on the guru-sadhu-sastra system.

 

in your service,

Aravind.

 

Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes

[Guest guest]

Dear All:

This is regarding the meaning of the Maha Mantra post by Aravind

Prabhu.

The meaning of the Maha Mantra is given by previous acharyas which

has been documented in various books of iskcon and the gaudiya

mathas.

 

It is said that one should not give his own interpretation to the

Maha Mantra. We encounter people who say that the Hare Krishna Maha

Mantra actually starts with Hare Rama.... and that Chaitanya

Mahaprabhu changed it to start with Hare Krishna....

 

>From an astrological perspective, we are living in Kali Yuga and

Rahu, the planet of deception has his sway in us. When we have to

recommend a mantra for a person with Rahu afflicting the Moon in his

chart, we have to invert the mantra so that the Mantra has to be

effective (astrological dictums - Rahu moves in a direction opposite

to that of other planetary bodies). So Mahaprabhu also inverted the

Hare Krishna Maha mantra in a very intelligent manner so that the

mantra can have its effect on the people in Kali Yuga.

 

Can someone throw light on whether this understanding is correct or

otherwise?

 

Thanking you,

your servant

k.n.sriram

[Guest guest]

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004, Aravind Mohanram wrote:

 

>>>>I was answering a question on a forum where a person was saying that the

maha-mantra is just a combination of the Lord's names and does not carry any

real meaning and the meaning (and even the mantra in the form that we chant) was

"invented" by Chaitanya - in that I conveyed the meaning that we, the followers

of Chaitanya are aware of, but there were hardly any takers! - ofcourse, it is

not necessary that everyone in the world accepts everything we say - but, when I

was thinking about it, I was wondering how the system of guru-sadhu-sastra holds

here - and in other such cases where the guru gives a completely new meaning not

found in the sastra - so, this raises a few questions,>>>

 

Let's first understand that according to Sruti (Taittiriyopanisad, 2.7) the

Absolute Truth is ultimately rasa, which--being experiential as well as

subjective--can hardly be constrained within anyone else's rational paradigms.

So the "meaning," if you will, of the mahamantra--being that very rasa (or as

Rupa Gosvami put it, "akhila-rasamrta-murti")--cannot be explained otherwise

than as the acaryas have done. He is full of love. What are we looking for

instead, or in what realm? Let's become what Sanskrit literates might call

"sa-hrdayas," those who have tried to perfectly imbibe the real feelings within

the hearts of these acaryas, by following their directions and examples

(guru-mukha-padma-vakya, cittete koriya aikya). That would seem a more

realistic option than trying to stuff their statements into the limited

framework of mundane logic--or to a certain extent, even discourse. After all,

the sruti (Katha 1.2.23, Mundaka 3.2.3) also teaches us that these mere tools!

cannot help us understand the wholly immediate realm of paroksanubhuti:

 

“This Supreme Self cannot be reached by argumentation, or by applying one’s

independent brain power, or by studying many scriptures. Rather, he alone can

achieve the Self whom the Self chooses to favor. To that person the Self reveals

His own true, personal form.”

 

Sevonmukhe hi jihvadau, svayam eva sphurati; He reveals Himself to the extent

that we sincerely serve His desires. The mahamantra is simply Krsna,

Yasodanandana, Syamasundara.

 

 

 

> * what exactly do we mean when we say that guru, sadhu and sastra should be in

consonance>

 

I suspect not everyone says the same things about this. I would say they have

to agree generally; that is, there are consistent principles that are more

important than details.

 

 

 

> *when a statement/revelation by a guru/acharya is not found in revealed

sastra, which one should we repose faith in?>

 

There are two types of concordance: 1) something is accepted as long as it

doesn't contradict evidence in sastra, 2) something is accepted if it is

explicitly mentioned in sastra. Deciding which is preferable would seem to be

crucial here.

 

We also have to reconcile apparent contradictions.

 

 

 

> * what is the unique role of sadhus here? is a sadhu's role just to confirm

what the acharya and sastra say?>

 

I think the sadhus' role is extremely important, because it implies the current

community as well as traditional precedent. Most notably, Srimad Bhagavatam

(11.19.17) even places the latter as a fourth member of the three pramanas Srila

Prabhupada generally emphasized. At the very least, this implies that we have

much to learn those who fruitfully traversed the bhakti path before us

newcomers, and that they can definitely help us disentangle the types of

problems and confusion we only assume to be altogether new or unprecedented--if

we are but willing to place our faith in them instead of in someone or something

else. That's also the purpose of their exemplary lives and the many narrations

detailing them.

 

MDd

[Guest guest]

Some thoughts: The maha-mantra is specifically mentioned in the

Kali-santarana-upanisad as the best means for deliverance in this age.

Sometimes the argument is given that since SCM changed the order of the

maha-mantra, it is not bonafide. However, when Prabhupada was questioned on

this by Achutyananda

Swami, he laughed and said that if people object to the way SCM chanted it,

then they could chant it the other way (the way it originally appears in

that upanisad)--it will come to the same thing.

 

Regarding the meaning of the mahamantra, Krsna says in BG bhaktya mam

abhijanati and satatam kirtayanto mam. So by constantly chanting this mantra

with devotion in the age of Kali, surely one is delivered. Prabhupada

explains in his essay on the mahamantra in SSR: "The word Hara is the form

of addressing the energy of the Lord, and the words 'Krsna' and 'Rama' are

forms of addressing the Lord Himself. Both Krsna and Rama mean the supreme

pleasure and Hara is the supreme pleasure energy of the Lord, changed to

Hare in the vocative."

 

In the verse nama cintami krsnas caitanya rasa vigrahah...the nondifference

of the name and the named are delineated. Lord Caitanya can certainly be

strongly defended as the yuga avatara who established that bhakti is

practiced by this mahamantra chanting, which Rupa Gosvami, an eyewitness to

such loud chanting of the maha-mantra by SCM (not everyone even accepts that

SCM chanted the maha-mantra aloud) in his Caitanyastaka, in which he states:

hare krsnety uccaih...Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu chants the Hare Krsna mantra

in a loud voice, the holy name dancing on His tongue as He counts the number

of recitations with His effulgent hand..."

 

So according to God, shastra, guru, sadhu I think a convincing case can be

established.

 

Even Madhvacarya states while commenting on the Mundaka Upanisad: kalau tu

nama-matrena pujyate bhagavan harih...in the age of Kali one can satisfy and

worship the SPOG Hari simply by chanting the holy name. (see CC Adi 7.76 and

purport)

 

Rupa-vilasa dasa

[Guest guest]

achintya, "rupavi" <rupavi@n...> wrote:

> Some thoughts: The maha-mantra is specifically mentioned in the

> Kali-santarana-upanisad as the best means for deliverance in this

age.

> Sometimes the argument is given that since SCM changed the order of

the

> maha-mantra, it is not bonafide. However, when Prabhupada was

questioned on

> this by Achutyananda

> Swami, he laughed and said that if people object to the way SCM

chanted it,

> then they could chant it the other way (the way it originally

appears in

> that upanisad)--it will come to the same thing.

 

Personally, I am not convinced that Chaitanya Mahaaprabhu changed

anything.... have any of our aachaaryas even quoted the Kali-

santarana? And if so, which form did they quote this mantra in the

context of that Upanishad?

 

I have heard rumors that there are different recensions, with South

Indian ones having the order as Hare Raama.... Hare Krishna while

North Indian ones having the order the way we normally chant it. The

one which Kushakratha translated it as it in our version. I wish I

knew what original manuscript he used for the translation.

 

Besides which, it seems rather uncharacteristic of Chaitanya

Mahaaprabhu to change *anything* from shruti, regardless of the

reasons.

 

> Regarding the meaning of the mahamantra, Krsna says in BG bhaktya

mam

> abhijanati and satatam kirtayanto mam. So by constantly chanting

this mantra

> with devotion in the age of Kali, surely one is delivered.

 

Those verses don't mention any mantra specifically, however. These

may not be useful in any discussions with the kind of people on whose

behalf Arvind asked the question.

 

Prabhupada

> explains in his essay on the mahamantra in SSR: "The word Hara is

the form

> of addressing the energy of the Lord, and the words 'Krsna'

and 'Rama' are

> forms of addressing the Lord Himself. Both Krsna and Rama mean the

supreme

> pleasure and Hara is the supreme pleasure energy of the Lord,

changed to

> Hare in the vocative."

 

I forgot if I mentioned this before, but I remember hearing something

to the effect that "Radhaa" being referred to as "Haraa" is something

which has a basis in the Naarada Pancharaatra. But I don't have a

copy of it so I can't confirm or deny this.

 

> So according to God, shastra, guru, sadhu I think a convincing case

can be

> established.

 

.... that Harinaama is the most appropriate means of deliverance in

this age, I agree. But I think one of his concerns was in

demonstrating the legitimacy of our aachaarya's interpretation of the

mahaa-mantra. Within the context of Kali-santarana, i get the

impression that we are meant to think each of the names is an address

for Hari. Grammatically, Hare is vocative of Hari, as well as the

vocative of Haraa. Until I see any evidence to the contrary, I think

we can only defend this position as "opinion of our aachaaryas." Then

again, it seems like an esoteric point so I don't know why anyone

would object to it.

 

yours,

 

K

[Guest guest]

achintya, "krishna_susarla"

<krishna_susarla@h...> wrote:

> Besides which, it seems rather uncharacteristic of Chaitanya

> Mahaaprabhu to change *anything* from shruti, regardless of the

> reasons.

>

 

In Caitanya Bhagavatha, it is related how Mahaparabhu solved one of

of Advaita Acharya's dilemmas about scripture by explaining

that 'sarvatha pani pada' is really meant to say 'sarvatra pani

pada.' Change Bhagavad-gita sruti?

 

 

> I forgot if I mentioned this before, but I remember hearing

something

> to the effect that "Radhaa" being referred to as "Haraa" is

something

> which has a basis in the Naarada Pancharaatra. But I don't have a

> copy of it so I can't confirm or deny this.

>

 

Is possible, but it is also the opinion of Jiva Gosvami, Gopala Guru

Gosvami and possible Bhaktivinoda Thakura (depending on context) as

said in their commentaries on mahamantra.

 

Haribol, Gaura

[Guest guest]

Haribol Mukunda Prabhu,

 

Thanks for the reply. I suspect not everyone says the same things about this. I

would say they have to agree generally; that is, there are consistent

principles that are more important than details. >>> It would be nice if

someone can write a book on guru-sadhu-sastra, if it's not already taken up. >

*when a statement/revelation by a guru/acharya is not found in revealed sastra,

which one should we repose faith in?>There are two types of concordance: 1)

something is accepted as long as it doesn't contradict evidence in sastra, 2)

something is accepted if it is explicitly mentioned in sastra. Deciding which

is preferable would seem to be crucial here.

 

>>>The meaning I provided on the forum was "Oh Energy of the Lord, Please engage

Me is Krishna's service". And, this is certainly not obvious from the mantra.

This meaning does not talk about rasa, atleast not directly. This certainly

does not contradict evidence in the sastras (which glorify bhakti and

harinama), but, can this meaning not be attributed to any other mantra? I think

ultimately, for us it boils down to "SP or SCM says and so we accept it". So,

it's still not clear to me as to how exactly the guru-sadhu-sastra principle

holds in this case?

 

We also have to reconcile apparent contradictions.

 

>>>Yes, I agree. That's why I think a nice manual on the topic would be of great help.

Let's take the example of moon landing. SP, in some place has said that it is

not possible, but in one lecture he says it may be possible, but the scientists

have to come back (cannot stay for long). Is this (that moon landing is

impossible) confirmed by any sastra? if not, we have only the Guru's words - we

cannot confirm it by sastra (although, sadhus may concur). So, it is my personal

opinion that we should avoid speaking vociferously about such topics

(particularly, on public fora), as we cannot invoke the G-S-S principle. Am I

wrong? please let me know. in your service,Aravind.

 

 

SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!

[Guest guest]

Further thoughts regarding interpretation of the maha-mantra: since there are

sufficient verses describing chanting as the recommended process for

self-realization in this age, and since we know that the acaryas and certain

rules of grammar indicate that the vocative case is employed (addressing or

calling according to the dictionary)--the question then is what is the object

of addressing or calling and what is the result. We may address a person for

many reasons: to get something, to get their attention, to remember them if

they are not present, etc. However, when we address them in the mood of the

bhaktas, it is with love. Certainly to address with love is the highest form of

address. I think sufficient examples can illustrate this also. So if it is an

interpretation to say that the mahamantra is an invocation for service out of

love, it is not a stretch.

 

om anavrttih sabdat--by sound vibration one becomes liberated.

 

nama cintamanih krsnas caitanya-rasa-vigrahah purnah suddho nitya-mukto 'bhinnatvan nama-naminoh

 

"The holy name of Krsna is transcendentally blissful. It bestows all spiritual

bendictions, for it is Krsna Himself, the reservoir of all pleasure. Krsna's

name is complete, and it is the form of all transcendental mellows. It is not a

material name under any condition, and it is no less powerful than Krsna

Himself. Since Krsna's name is not contaminated by the material qualities, and

there is no question of its being involved with maya, Krsna's name is always

liberated and spiritual; it is never conditioned by the laws of material

nature. This is because the name of Krsna and Krsna Himself are identical.

(Padma Purana)

 

ramante yogino 'nante...The Supreme Absolute Truth is called Rama because the

transcendentalists take pleasure in the unlimited true pleasure of spiritual

existence (Padma Purana)

 

But very importantly, aside from the names Krsna and Rama being nondifferent

than Krsna and Rama and full of transcendental devotional mellows--the 11th

canto describes the RESULT of chanting as follows:

 

evam-vratah sva-priya-nama-kirtya

jatanurago druta-citta uccaih

hasaty atho roditi rauti gayaty

unmada-van nrtyati loka-bahyah

 

"By chanting the holy name of the Supreme Lord, one comes to the stage of love

of Godhead. Then the devotee is fixed in his vow as an eternal servant of the

Lord, and he gradually becomes very much attached to a particular name and form

of the SPOG. As his heart melts with ecstatic love, he laughs very loudly or

cries and shouts. Sometimes he sings and dances like a madman, for he is

indifferent to public opinion." (SB 11.2.40)

 

jatanuragah druta-citta ucchaih -- literally "in this way develops attachment with a melted heart."