PDA

View Full Version : Daily Chanting



satay
16 March 2006, 11:45 AM
I think chanting the maha mantra is such a good thing to do daily even if you are not an iskconite.

Hare Krishna Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna Hare Hare
Hare Rama Hare Rama, Rama Rama Hare Hare

satay
19 March 2006, 06:50 AM
Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare
Hare Ram Hare Ram Ram Ram Hare Hare

Hare Krishan Hare Krishna Krishan Krishan Hare Hare
Hare Ram Hare Ram Ram Ram Hare Hare

satay

satay
20 March 2006, 10:23 AM
Hare Krishn Hare Krishn Krishn Krishn Hare Hare
Hare Ram hare Ram Ram Ram Hare Hare

Hare Krishn Hare Krishn Krishn Krishn Hare Hare
Hare Ram Hare Ram Ram Ram hare Hare

Hari Om

satay

Sunil Bhalla
20 March 2006, 01:37 PM
This is such a beautiful and universal mantra...
I am not Iskconite ...and I love it.

Hare Krishn Hare Krishn Krishn Krishn Hare Hare
Hare Ram hare Ram Ram Ram Hare Hare

Hare Krishn Hare Krishn Krishn Krishn Hare Hare
Hare Ram Hare Ram Ram Ram hare Hare:)

Sudarshan
20 March 2006, 01:50 PM
Type every letter Satay. No copy pastes.:)

My favourite mantra is Sudarshan Mantra. I also do Garuda Mantra. Gayatri Mantra is of course done by many Hindus.

Mantras aren't supposed to be even uttered aloud. Nowadays this is kaliyuga, when it is displayed on billboards. A mantra is supposed to be recieved from a guru personally, and only from a guru who is a siddha in it.

The ideal way to recite a mantra is in perfect silence, in as remote a spot as possible, and away from the disturbances of routine life. If concentration is hard this way, it is recommended to utter it slightly loudly that you can hear the voice.

It is disappointing to see even Gayatri mantra beaming aloud on public loud speakers these days. Mantra received from books have as much value as the knowledge of medicine obtained from books instead of going to the medical college. No wonder people are using mantras to achieve wordly accomplishments and not much on higher spiritual pursuits.

satay
20 March 2006, 03:18 PM
Type every letter Satay. No copy pastes.:)

I do write each and every letter of the mantra. It just flows from my fingers to the keyboard.

I remember I got suspended for doing this on christianforums because some non-hindus also started chanting on that thread!



Mantras aren't supposed to be even uttered aloud. Nowadays this is kaliyuga, when it is displayed on billboards. A mantra is supposed to be recieved from a guru personally, and only from a guru who is a siddha in it.

The ideal way to recite a mantra is in perfect silence, in as remote a spot as possible, and away from the disturbances of routine life. If concentration is hard this way, it is recommended to utter it slightly loudly that you can hear the voice.

It is disappointing to see even Gayatri mantra beaming aloud on public loud speakers these days. Mantra received from books have as much value as the knowledge of medicine obtained from books instead of going to the medical college. No wonder people are using mantras to achieve wordly accomplishments and not much on higher spiritual pursuits.

True that. But how are we supposed to show our affection to Hari? This is one of the way.

There is a Narayana mandir in the heart of the city where I was born in punjab. The head priest there had family relations with my grandfather etc. due to generations of acting as our family priest.

I remember when I was a kid, He announced that there is a new temple being built in Vrindavan (this is early 80s) and that we need to submit the maha mantra written on pages, if someone wants they could write it down on a piece of paper and these papers will be poured in the foundation of the temple in vrindavan. You would not believe it, people brought bags and bags of 'copies' (you know the one used to do your school homework in) full of maha mantra written on the pages! Bags!! it was reallly amazing.

I have received this mantra from my nani who passed away in 88. She sang krishna songs and lived as a dasi most of her life in Bhagwan's prem.

To me this mantra goes on in my mind in the background walking, driving, eating even when writing this messages! :)

satay

Sudarshan
20 March 2006, 03:39 PM
True that. But how are we supposed to show our affection to Hari? This is one of the way.


That is the difference Satay. There are specific ways of showing our affection to Hari.

The one that can be done at all times under all circumstances are simple chanting of the Lord's names - Ram, Krishna etc. Many simple prayers can be recited throughout the day.

Then come shlokas and stotras - these are prayers to the Lord and also singing his glories. These need a little bit of discipline, and some purity. One must take a bath and use the early morning hours or do it by the evening.

Mantras are sacred syllables and one needs to be careful to take the maximum care while doing them. Extreme dedication and concentration are needed while doing them, else it is not effective.

Some of the recitations have clear protocols and must be followed rigiidly . You are doing this for you own sake. For Vishnu Sahasranama must be done with a very sattvik life and attritude. People who cannot change themselves or give up their bad ways must purify themselves by resort to nama japa and stotra japa before moving to mantra japa and other disciplines that involve the deep spirit.

Any mantra is equally effective as the other. What is needed is faith and dedication, and constant practice. There are no "higher" or "lower" ones, that is mere propaganda. If you obtain real siddhi in any mantra, you will have a vision of the diety for the mantra - that settles the issue.

satay
21 March 2006, 10:44 AM
Hare Krishn Hare krishn krishn krishn hare hare
Hare Ram Hare Ram Ram Ram hare hare

Hare krishn Hare Krishn Krishn Krishn Hare Hare
Hare Ram Hare Ram Ram Ram hare Hare

satay
11 April 2006, 11:45 AM
"I am the father of this universe and the mother..."

Hare Krishn Hare Krishn, Krishn Krishn Hare Hare
Hare Ram Hare Ram, Ram Ram Hare Hare

Hare Krishn Hare Krishn, Krishn Krishn Hare Hare
Hare Ram Hare Ram, Ram Ram Hare Hare

Hare Krishn Hare Krishn, Krishn Krishn Hare Hare
Hare Ram Hare Ram, Ram Ram Hare Hare

orlando
01 June 2006, 09:44 AM
Hare Krishna Hare Krishna
Krishna Krishna Hare Hare
Hare Rama Hare Rama
Rama Rama Hare Hare

orlando
01 June 2006, 09:53 AM
http://www.prabhupadaconnect.com/files/hare_krsna_hare_rama.jpg

http://www.harekrsna.it/preghiere_vaisnava/il_mantra/immagini/hare_krishna.jpg

At http://www.harekrsna.it/preghiere_vaisnava/il_mantra/mantra.asp you can hear the Hare Krishna maha-mantra.

Regards,
Orlando.

grames
02 June 2006, 12:43 AM
Mantras aren't supposed to be even uttered aloud.

The ideal way to recite a mantra is in perfect silence, in as remote a spot as possible, and away from the disturbances of routine life. If concentration is hard this way, it is recommended to utter it slightly loudly that you can hear the voice.

I guess Shri Ramanuja himself disagreed with this and he gave the OM Namo Naraya naya mantra to everyone and said recite it wherever and whenever possible. Mantra recited by a renunciate has different purpose and effect than mantra recited by a neophyte. When you say a mantra loud, your ears also hear it and that viberations fine tune your senses towards the God and His diviness. The more advanced you are, the decibels are not required. In kali, it is perfectly ok to recite mantra in loud speakers and at least it will give a chance for everyone to hear God names and His mercy.

Bhakti Yoga Seeker
03 June 2006, 07:07 PM
In my opinion, the best place to recite a mantra is either with no one around or with a group of people that are sharing the same interests. This is to ensure the highest possible vibrations and enhance meditation as much as possible. Unfortunately, with an overcrowded world, police states, and paranoid people, finding a remote place to do anything at all much less meditation is extremely difficult. On the other hand, chanting a mantra in a downtown crowded city is not conducive to meditation unless one is quite advanced. At least that has been my experiences. If the enviornment is excessively rajasic and tamasic, it may not be worth the trouble to try to introduce a sattvic vibration and instead go somewhere else. Besides, public chanting especially while alone will antagonize the already paranoid and fearful public and could likely bring trouble. In this age, probably the best middle ground is to do meditation at home or with a group of people in a location that won't disturb anyone (or better yet so that others don't disturb you).

This entire concept of taking to the streets with loud chanting that is deliberately done to grab everyone's attention in my opinion is adharmic. The first reason is that it is not conducive to your own meditation because the focus is not on changing yourself but instead on changing other people. The second problem is that because it is done in an environment where almost always 100% of the public doesn't want to hear it, it leads to a reverse effect where people are irritated by it and thus look down upon it instead of giving it a try. It also causes people to get a drift of a "holier-than-thou" feeling coming from the public preachers. In most countries, it will also cause an unwanted encounter from the police mainly because people will call due to a disturbance of the peace. Third, preaching to the wrong audience is not only a waste of time for the devotees but it also gives a bad name to what you are preaching.

I've never been for unsolicited public preaching because of the holier-than-thou attitude that it produces. It automatically causes an us vs. them mentality where the preachers are the saved and the people being preached to are the unsaved. Again, this causes the people being preached to to automatically disregard what the preachers are saying (or chanting) regardless of what it is. It can also be harrassing. Regardless of what our opinions are on these things, people have the right to walk down the street without a constant sales pitch and people have the right to enjoy a beer on the patio of a bar without being surrounded by people telling them how to run their lives. The preaching crowd will see everyone else as tamasic and rajasic while at the same time the group that is causing the greatest amount of annoyance to the environment is the preaching group. People don't want to be preached to even if they are in full agreement with what is being preached.

We have the internet, phone books, and information formats everywhere. If people decide that they would like to add meditation to their lives, they will seek it. It can also be good to mention the idea in a non-confrontational way. Unsolicited preaching simply irritates people and cheapens whatever is being preached. ~BYS~

c.smith
03 June 2006, 09:05 PM
Yes, Bhakti Yoga Seeker - I agree with you 100%. The only group that I know to preach publically is ISKCON. The rest of the Hindu religions seem to operate below the radar unless you know what and where to look.

My only experience with chanting aloud is with ISKCON. I've attended programs where everyone chants together. It is very powerful. I've also been told that the sound vibration is most important.

As I'm now guided by Lord Siva, I have continued to chant. So overall, which way is the best for one just beginning the journey?

Namaste -

Clay

Bhakti Yoga Seeker
04 June 2006, 09:56 PM
Namaskaar. I strongly agree that chanting aloud in groups is very powerful. Naturally, this is why you want to chant only in groups where everyone in the group is on the same page to enhance the vibration. That is why chanting in groups in a public place where everyone is irritated will only serve to pull the vibrations down! In a temple, home, or other group setting where everyone who is chanting wants to chant it will likely create valuable results. I've seen it myself. As to where you should start your journey, if you are chanting regularly, it sounds to me that you have already started! There are so many different ways to spiritually advance that it is hard for me to say exactly where you should start or continue where you are from here. Tell me what you are interested in pursuing. Namaskaar. Hare Krishna and Aum Namah Shivaya. :) ~BYS~

Singhi Kaya
05 June 2006, 04:22 AM
This entire concept of taking to the streets with loud chanting that is deliberately done to grab everyone's attention in my opinion is adharmic.:eek:

Religion has many levels and not all of it is about high flying "spirituality". Getting the masses involved and integrated is a major part of it. Vaishnavism under Sri Chaitanya pioneered the street kirtans much before ISKCON and I'm guessing the purpose it served in saving the dharma is un-parrelled. It may or may-not be relevant in western world and may or may not irritate a few. Sweeping comment of adharmic is not correct~IMHO. I would expect most hindu's would study bhakti movement of chaitanya, his character and the socio-polictical environments before embarking on such a comment.

However if this is with regards to a particular ISKCON community and considers special cases of chanting in streets in the modern western world to grab attention, I may agree with you.

Sudarshan
06 June 2006, 12:27 PM
I guess Shri Ramanuja himself disagreed with this and he gave the OM Namo Naraya naya mantra to everyone and said recite it wherever and whenever possible. Mantra recited by a renunciate has different purpose and effect than mantra recited by a neophyte. When you say a mantra loud, your ears also hear it and that viberations fine tune your senses towards the God and His diviness. The more advanced you are, the decibels are not required. In kali, it is perfectly ok to recite mantra in loud speakers and at least it will give a chance for everyone to hear God names and His mercy.

I am sorry I cant agree with this explanation. You cant use the example of Sri Ramanuja in this context. Remember, he was expressedly forbidden by his guru not to do that.

Mantra Japa is a sacred and an intense spiritual activity and have the power to awaken hidden spiritual powers and consciousness. There are prescribed rules for Mantras. It is especially mentioned that for Gayatri mantra, completely silent meditation is uttama, slight sound is madhyama and loud noise is adhama.

What you are talking about is kirtan, bhajan and nama-japa which can be done is groups and in chorus. For mantra and meditation, it destroys the very purpose - solitute and slience and the ways to do mantra japa, irrespective of whether you are a renuncant or a house holder.

Similarly, other rules like the Yama Niyama must be observed by anybody practising mantra and meditation. I dont think this should be diluted to fit anybody's conveneince. I would warn many Vaishnavites to also give importance to this part of Hinduism, namely the core spiritual part - silent intense meditation, which adds many dimensions to the Bhakti movement. You need not destroy the foundation of the religion in the name of Kali Yuga.

Bhakti Yoga Seeker
07 June 2006, 10:09 PM
:eek:

Religion has many levels and not all of it is about high flying "spirituality". Getting the masses involved and integrated is a major part of it. Vaishnavism under Sri Chaitanya pioneered the street kirtans much before ISKCON and I'm guessing the purpose it served in saving the dharma is un-parrelled. It may or may-not be relevant in western world and may or may not irritate a few. Sweeping comment of adharmic is not correct~IMHO. I would expect most hindu's would study bhakti movement of chaitanya, his character and the socio-polictical environments before embarking on such a comment.

However if this is with regards to a particular ISKCON community and considers special cases of chanting in streets in the modern western world to grab attention, I may agree with you.

Namaste. Keep in mind that I am not referring to the general aspect of chanting in the streets. I'd rather hear that in public than a lot of other things we have to hear on a daily basis (noise, people asking for money, etc.). Public preaching should at least be aimed to those who are either neutral or somewhat open-minded. Simply having your words fall on deaf ears doesn't do anyone any good. If the public preaching or chanting is done in a way that is designed to attract positive attention, then it would certainly be a great form of seva. What is adharmic in my opinion is when the chanting or other public preaching is done with a car salesman attitude where the overwhelming majority of the audience is clearly in opposition to what you are preaching or saying and when done with an us vs. them or saved vs. unsaved mentality and attitude. I hope this cleared up any misunderstandings. I don't have a problem at all with street kirtans. My criticism is not focused on the "what" of what the group is doing but instead on the "why." If the purpose is ego-based or a "holier-than-thou" mentality, that is what I consider adharmic. Otherwise, it is at least neutral if not a positive thing. ~BYS~

Sudarshan
08 June 2006, 05:52 AM
I am sorry I cant agree with this explanation. You cant use the example of Sri Ramanuja in this context. Remember, he was expressedly forbidden by his guru not to do that.

Mantra Japa is a sacred and an intense spiritual activity and have the power to awaken hidden spiritual powers and consciousness. There are prescribed rules for Mantras. It is especially mentioned that for Gayatri mantra, completely silent meditation is uttama, slight sound is madhyama and loud noise is adhama.

What you are talking about is kirtan, bhajan and nama-japa which can be done is groups and in chorus. For mantra and meditation, it destroys the very purpose - solitute and slience and the ways to do mantra japa, irrespective of whether you are a renuncant or a house holder.

Similarly, other rules like the Yama Niyama must be observed by anybody practising mantra and meditation. I dont think this should be diluted to fit anybody's conveneince. I would warn many Vaishnavites to also give importance to this part of Hinduism, namely the core spiritual part - silent intense meditation, which adds many dimensions to the Bhakti movement. You need not destroy the foundation of the religion in the name of Kali Yuga.

Again, with respect to Kali Yuga, I think this sorry state of affairs has nothing to do with God or time, but is human creation. If Hinduism was a glorious spiritual tradition 2000 years and it is not now, it is soely due to human beings.

There used to be time when many Hindus were fully spiritual, with no element of materialism. People spent most of the time in God related activities. They started deviating from it, and suddenly they started diluting the religion. Now they came with up with exuses of "this much is sufficient for this age" and all that.

Make no mistake about it. The vedic religion clearly preaches that the only way to mukti is realization of God. This is exactly what is preached by advaita, VA or dvaita though they have different ideas on what constitutes mukti and what constitutes the path. All ways of worship have to ultimately culiminate in samAdhi to be able to lead to moksha. That is why I have mentioned meditation to be an integral part of religion irrespective of your ashrama or philosophical system. Bhajan, kirtan etc are all fine, but they have much greater value when combined with "looking inside". Many Vaishnavas seem to think all these meditation are all waste of time and spend time ridiiculing those who do it - that is against the spirit of vedas. Sorry if that sounds offending, but "facts" have to be told.

orlando
08 June 2006, 09:54 AM
Namaste Shri Sudarshan.
I think that silent meditation is not suitable for everyone.-
For example my-self.My mind is like a monkey!It does what it wants!
I am able (even if not totally) to control it though Rama-nama and in general nama-japa.
Regards,
Orlando.

orlando
08 June 2006, 10:20 AM
Namaste all.
If the thing has worked I have attached some music files that I have downloaded (legally because it is permitted) from an ISKCON italian site.
I consider very beatiful Prapannam06b and Ramadance-Ramava.
Only one file is not taken from that ISCKON site.
It is Meat is muder.Although the song is singed in English,it is chanted from an italian singer:Claudia Pastorino.
http://www.claudiapastorino.it/homepage.gif

I did download it at http://www.claudiapastorino.it/musica2.html

Regards,
Orlando.

Sudarshan
08 June 2006, 11:41 AM
Namaste Shri Sudarshan.
I think that silent meditation is not suitable for everyone.-
For example my-self.My mind is like a monkey!It does what it wants!
I am able (even if not totally) to control it though Rama-nama and in general nama-japa.
Regards,
Orlando.

Silent meditation is not suitabke for ANYONE. It has to be acquired from constant practice alone. It needs patience and you dont do things overnight.

I have been honestly searching for a few years about the exact import of the teachings of Srivaishnavism. As you know, two independent methods are described for Srivaishnavas. One is Bhakti Yoga and the other in Prapatti.

Bhakti Yoga of Srivaishnavism is grossly misunderstood and misrepresented. Please read Sri Ramanuja's Gitabhasya to know what exactly Bhakti means. Bhakti itself is defined by Sri Ramanuja as sneha pUrvam anudhyAnam - or intense loving uninterrupted meditation on Sriman Narayanan. Nothing short of this has been classified as Bhakti by Sri Ramanuja. Three grades of Bhakti are accepted by Sri Ramanuja, Para Bhakti, Para Jnana and Parama Bhakti.

Para Bhakti is the stage when the Lord can be seen through the inner eye in the meditation( samAdhi). Para Jnana is a more detailed knowledge about God (apaoxa) and a kind of wisdom that fades away when samAdhi is broken. Parama Bhakti is that in which the Lord is seen anytime anywhere and in everything. So that is what Bhakti is all about in Srivaishnavism. It is certainly more than singing, dancing etc, which are later developments of Hinduism. Bhakti is knowledge and vision of God in samAdhi and nothing short of it.

The qualifications for a such a practice is rather higher and hence an alternative is offered to people who cannot pursue all these - this is Prapatti Marga or the path of self surrender to God. This is also kind of misrepresneted and sometimes I hear people making mocking remarks on this path of Srivaishnavism. I have talked on this issue with many Srivaishnavas, non Srivaishnavas and other Vaishnavas, and have come to the conclusion that Prapatti is nothing different from extreme Vairagya.

Prapatti cannot be mere ritualistic path. It implies extreme Vairagya in the prapanna and his qualifications are described by Srimad Vedanta Desika. Vairagya means complete non attachment. You associate yourself with Narayana alone, and not with the human body. You no longer care for the body, whether it is sick, or you are insulted or people sue you or any eaethly misery is viewed by you as "nothing". There is no human from whom you will seek help of any kind- except the divine. That is true pratpatti as I understand, and as you observe it is more easy than Bhakti Yoga, but not as easy as you imagine. A true prapanna of this kind will definitely "see" Lord Vishnu before he dies. Surender to God cannot be just in word isn't it? If it is in deed, it is equal to Bhakti Yoga.

So both paths of Srivaishnavism are only variants of Jnana marga only for people of different temperaments.

Also, Srivaishnavism is a vedantic religion that came out of Pancharatra system. Read the history of the Pancharatra religion carefully, and you can find easily that these Bhagavatas were actually much closer to Kashmir Tantrics in practice. Their life styles were very close to a sanyasin, with only difference - the Srivaishnava was allowed to marry and give birth to children only for giving the spiritual guidance. Other than that, he is like a sanyasin. The Panchartra means of worship was five fold - abhigamana, upAdhAna, ijyA, swAdhyAya and yoga . The Yoga here is only some kind of Raja Yoga which was practised by all early Srivaishnavas. I do not know how this tradition was lost, but the Yogic tradition is completely lost for Srivaishnavas. I am just assuming that people got too lazy.:)

The effect of all these is that nowadays Srivaishnavas think that medittaion and Yoga are all alien to their tradition, while it is the core of this religion. Very few people will take all these seriously. In all his kindness for the degenerating humanity, Sri Ramanuja sacrificed many core tenets of the faith, so that religion could be practised easier. That does not, however mean, that you should not try to become a mystic like Sri Ramanuja or Alwars by the practice of Yoga. All Alwars and the early Vaishnava Acharyas were only Yogis and mystics though the very talk of it taken with scepticism and opposed these days.

satay
08 June 2006, 04:11 PM
Prapatti cannot be mere ritualistic path. It implies extreme Vairagya in the prapanna and his qualifications are described by Srimad Vedanta Desika. Vairagya means complete non attachment. You associate yourself with Narayana alone, and not with the human body. You no longer care for the body, whether it is sick, or you are insulted or people sue you or any eaethly misery is viewed by you as "nothing". There is no human from whom you will seek help of any kind- except the divine. That is true pratpatti as I understand, and as you observe it is more easy than Bhakti Yoga, but not as easy as you imagine. A true prapanna of this kind will definitely "see" Lord Vishnu before he dies. Surender to God cannot be just in word isn't it? If it is in deed, it is equal to Bhakti Yoga.


namaste!
Nice post. I am just wondering about 'prapatti'...I take it at face value what you are saying here and that's not a problem. But doesn't this mean we are throwing all logic out the window?

I mean if your car is stuck on the highway without gas you will have to make arragements to get gas...leaving everything to the lord is not going to be very practical. similary, if you are sick I mean it just makes sense to pop a pill or are you implying that with prapati it is irrelevant what happens here in this world and the man is so out of his mind and refuses to use reason and logic?

just curious...

Sudarshan
08 June 2006, 04:42 PM
namaste!
Nice post. I am just wondering about 'prapatti'...I take it at face value what you are saying here and that's not a problem. But doesn't this mean we are throwing all logic out the window?

I mean if your car is stuck on the highway without gas you will have to make arragements to get gas...leaving everything to the lord is not going to be very practical. similary, if you are sick I mean it just makes sense to pop a pill or are you implying that with prapati it is irrelevant what happens here in this world and the man is so out of his mind and refuses to use reason and logic?

just curious...

Ideally yes. To such a person who has resigned his fate to the Lord like this - everything is taken care by God himself. By the way Satay, what is the worst fate of anybody? Death? If somebody overcomes this fear, he is as good as united with God. None of us have been liberated yet because we have neither done Bhakti Yoga in the past nor Prapatti Yoga properly. Practicality is not the question - perfection alone leads to God, and how to achieve this perfection is the key.

I beleive in only two paths to God -

The path of Jnana or Bhakti - In which you do Yogic practice like Raja Yoga or Kundalini Yoga until the vision of God. Karma is burnt by the fire of Jnana here.

The path of Saranagati or Prapatti in which you offer yourself to be blown away by your Karma, not fearing or caring for anything whatsoever, accept whatever comes your way without a hint of disapproval or protest. Might sound too idealistic, but mukti is also idealistic, and only the truly deserving will get it. But this means you have to do your duties, and not be idle. Prapatti does not require you to be actionless, but never expect any reward for any of your actions, and treat misery and joy with equanimity. Dont you think this is severely insisted in BG? Prapatti is the highest form of Karma Yoga. Jnana is obtained by the depletion of Karma in this path. When Karma has disappeared by such pure actions, what fuel is there to cause a next birth? If at all you are still born again, it will be only in the midst of the greatest Yogis!!

satay
08 June 2006, 05:11 PM
By the way Satay, what is the worst fate of anybody? Death? If somebody overcomes this fear, he is as good as united with God.

personally the greatest fear for me is not death but actually being in an accident and being crippled for life. I think that is more problematic than death. I worry about it all the time what if there is a time where I can not do something that I love doing right now. e.g. with a heartattack or something that you loose part of your brain or part of your bodily functions. That is my greatest fear (and heights):) but death I look forward to...

Death I see as a gateway to another dimension and as osho says...never born never died...just visited this planet from this date to that date... :)

Sudarshan
08 June 2006, 05:26 PM
personally the greatest fear for me is not death but actually being in an accident and being crippled for life. I think that is more problematic than death. I worry about it all the time what if there is a time where I can not do something that I love doing right now. e.g. with a heartattack or something that you loose part of your brain or part of your bodily functions. That is my greatest fear (and heights):) but death I look forward to...

Death I see as a gateway to another dimension and as osho says...never born never died...just visited this planet from this date to that date... :)

I remembered the analogy cited by a very great Vaishnava Acharya.

Let us say that as a child you wanted a toffee. You asked your father and he refused to buy it. What would you do if you badly needed it? You will refuse to take lunch that day, a strike! Your father may not care. Then, if you are adamant you will skip dinner. Your dad will get concerned but may not still get you the tofee. However, if you continue this strike for 3 days, your dad will be alarmed and will get the toffee for you.

Same is God. If you repeatedly refuse to protect yourself from dangers and demand his appearance and go on similar "toffee" strike, God will be forced to come down for you. He is the more than a father to all of us. This is the real secret to God realization!

satay
08 June 2006, 08:32 PM
I remembered the analogy cited by a very great Vaishnava Acharya.

Let us say that as a child you wanted a toffee. You asked your father and he refused to buy it. What would you do if you badly needed it? You will refuse to take lunch that day, a strike! Your father may not care. Then, if you are adamant you will skip dinner. Your dad will get concerned but may not still get you the tofee. However, if you continue this strike for 3 days, your dad will be alarmed and will get the toffee for you.

Same is God. If you repeatedly refuse to protect yourself from dangers and demand his appearance and go on similar "toffee" strike, God will be forced to come down for you. He is the more than a father to all of us. This is the real secret to God realization!

Interesting. I see your point in a way. My dad always says something along these lines. He is the kind of person who doesn't follow much rules. He feels that durga is his mother and as mother she must listen to him even though he may be breaking some rules. He says that as a devotee one must be able to make a demand and that demand has to be met just like a child makes a demand and no matter how hard a parent want to ignore it eventually parent is going to meet the child's demand. it's a kind of a funny logic but I see the point.

I however choose a different way and say that making demands of the supreme is not a good thing at all. But my dad argues that a child must have the confidence in him/her self that if he makes a demand the parent will comply. I see the logic but I never dare to make a demand...this maybe has something to do with one's own 'makeup'

Strangely...ma durga seems to listen to this spoiled child of hers for whatever reason (not not me...my dad!)

sarabhanga
08 June 2006, 09:13 PM
I mean if your car is stuck on the highway without gas you will have to make arrangements to get gas...leaving everything to the lord is not going to be very practical.
prapatti is “pious resignation or devotion” (the foundation of Bhakti ~ i.e faith), and Sudarshan is quite correct ~ with total devotion, the appropriate arrangements will ALWAYS be made. If one’s aims are worldly, however, the details (e.g. the timing, the route, or even the mode of transport) of such divine arrangements may not exactly match with mundane expectations!

prapAta is “springing forth”, and prapatti is the same “leap of faith” recommended by Christians.

sarabhanga
09 June 2006, 12:21 AM
Namaste Orlando,

I prefer the original version, by The Smiths.

There is a link to an MP3 file on the following page: Meat is Murder (http://www.animalliberationfront.com/Saints/Musicians/Music/The%20Smiths%20--%20Meat%20is%20Murder.htm)

Sudarshan
09 June 2006, 02:07 AM
Interesting. I see your point in a way. My dad always says something along these lines. He is the kind of person who doesn't follow much rules. He feels that durga is his mother and as mother she must listen to him even though he may be breaking some rules. He says that as a devotee one must be able to make a demand and that demand has to be met just like a child makes a demand and no matter how hard a parent want to ignore it eventually parent is going to meet the child's demand. it's a kind of a funny logic but I see the point.

I however choose a different way and say that making demands of the supreme is not a good thing at all. But my dad argues that a child must have the confidence in him/her self that if he makes a demand the parent will comply. I see the logic but I never dare to make a demand...this maybe has something to do with one's own 'makeup'

Strangely...ma durga seems to listen to this spoiled child of hers for whatever reason (not not me...my dad!)

Rule breakers will finally get thier demands too, but if the demands are spiritual in nature while still breaking rules, you will need to face trials and tribulations in plenty before you finally get there.:)

TruthSeeker
09 June 2006, 04:21 AM
The effect of all these is that nowadays Srivaishnavas think that medittaion and Yoga are all alien to their tradition, while it is the core of this religion. Very few people will take all these seriously. In all his kindness for the degenerating humanity, Sri Ramanuja sacrificed many core tenets of the faith, so that religion could be practised easier. That does not, however mean, that you should not try to become a mystic like Sri Ramanuja or Alwars by the practice of Yoga. All Alwars and the early Vaishnava Acharyas were only Yogis and mystics though the very talk of it taken with scepticism and opposed these days.

Hinduism prior to the advent of Sri Shankara must have been unusually secular in nature, and also deeply spiritual in nature. Every person indulged in a type of religion he liked and there was hardly any proselytizing within the whole of Hinduism - there were Shankyas, Naiyyayikas, Yogis, Bhagavatas, Tantrics and there was no real anymosity between them.

In the 8th century, Adi Shankara came down, and composed the prastAna thrayI and established that vedantic philosophy alone was Hinduism, and preached it far and wide all over India. There were a number of people who resented it, but they could not do anything due to his prowess. But we also know why Shankara had to do it - adharmic religions had begun to take over Hinduism and somebody had to do something to unify the vedic religion.

Thus, Hinduism now came to be associated only with vedanta with advaita flavour in it. Since this had clashed with the beleifs of many others, many other groups came soon after, with each group vying for each other and trying to outwit each other.

While the emphasis should have been on sAdhana, in medieval India the emphasis was on logic and argumentation and trying to show who was superior. In this process, the mystic Yoga was totally lost and became completely replaced with bhajans. This may not be anything inferior spiritually in the long run, but such lack of emphasis on Jnana Yoga ensured that people had only bookish knowledge to quarrel with - and NO SPIRITUAL WISDOM.

What is the point with religion if it is just bookish? Religion is there for realization alone, and as long as religions dont emphasis this even a bit, there will always be dualism and divisiveness - the infighting will never cease. Knowledge of the Self alone puts an end to all these quarrels and the never ending questions - so seek that alone. Bookish knowledge however good serves no purpose whatsoever, unless it is used fully for the above purpose.


So start with meditation today, even if it appears difficult to practice. You are bound to find the answers in due course. We can find out which philosopher was correct when these truths are realized in practice.;)

TruthSeeker
09 June 2006, 06:43 AM
I would warn many Vaishnavites to also give importance to this part of Hinduism, namely the core spiritual part - silent intense meditation, which adds many dimensions to the Bhakti movement.

The combination is actually science and not fancy imagination. A small opinion I am giving.

The Atman cannot be percieved by the senses. It is to be percived only through the mind ( ultimately it is the Atman that percieves itself)

Mind in this context refers to the lower mind called the Manas, the Chitta or the memory bank, the intellect or the Buddhi and the ego or Ahamkara. It is this mind that can percieve the abstract Atman.We know that Atman is pure consciousness, so why is it unable to percieve.The reason is two fold.

The Mind is a mirror that can capture the image of the Atman. It is unable to do so, because a) it is impure and dusty b) it is shaky. It is impure due to wordly attachment and due to the kama krodha lobha mada matsarya etc. It is shaky due to the karma or the vasanas of the previous births.

So two things are to be done to capture the Atman on the mind. Remove the dust on it, and stop its constant shaking. The former requires the practice of Karma Yoga and a good religeous discipline. The latter requires meditation and samadhi. Both are absolutely essential to the success of Yoga and it is a failure without accomplishing both. Removing the dust is higher in priority and for this reason more emphasis is on Karma Yoga rather than on Jnana Yoga for most religions. Once the mind is purified, its shaking can be more easily stopped.


Note:
It is Atman that percieves and not the mind. But since Atman has no dust nor it shakes and is unchanging, its defects are relocated to the mind in this example.

satay
24 September 2006, 01:53 PM
Hare Krishn Hare Krihsn, Krishn Krishn Hare Hare
Hare Ram Hare Ram, Ram Ram Hare Hare

Hare Krishn Hare Krishn, krishn Krishn Hare Hare
Hare Ram hare Ram, Ram Ram Hare Hare

Hare krishn Hare Krishn, Krishn Krishn Hare hare
Hare Ram Hare Ram, Ram Ram Hare hare

cbrahma
21 December 2006, 11:09 AM
I have chanted the mahamantra in the past, a full sixteen rounds, following the regs. I since dropped the practice because the life-style it demands is impractical and complicated. The rules for eating offering etc...are enough to stress me out every time I need to cook a meal for myself , let alone friends. Then I come to a forum like this and find out about so many other requirements such as diksa, two inititiations and my urge is cured.
Thank you

c.smith
27 January 2007, 09:26 PM
cbrahma

Thank-you for sharing your experiences and concerns. As you may have noted from some of my previous posts, I felt the same way for some time. As a result, I broke off from ISKCON and don't feel bad about having done so. I had a lot of questions that weren't getting answered (some I didn't even know how to ask) that I needed so I branched out on my own and got what I needed. Now I'm slowly returning to the Temple and associating with devotees, chanting the Mahamantra, etc. A sense of peace is overcoming me.

I can see that this certainly isn't everyones experience here. I treasure the different points of view that are shared here and value the moderator(s) for what they contribute.

My view? When it all comes down to it, we're all looking for the same thing and will one day all find the one answer.

Hare Krishna

Clayton

yajvan
28 January 2007, 09:17 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

I strongly agree that chanting aloud in groups is very powerful. Naturally, this is why you want to chant only in groups where everyone in the group is on the same page to enhance the vibration.

Namaste BYS (et.al)
If Chanting in large groups is benefical (agree), then tanscending in large groups must be equal or more powerful. It has been my experience thus so.

How so? when the group is transcending together, then they are touchnig the fabric of all beings at the same time. By this method the world would change in one week. We are all connected by consciousness. This is not a nice concept but the reality of this world.

Meet together, talk together, let your minds apprehend alike;
In like manner as the ancient gods concurring accepted their portions at the sacrifice.
Common be the prayer of these assembled worshippers, common be the acquirement, common the purpose, associated by the desire. I repeat for you a common prayer, I offer for you with a common oblation, common be your intention, common be the wishes of your hearts, common be your thoughts, So that there may be through union among you.
Rig Ved -10 Mandala, 12.40, the rishi is Samvanana, Agni is devata

pranams,

Znanna
28 January 2007, 10:48 AM
Meet together, talk together, let your minds apprehend alike;
In like manner as the ancient gods concurring accepted their portions at the sacrifice.
Common be the prayer of these assembled worshippers, common be the acquirement, common the purpose, associated by the desire. I repeat for you a common prayer, I offer for you with a common oblation, common be your intention, common be the wishes of your hearts, common be your thoughts, So that there may be through union among you.
Rig Ved -10 Mandala, 12.40, the rishi is Samvanana, Agni is devata





"By the same mouth..."

http://www.io.com/~patrik/pennae.html




Namaste,
ZN

c.smith
28 January 2007, 04:20 PM
I attended a japa workshop today and the guru stated that japa done in groups is very beneficial but since different people are at different stages of spiritual unfoldment, the sound vibrations (though potent) will have differing effects on each soul.

A couple of other things she mentioned that answer some of my own questions and doubts -

1. Many others have concentration problems while chanting. She suggests using then tounge and both lips in all of the pronunciation. Also suggests for some to put in ear plugs, so if chanting in a whisper the sound is magnified in ones head. Says both help with concentration and attention to the mantra.

2. Suggests using the picture of a deity or doing japa at ones altar.

3. Suggets chanting during the 1 - 1 1/2 hours before sunrise or just at sunset.

yajvan
28 January 2007, 08:47 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~~


A couple of other things she mentioned that answer some of my own questions and doubts -

1. Many others have concentration problems while chanting. She suggests using then tounge and both lips in all of the pronunciation. Also suggests for some to put in ear plugs, so if chanting in a whisper the sound is magnified in ones head. Says both help with concentration and attention to the mantra.

2. Suggests using the picture of a deity or doing japa at ones altar.

3. Suggets chanting during the 1 - 1 1/2 hours before sunrise or just at sunset.

Namaste C.Smith,
May I ask what is your goal?
Chanting/japa and concentration as the goal? If this is your goal - it is very noble. To gain this goal, we nourish the root of thinking.
We get a concentrated mind ( clarity and one pointedness) not by straining the mind and concentrating , but by a natural process of refreshing and culturing the mind, for this one-pointedness to occur on its own.
Think about a fruit tree... we do not water each bud, or fruit blossom to make the tree bare fruit. What do we do? we water the root, and all parts of the tree benefit, and we are able to pick the fruit in due time.

Like that, for us we water the root of this consciousness; we bring our awareness to the ocean of your Being, to the silence within and all parts of the aspirant is nourished. The ability to concentrate, the closeness to the SELF, the expansion of awareness, closer to delight, like that one benefits. WE then come out and act - yogastha kuru karmani, as Sri Krsna has said. Established in yoga ( or union of the Divine) we perform actions ( karma). This bares the best fruit.

pranams,

c.smith
28 January 2007, 09:48 PM
Concentration IS essential for me, but I chant out of love for Krishna. Even at times when I don't feel like chanting, the process of simply starting brings me closer to the Lord. It's simple and it reminds me just how close He is. It's kind of like the picture you get in your mind when a loved ones name is spoken.

grames
08 February 2007, 04:58 AM
Dear Sudarshan,

You are correct and i agree with you totally that Mantra has prescribed rules and regulations and it should be strictly followed. In the same line, few mantras you can recite loudly and that is their prescribed rule :). ON NAMO NARAYA NAYA is one of them!

orlando
04 September 2007, 12:23 PM
http://i10.tinypic.com/4xqg7es.jpg

devisarada
04 September 2007, 12:36 PM
Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare
Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare
Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare
Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare

Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare
Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare
Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare
Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare


What more is there left to say?

Krsna Das
11 January 2010, 08:54 AM
Hare Krsna !

Dandavat Pranamas !

I was thinking to create a new thread for Mahamantra Chanting but then suddenly happened to find that it already exists here, with the mercy of Satay.

Let me add my bit:

Sri Krsna Caitanya Prabhu Nityanada
Sri Advaita Gadadhar Srivasadi Gaur Bhakta Vrnda
Hare Krsna Hare Krsna Krsna Krsna Hare Hare
Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare

Hari Bol