|
Post by Nityānanda dāsa on Sept 21, 2019 6:36:20 GMT -6
Radhe Radhe! Yes, that is a very lovely verse. The peacock reference also stood up for me, I wonder why Radhagovinda Nath chose to go with those meanings. Thank you for these verses and translations from the Caitanya Bhagavata, like I said before, I've never read it nor do I know of any good translation out there, I'd like to try and add them for kirtana at home. Looking forward to your next update of this text. Considering the day it is, I wanted to share one of my favorite kirtan videos: I don't really know anything about the Goswami singing, apart from the fact that he deeply impressed me, Jagadish seems to remember his name was Nityananda Goswami and thinks he's no longer with us. In any case I'm thankful that I found him: www.youtube.com/watch?v=tILtTEbhZy4Good morning all! Radhe Radhe! I'm not sure why my notifications stopped coming from the symposium? Maybe they went to spam? I'll have to check as I haven't received any in a while... Otherwise as for translations of Cb, I have two (from IGM). One is a straight English narrative by Sarvabhavana Das and the other is a multi-volume edition that has the commentary of Bhaktisiddhanta. I've been making my way through the former, but haven't touched the latter. I also believe I can get the former in digital copy possibly. Jai Nitai Jai Gaur!
|
|
|
Post by Ed on Sept 21, 2019 9:45:43 GMT -6
Radhe Radhe! Yes, that is a very lovely verse. The peacock reference also stood up for me, I wonder why Radhagovinda Nath chose to go with those meanings. Thank you for these verses and translations from the Caitanya Bhagavata, like I said before, I've never read it nor do I know of any good translation out there, I'd like to try and add them for kirtana at home. Looking forward to your next update of this text. Considering the day it is, I wanted to share one of my favorite kirtan videos: I don't really know anything about the Goswami singing, apart from the fact that he deeply impressed me, Jagadish seems to remember his name was Nityananda Goswami and thinks he's no longer with us. In any case I'm thankful that I found him: www.youtube.com/watch?v=tILtTEbhZy4Good morning all! Radhe Radhe! I'm not sure why my notifications stopped coming from the symposium? Maybe they went to spam? I'll have to check as I haven't received any in a while... Otherwise as for translations of Cb, I have two (from IGM). One is a straight English narrative by Sarvabhavana Das and the other is a multi-volume edition that has the commentary of Bhaktisiddhanta. I've been making my way through the former, but haven't touched the latter. I also believe I can get the former in digital copy possibly. Jai Nitai Jai Gaur! Radhe Radhe! Hi, Nilamadhava, good to see you back here. Thank you for the recommendations on the CB, I’ve heard of these two editions, and I’m sure they have their merits, but I’d rather not read them. I’m honestly surprised that I’ve found at least three different english editions of Krsnadas Kaviraja’s CC published in India along with the one published by Harvard press, but I haven’t been able to find a nice simple translation of this book that’s not done by an IGMer. It’s a little frustrating since this is one of the few reliable sources on Prabhu Nityananda’s life and I’ve always wanted to read it, but I’d rather wait. There’s member who used to frequent this Symposium, along with Nitai’s his translations are also some of my favourites, his name is Madanmohan Das (Morris, I believe). A translation by him would be one of my first choices but it seems he was never too interested in publishing, though I'm happy he still shares them publicly. Anyway, a translation like those would be nice, or an academic one, but so far I’m still searching.
|
|
|
Post by kirtaniya on Sept 22, 2019 9:02:04 GMT -6
After 30 years of search, wandering in tenets of acintya of non-masturbation and masturbation, my realisation is as follows. The congregational chanting is the ultimate religion, knowledge, wisdom and love. It should be done out loud at least by two friends with the use of instruments producing sound which reaches and envelopes the whole universe. And one should be always alert to hear one’s own voice along with the voices of the other kirtaniyas participated.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Sept 22, 2019 10:46:16 GMT -6
After 30 years of search, wandering in tenets of acintya of non-masturbation and masturbation, my realisation is as follows. The congregational chanting is the ultimate religion, knowledge, wisdom and love. It should be done out loud at least by two friends with the use of instruments producing sound which reaches and envelopes the whole universe. And one should be always alert to hear one’s own voice along with the voices of the other kirtaniyas participated. Greetings Kirtaniya, Welcome back. I am glad to see you here and hear you here. Metaphorically speaking, of course. Your comment fits well with this topic since this thread is about Sundarananda's book on the Mahamantra and especially its relationship to sankirtan. Sundarananda Das or Sundarananda Vidyavinod as he was known in GM was one of the great scholars of that organization. I have been fortunate to have gotten several of his books thanks to Subrata and Visakha and Sakhicarana Das who visited the house of his son in Kolkata and got almost the last copies of everything he had. In fact, some of the books they sent me were the last copies available from his house. I feel very fortunate. Anyway, the question for him in this book is should the Mahamantra be sung in sankirtana. Or, as a mantra and not only as a mantra as the MAHA mantra must it always be counted as other mantras always are. He cites descriptions of Mahaprabhu and his bhaktas doing sankirtana with everything but the Mahamantra and plenty of examples of bhaktas alway counting their Mahamantra japa or Kirtana which basically mean doing the Mahamantra loudly, but musically, like Haridas Thakur used to.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Sept 22, 2019 11:54:35 GMT -6
Radhe Radhe! Hi, Nilamadhava, good to see you back here. Thank you for the recommendations on the CB, I’ve heard of these two editions, and I’m sure they have their merits, but I’d rather not read them. I’m honestly surprised that I’ve found at least three different english editions of Krsnadas Kaviraja’s CC published in India along with the one published by Harvard press, but I haven’t been able to find a nice simple translation of this book that’s not done by an IGMer. It’s a little frustrating since this is one of the few reliable sources on Prabhu Nityananda’s life and I’ve always wanted to read it, but I’d rather wait. There’s member who used to frequent this Symposium, along with Nitai’s his translations are also some of my favourites, his name is Madanmohan Das (Morris, I believe). A translation by him would be one of my first choices but it seems he was never too interested in publishing, though I'm happy he still shares them publicly. Anyway, a translation like those would be nice, or an academic one, but so far I’m still searching. Yes. it was great having Madanamohan Das here. I ways liked his translations. Moreover there is definitely a paucity of non-IGM translations of the Caitanya-bhagavata. I have always thought it would be great if we had all the biographies together in one book, something like a Caitanya New Testament. In the Bible there are four gospels and then a number of Paul's letters and then the prophesy of Revelations. The Caitanyite biographical literature could easily match or surpass that. The gospels are fairly short, but the Caitanya caritas are not. Anyway, I will try to contact Madanmohan and see if he will share his Cbh with us. I have part of the Kadaca of Murarigupta to share, the first quarter. In fact, for all I know I may have already posted it. It was an appendix for the Ghosh work Lord Gauranga.
|
|
|
Post by kirtaniya on Sept 22, 2019 14:27:01 GMT -6
<...> Anyway, the question for him in this book is should the Mahamantra be sung in sankirtana. Or, as a mantra and not only as a mantra as the MAHA mantra must it always be counted as other mantras always are. He cites descriptions of Mahaprabhu and his bhaktas doing sankirtana with everything but the Mahamantra and plenty of examples of bhaktas alway counting their Mahamantra japa or Kirtana which basically mean doing the Mahamantra loudly, but musically, like Haridas Thakur used to. Jay Nitaidas ji! The answer to your question is soo primitive, I wish you find it. And it is of the nature susukham kartum avyayam. Such answers when found look like camatkaras, or just wow! It is big or small wow depending on how deeply you stuck into rational thinking. When you see the real situation under the question you see the limit of rational thinking and its confusing nature.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Sept 22, 2019 19:42:27 GMT -6
<...> Anyway, the question for him in this book is should the Mahamantra be sung in sankirtana. Or, as a mantra and not only as a mantra as the MAHA mantra must it always be counted as other mantras always are. He cites descriptions of Mahaprabhu and his bhaktas doing sankirtana with everything but the Mahamantra and plenty of examples of bhaktas alway counting their Mahamantra japa or Kirtana which basically mean doing the Mahamantra loudly, but musically, like Haridas Thakur used to. Jay Nitaidas ji! The answer to your question is soo primitive, I wish you find it. And it is of the nature susukham kartum avyayam. Such answers when found look like camatkaras, or just wow! It is big or small wow depending on how deeply you stuck into rational thinking. When you see the real situation under the question you see the limit of rational thinking and its confusing nature. Yes, Kirtaniyaji, isn't it always the most primitive things that trip us up and cause us to jump in amazement when we discover them. So it is with my other posting about Krsna being one with his name, his name being him. Absolutely primitive and absolutely amazing and absolutely inconceivable! The mind is struck dumb!
|
|
|
Post by Nityānanda dāsa on Sept 25, 2019 18:00:21 GMT -6
One other thing to think about today. I have been receiving emails from an ISKCON lady, Ananta-sarovara Devi Dasi, who is a Sanskritist working for the International wing of the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. She wrote me years ago when she was working on her PhD at BHU on bhakti-rasa. She completed her degree and has been living in Mayapur and working on various BBT projects. Apparently, they are about to bring out their own edition/translation of the Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu. Anyway, she recently sent me a link I would like to share with other readers here. It is an interesting peek into the operations of the GM and the fantasy life lived by one of its now deceased big leaders, Sridhara Maharaja. Ananatavasudeva (who later left GM and became Puridas) also plays a role here as someone concerned with promoting the truth whereas Sridhara Maharaja is more concerned with validating fiction up to and no doubt including the fiction of Bhaktisiddhanta's membership in a lineage of the CV tradition. He is of course also trying to make a place for the authenticity and acceptance of his own works. It is comparable to our own current president who is severely fact-challenged and who enjoys proclaiming that the press is full of "fake-news." I wonder what some of the others here think about this viewpoint. Here is the link. No one wants to comment on this? Here's my crack at it before I read what you wrote... Point about modern acaryas as superior to “Vedas and Upanishads” as well as the rsis who composed those literatures. (I understand that Vyasadeva was also an author of these texts.) BR Sridhar (BRS) then equates these ‘rsis’ with those pursuing Brahman and Paramatma. According to this argument however, current and future Vaishnav acaryas will surpass any teachers before them. But is this what the acaryas teach? Is this what the Goswamis taught? I don’t think so. sruti smrti puranadi pancaratra vidhim vina
Also some of the qualifiers of modern day acaryas given by BRS are non-observable or verifiable criteria such as “who have found the expression within their heart” and “they have got inspiration” and “who can perceive Him, recognize Him…” and “whatever inspiration comes from within, that cannot but be the truth.” And so on. He’s doing away with the advice of the same acharyas he claims to represent. Narottam Das Thakur was such an acarya, and what did Narottam say? sadhu sastra guru vakhya cittete/hrdoye kariya aikhya, there is a three (or four) checkpoint system. Not that the modern vaishnav acarya trumps sastra and the previous rsis. In fact, I believe there is one place saying that the sadhus and guru simply reflect the light of sastra and that sastra is primary. Of course we agree that Bhagavatam is the cream of the Vedas. But that doesn’t mean that anyone claiming to represent the Bhagavatam is superior to the authors of the Vedas and Upanishads. And after all, weren’t some of these rsis Vaishnava acaryas also? Where is the support for the point that Jaiva Dharma is eternal? Where is the support for a siksa parampara? In one sense, I think I get where BRS is coming from. He is saying that the modern day acarya is superior to the rsis (pursuing Brahman/Paramatma) of the past. The way in which this is true is that the modern acarya makes these teachings accessible to the people of the present age. The rsis are no longer physically with us and cannot do that. The acarya teaches according to time, place, and circumstances. However, such an acarya would not deviate from the teachings of sastra. The acarya wouldn’t change principles, but would adapt details for students to best access and practice said principles. When the acarya deviates, then we know such a person is no longer (or never was) an acarya. While BRS shows sentiment and attachment for his guru and param guru, sentiment alone is insubstantial. Sure, we’re all meant to have attachment to our gurus. That is in the sastra. But also the main point that BRS seems to have missed is that guru should fit the definition given by the sastra. Which means that guru doesn’t deviate from sastra as BST did by inventing his own parampara. Rupa Goswami didn’t just write his thoughts with no substantiation. He backed up his realizations with support from the Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, etc. Obviously Rupa felt that the contributions of the rsis were very important. Rupa didn’t write, “My guru said. My guru did.” He didn’t write based on sentiment or unverifiable information. Also, I’ve been reading this Vaishnava Sadacar book compiled by students of Ananta Das Babaji. I find it odd that one must wash their hands with dirt seven times and their mouths and feet so many times with earth and water. Are these things truly spiritual PRINCIPLES? Or are they details? I think they’re the latter. After my visit to India, I’ve also been thinking about the difference between Indian and American cultures. Very often the two don’t understand one another, especially if they have no experience of one another. Having experience of both, I do find myself trying to marry the two in a way that doesn’t compromise spiritual principles. It’s an interesting place to be in for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Sept 29, 2019 15:47:29 GMT -6
Yes, I agree, it’s no historical record, however I find a few things interesting, although this are just my conjectures and the questions that this raised for me: It’s not unlikely that some event of this kind took place regularly in those days, although I found no records of it, perhaps the name is just the author’s idea of a general translation for english readers of the original name, but in any case according to this account it’s clear that the conference wasn’t specifically about this issue with the maha-mantra. It seems to be one those events where different groups both from the neo and traditional hindu world at the time would engage in the politics of religious social life. So in the context of this conference perhaps Prabhu Prangopal Goswami saw an opportunity for self assertion and to defuse conflict, since previous to this the account mentions challenges and prohibitions from certain unnamed chief members of society that were responded by Prabhu Yadugopal Goswami with large kirtan processions. I have somewhat of a hard time believing that members of Sri Bodo Baba’s community would actively seek to engage in these kind of debates, but apart from them who else specifically was upholding the opinion that Sundarananda expresses here? Do we have names and backgrounds for those old timers he mentions? Tension among groups professing to follow Caitanya at this time wasn’t uncommon, and it was more evident between the traditional brahminical Vaisnava community supported by the Bhadralok class against what they considered as transgressions to the Vaisnava acara in other communities. Goswamis like Bipin Bihari, Prangopal and Radhikanath seem to have been specially vocal in this sense. So, I still wonder, how recent was the introduction of the maha mantra in kirtanas? Did it somehow escape these Goswamis that this wasn’t the old way? and if not, were they consciously trying to introduce this change or at least normalise it? If we look at manuals from the previous generations, will we find any expressed prohibition? or was it a common knowledge that the compilers didn’t consider necessary to mention? Yet they even write about how to clean your teeth, wouldn’t they mention this when discussing the chanting of Harinam?. What I’m getting at is that they probably saw these arguments as coming from sources outside their communities and sought a public way to settle the matter and reassert their leadership since it would mean pressure on the other side to comply and refrain from more conflict. However, the lack of mention of this event in the writings of Sundarananda, as you’ve pointed out, makes me wonder about the extent of their outreach, though it may be that a survey of other contemporary sources could prove this wrong. If these opposing arguments were indeed coming not just from traditional CV but from the influence of other traditional or neo hindu movements and other communities professing to be followers of Caitanya, then it’s not hard to believe that personalities like Prangopal Goswami would care to engage in these kind of debates. It’s a long way from the stories of bhaktas scorning debate or argument and happily signing their defeat just so people would leave them alone to continue with their bhajan. Actually, when I read the whole story and saw that the opposite side didn’t even argue I thought “well, that’s very vaisnava of them”. About Sri Yadugopal Goswami’s achievements, well, you can see the sources we have in english at the moment. However, like S.K. De would say, the pious mind of the author invests him with the traditional signs of a virtuous childhood, said to be a natural pandit and that he had an extraordinary memory since a very early age. Actually, he seems to have been a well respected pathak in his day, but was predisposed against preaching because he didn’t want to be away from his household deity. It is said there that he was also a well trained musician in various instruments. Apparently, his father noticed his attachment for the Thakurs since an early age and was happy that he wanted to devote himself to their seva. Later on he got some extra land and became a farmer for the Thakurs. I never got the sense that he wanted any exposure or made any efforts to that effect, so it’s no wonder we haven’t read much from him. Do Dr. Kapoor or Haridas Das Baba mention him at all? I really regret having left The Saints of Bengal, definitely should’ve taken it with me. Anyway, this particular book seems to be an offering probably by westerners to Srila Prankrsna Das Baba, there are other bengali hagiographies about their family line that could provide some more details (and probably invite more questions) and expand upon these stories, but those are out of my reach. Here's a pic of Prabhu Yadugopal Goswami giving a discourse: View AttachmentEduardo, I just today had a nice conversation with Subrato and he told me about a book he has at his home in Kolkata that deals entirely with just such a meeting as this. It may have even been the same meeting. The book was published some time ago and goes into greater detail on the practices relating to the Mahamantra. According to him the meeting was in Vrindaban and was attended by the leading CV illuminaries of the time and that the winning side was the one that argued that the Mahamantra should always be counted and not be part of sankirtan, the exact opposite of the outcome described in this little booklet. He promised he would scan the text and send me a copy when he got back home (he is currently in New York City until the end of November). It apparently goes into depth about the history of the chanting of the Mahamantra and does not connect it with the Kali-santarana Upanisad, but traces it to some other source. I am fascinated and can't wait to see the book. Like Sundarananda's work it contains lots of scriptural citations and also something like a decree in which the position of the winning side is clearly stated and those who accept it have signed it. I mentioned the story from this book and he told me some things about the family of Prangopal Goswami and their tenuous relationship with the rest of the Nityananda lineages. They were apparently outliers because their home and area of influence was in Bangla Desh. So it might be true that Yadugopal Goswami spoke at the meeting, but was not the victor. What I don't understand is why Sundarananda does not mention such a meeting. It should have been central to his argument. Maybe it was and he did not want to mention it because of fear of a negative reaction from his GM guru-bhai. Already he is suggesting that Bhaktivinode and Bhakti-siddhanta were wrong in their views on how the Mahamantra was to be chanted. Anyway, this is an interesting development in the history of this question. More to come later.
|
|
|
Post by Ed on Sept 30, 2019 11:18:08 GMT -6
Radhe Radhe! Hi, Nilamadhava, good to see you back here. Thank you for the recommendations on the CB, I’ve heard of these two editions, and I’m sure they have their merits, but I’d rather not read them. I’m honestly surprised that I’ve found at least three different english editions of Krsnadas Kaviraja’s CC published in India along with the one published by Harvard press, but I haven’t been able to find a nice simple translation of this book that’s not done by an IGMer. It’s a little frustrating since this is one of the few reliable sources on Prabhu Nityananda’s life and I’ve always wanted to read it, but I’d rather wait. There’s member who used to frequent this Symposium, along with Nitai’s his translations are also some of my favourites, his name is Madanmohan Das (Morris, I believe). A translation by him would be one of my first choices but it seems he was never too interested in publishing, though I'm happy he still shares them publicly. Anyway, a translation like those would be nice, or an academic one, but so far I’m still searching. Yes. it was great having Madanamohan Das here. I ways liked his translations. Moreover there is definitely a paucity of non-IGM translations of the Caitanya-bhagavata. I have always thought it would be great if we had all the biographies together in one book, something like a Caitanya New Testament. In the Bible there are four gospels and then a number of Paul's letters and then the prophesy of Revelations. The Caitanyite biographical literature could easily match or surpass that. The gospels are fairly short, but the Caitanya caritas are not. Anyway, I will try to contact Madanmohan and see if he will share his Cbh with us. I have part of the Kadaca of Murarigupta to share, the first quarter. In fact, for all I know I may have already posted it. It was an appendix for the Ghosh work Lord Gauranga. I meant to respond to this but looks like I forgot, your other comment reminded me, I do have your translation of Murari’s Kadaca. That one, the Caitanya Bhagavata and Kavi Karnapura’s works I have read only through quotations and partial translations from different places. I’d like to see a volume compiled of these works, at least, but what you propose here would be much better. Well, the plot thickens, Nitai, this is great, and many thanks to Subrata, I look forward to seeing what this book says about the meeting, it sounds like it actually is the same one. Your suggestion as to why Sundarananda doesn’t mention it sounds very plausible to me, I think he must’ve known of it, it may have featured in some of the well known Vaisnava patrikas of the time, but again there are too many details missing from what we know so far, this book will hopefully fill in some of those and provide more context.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Sept 30, 2019 14:53:20 GMT -6
Wouldn't it be funny if we were to find that Sundarananda took all or many of his scriptural citations from this account of that meeting in the book in Subrato's possession. That would be rich. If not, then perhaps there are other references that will further enrich our knowledge of the debate. Moreover, we will know who participated because of all the signatures on the Siddhanta-patra. It appears at present that the dissenters are the members of the family of Prangopal Goswami and the members of the family of Kanupriya Goswami. There were probably others.
I have looked at Sundarananda's later book on the Holy Name, Sri Sri Nama-cintamani-kirana-kanika, and he takes exactly the opposite position from the one he supports in his earlier book, Mahamantra. Not only that, but he does not even mention this earlier book. One would think that he would admit to having formerly written in support of a certain position, but that now he has changed his mind. Perhaps I missed it, but there seems to be no reference at all to the Mahamantra book. At any rate, all of these things will eventually come to light.
|
|
|
Post by Ed on Sept 30, 2019 15:26:51 GMT -6
Wouldn't it be funny if we were to find that Sundarananda took all or many of his scriptural citations from this account of that meeting in the book in Subrato's possession. That would be rich. If not, then perhaps there are other references that will further enrich our knowledge of the debate. Moreover, we will know who participated because of all the signatures on the Siddhanta-patra. It appears at present that the dissenters are the members of the family of Prangopal Goswami and the members of the family of Kanupriya Goswami. There were probably others. I have looked at Sundarananda's later book on the Holy Name, Sri Sri Nama-cintamani-kirana-kanika, and he takes exactly the opposite position from the one he supports in his earlier book, Mahamantra. Not only that, but he does not even mention this earlier book. One would think that he would admit to having formerly written in support of a certain position, but that now he has changed his mind. Perhaps I missed it, but there seems to be no reference at all to the Mahamantra book. At any rate, all of these things will eventually come to light. That would be rich, and not all that surprising to be honest, although what you mentioned about the old timers makes me believe there actually were other references available to him beyond the writings from Bodo Baba's tradition, knowing about the participants and both party's arguments would be a great start to understand how is it that the losing side's position in subrata's book ultimately prevailed. It's interesting what you say about Sundarananda's later book, and also baffling. I was reading chapter 7 of Mani Babu's book this morning, in it the Goswami also states the common believe regarding Sankirtana of the mahamantra and that episode from the CB Madhya 23.75-89: you do counted repetitions (Japa) and uncounted repetition in kirtana or sankirtana of the mahamantra, but this is what Sundarananda refutes from the start, and is actually the only counter-argument I've seen him give from the other party, I still have no idea what other arguments, if any, could've made him change his mind, and he doesn't mention it in his later book? Well, I also hope some of these things will eventually come to light, I'm sure we'll get some answers or hints from Subrata's book.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2019 13:32:19 GMT -6
{I have responded to some devotee question long back, which I am reproducing again}
Jay Nitai,
Here is the Mahaprabhu conclusive instruction about rule of Mahamantra chanting showing his own example to devotee. Here is word by word translation of the passage of Chaitanya Bhagavat (137-142).
shuno mishra kaliyuge naahi tap jagya, jei jon bhaje krishno taar maha bhaagya
"Listen Misra, in kali Yuga there is no instruction for Tapasya and Yaggya to achieve Lord's adobe In this age who ever worship Krishna has tremendous fortune."
ataeva grihe tumi krishno bhajo giyaa kutnati parihari ekant hoiya
"Hence go back to house and start worship of Krishna by leavings materialistic activity and steady one pointed mind in remembering Krishna in seclusion."
saadhya-saadhan tattva je kichhu sakal harinaam-sankirtan milibe sakal
"Whatever knowledge ( tattwa ) about the of object of worship ( Sadhya i.e Krishna ) and the path of worship of Krishna ( sadhan i.e Nababidha Sudhdha Bhakti ) will be required
Harinam - Samkirtna will provide that wisdom"
tathaahi brihannaradiya puranam
harernama harernama harernamaiva kevalam kalau nastyeva nastyeva nastyeva gatiranyatha
atha mahamantra - hare krishna hare krishna krishna krishna hare hare hare rama hare rama rama rama hare hare
ei shlok naam bali loy mahamantra, sholo naam batrish akshara ei tantra sadhite sadhite jabe premaankur hobe, saadhya saadhan tattva jaanibaa se tabe
"This shlok called Mahamantra is composed of 16 Names 32 letters of Krishna Names, is the Tantra ( Tantra in traditional spiritual sense means method / mechanism of spiritual practice) for Krishna's worship.
While performing this spiritual practice ( Sadhite Sadhite ) when Prema will arise in the chitta of practitioner , he/she will come to understand the wisdom of Krishan Tattwa and Bhakti Tatta."
prabhur shrimukhe shiksha shuni dvijavar, punah punah pranaam karaye bahutar (137-142)
"By hearing this instruction direct from the lotus mouth of Sri Gourhari, the Brahmin offerred danvat to Sri Gourhari again and again. "
Note: Sadhite Sadhite means by spiritual practice and Kirtan of Krishna's name. Here Mahaphabu did not mention explicitly to recite Mahamantra in kirtnan but indicated that mahamantra is for Japa Sadhan ( keeping the count while doing Japa which can be loud as well as mental or unuttered ( bachik,manasik and upangsu ) and while singing Krshina's name loudly in Samkirtan ( This is in harmony of Mahaphanu's explicit instruction of Mahamantra Japa and Singing Krishna's name in SamKirtan in the later section of chaitanya Bhagavat which I am going to show next ).
In the Shri Chaitanya bhagavata Madhya Khanda 23.76-78 section Sriman Mahaprabhu instructed.
Apane Sabhare Prabhu Korilen Upadesh. Krishna Nam "Mahamantra" sunoh bisesh.
“Prabhu Gourhari himself instructed everybody Carefully listen to Krishna Naam which is called “Mahamantra” “
“Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare”
Prabhu bole, - Kohilam ei “Mahamantra” Iha giya jopo sobhe koriye nirbandha.
“Prabhu said, I am telling you this “Mahamantra” All you go and do japa ( chanting ) this Mahamantra by Keeping count regularly( Nirbandha - Sanskrit dictionary Sabdakalpadrum states the meaning of Nirbandha is attaining specific regular goal of daily practice – i.e in this context chanting Mahamantra in japa keeping count regularly for a specified number, as done in japa for e.g one lacs , two lacs of harinam )”
Iha haite sorbo sididhi hoibe savar. Sorbokhon bolo ithe bidhi nahi ar.
“From this Mahamantra one will attain all the spiritual goal Everytime , everywhere one can chant this name , there is no other restriction in this ( except keeping count” )
Some may object in the above verse “Bolo” means uttering in mouth which is Kirtan but that is wrong argument as “Bolo” will also refer to Upangsu and Vachik type of japa where uttering of Mahamantra practiced and which in harmony with subsequent section where Mahaprabhu specifically instructing for Kirtan and what should be sang other than Mahamantra. Das Panch mile nijer dwarete bosiye Kirtan Karaha Sabhe Hate tali diya.
“Assembling with Five to Tens devotee (together with many devotee) sitting in your own courty yard ( or infront of door of your household) - Sing Kirtan by clapping in two hands”
Haray NamH Krishna Yadavaya NamaH Gopal Govinda Ram Sri Madhusudhan .
Note: After instructing Mahamantra Japa keeping count, now Gourhari very clearly and explicitly instructing how to perform Samkirtan with many devotee ( Japa can not be done in the assembly of many devotee with keeping the count and chant) by clapping in hand in absence if any instrument like Mridhanga and Kartal. Even he instructed what to be sang in Kirtan any name of Krishna other than Mahamantra when he said -
Haray NamH Krishna Yadavaya NamaH Gopal Govinda Ram Sri Madhusudhan .
So now this is clearly established the Instruction of Father of Samkirtan what is to be chant in Japa and what is to be sing in Kirtan.
Again in previous section of Shri Chaitanya bhagavata Madhya Khanda chapter 1 while Prabhu initiating Samkirtan movement he is instructing how to perform Samkirtan to his pupil at the end of his teaching lila in Navadwip
Parilam Sunilam Jotodin Dhari Krishner Kirtan koro poripurna Kari.
“For the long time we have studied and listen from many sastra Now perform Krishna Samkirtan to which the process of learning complete and fruitful.”
" SisyaGon Bolen Kemon Samkirtan Apanone Sikhay Prabhu Sri Sachinandan. “
All the disciple asked how to perform Samkirtan , what Samkirtan? Prabhu Sachinanadan taught them by his own self
” Kedar Rag Hari Harayae Nama Krishna Jadavaya NamH: Gopal Govinda Ram Sri Madhusudhan.
Note: Here again we see Sriman Mahaprabhu instructed what to sing in kirtan, the same name Hari Haraya NamH Krishna , but no Mahamantra ( Rag Kedar in Samkirtan : Prabhu even taught the rag of the Kirtan in such minute details)
" Disa Dekhaiya Prabhu Haat Tali Diya Apone Kirtan Kore Sisya Gon Loiya
“
Thus by showing the direction Sriman Mahaprabhu sings himself in Kirtan by clapping hands with with disciple.
Now I hope with the clinching evidence from Prabhu’s first hand pastime narration in Chaitanya Bhagavat we can easily conclude Prabhu never recommended Mahamantra in Kirtan but in Japa.
I am attaching another section of a Book on Das Goswami by Bhajanandi Mahatma Ramkinkar Das Baba of Radhakunda, where from page 570 onwards you can see numerous other evidence and behavior of our Acharyya how they chant Mahamantra ( this is in Bengali, if possible translate this in English for others to understand ).
Even there is an announcement from Goswami’s of Radharaman temple Sri Banmali Lal Goswami saying, in Radharaman temple also there was no rituals of singing Mahamantra in Kirtan since that is prohibited by sastriya rule. Hope this would help.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2019 13:44:23 GMT -6
Here is the attached snapshot from the book of Das Goswami by Ramkinkar das where some of the information is provided.
|
|
|
Post by Ed on Oct 4, 2019 13:57:44 GMT -6
Thanks, Subrata. This follows very much the evidence provided by Sundarananda on this issue as well. Tell us a bit more about Ramkinkar Das Babaji if you can as well, please. I'm interested in trying to understand why this trend started, at what point in history, and how it became a widespread practice as we find it today.
|
|