Questions about chanting

[Susie 0]

Hi everyone!

 

I have been reading here and there about chanting but do not know how to get started.

 

I am new to all of this and do not have a guru. What kind of beads are used?

 

Thanks,

Susie

 

 

[Guest guest]

i have answered to you in audarya...

 

generally are used beads made of tulasi wood..

 

but chanting mahamantra and reciting a regular daily number of it is extremely more important than the instrument you use for doing it

 

when prabhupada came in the west, there were not tulasi beads, the devotees made simple japa malas with wooden red pearls bought in a shop in new york

 

the devotees who received them, are still chanting on them.. they're given by the spiritual master, prabhupada, so they're as sacred as tulasi ones

[Azygos 0]

I dont think you necessarily need beeds to chant. They are all symbols, and you dont need too many of them.

Chanting is generally beneficial when the guru initiates the disciple into a particular mantra.

Of course, you dont really need a guru until you are ready. "When the student is ready, the teacher wont be far away"

 

Regards,

Saurav

 

[Guest guest]

I dont think you necessarily need beeds to chant

––simply one needs to execute the advice of the guru, and the guru advices to chant at least a fixed number of mantras. And to do it mala is very useful and practical.. and if it is made of something sacred, it is more helpful.

 

but it is not essential, the essential thing is the number

 

--

 

Chanting is generally beneficial when the guru initiates the disciple into a particular mantra.

---hare krsna mahamantra is already given freely to everyone by sri chaitanya mahaprabhu. One has to find a pure guru (tattva darshinah.. who sees the absolute truth, krsna.. as bhagavad gita says) to make the chanting a conclusive instrument to go back to godhead, but the chanting has to be done even before to express, to krsna, the desire to take shelter in one of his intimate associates.. the pure gurus

 

mantra is asking devotion.. devotion is asking a guru... then the conclusive process starts

 

"When the student is ready, the teacher wont be far away"

--the "readyness" is achieved by chanting

[Azygos 0]

Yes, if one wants to work the path of bhakti, then chanting is essential.

 

But in the path of karma and gyana it is not required

 

Even in raja yoga, ordinary chanting does not help.

 

Regards,

Saurav

 

[Guest guest]

Yes, if one wants to work the path of bhakti, then chanting is essential.

 

--god can be reached only by love, service, surrendering.... our actions (karma) and intellect (jnana) have no sufficient power to conquer him who is greatest being us tiniest.

Inside love there's knowledge of the beloved (jnana) and action in favor of the beloved (karma)..

 

so consider it.. spirituality is a real need for living entities, actually the only need... not some form of intellectuality or a game where you stick to the rules of the game only because previously you have decided to play it

 

the name of god is god himself.. because god has not duality..

 

how can we say that god is not necessary being simulteneously spiritual seekers, dharmic practitioneers and so on?

 

do your karma, jnana, yoga and chant hare krsna.. this chanting will give sense, purity and power to everything

 

[Subham 0]

Hari OM:

 

"do your karma, jnana, yoga and chant hare krsna.. this chanting will give sense, purity and power to everything"

 

Very good, i fully agree with you.

 

i would also add, in addition to chanting, please think about Him as much as possible, irrespective of whatever we are doing, in this way the mind gets de-tangled from the material things and starts slowly moving towards Him

[vishiva 0]

In Kaliyuga.

 

you can't just remain detached from the materialistic views. so chanting brings you the image of god and his presence in you knowingly or unknowingly. so its essential that one should chant from heart always.

 

there is no prescribed way to chant(use of beads,use of mat,sit in front of idol,only in puja room...etc.). but yes there is a prescribed way to pronounce it. as the vibration is good to you and others . not only the mahamantra. but every mantra when you chant you should know the pronounciation and that can be learned from the guru only . or the perfect disciple of that god or demi-god.

 

but chanting is pleasure. you need not open your mouth or shout for chanting but its done in heart. as your heart beats on its own. chanting goes on its own. the only thing that you practice a bit to train your self. and then leave it and don't disturb your self. God in you shall show the importance of chanting....then no question arise.

 

"there can be only one either God or you,so if you want to see God then you have to dissolve in him. you can't measure the depth of ocean by the scale made of salt. its same like you can't see God but you get dissolve in him , wish that dissolution happens quickly. that should be the goal of life"

 

[Guest guest]

not only the mahamantra. but every mantra

--yes.. if the personality who have that name is transcendental, we ask to him to come to rescue us from material bondage and he comes.... Krsna, Vishnu, Ramachandra, Narasimha, Narayana, Shiva and so on.. The discussione wheter he's supreme or not, is, at this stage useless... If it is a bona fide path with the presence of a bona fide guru (tattva darshinah.. one who sees, relationates, and live with god), the results will be there.

But the mentality that we are god, in the sense that we are the one who we are calling with nama, is a big obstacle for the conclusive effect of chanting... If we were god, we were not unconscious of it and there were no need of any mantra.

 

you need not open your mouth or shout for chanting but its done in heart. as your heart beats on its own. chanting goes on its own..

--you are very optimistic... chanting has to be done daily, more as we can (at least in the number of mantras asked by the spiritual master), with deep effort in achieving concentration. Chanting in the heart is good, but also chanting with voice or even singing is good.. and it is merciful to other living beings because they, by hearing, can virtually have the same benefit as our chanting

 

if you want to see God then you have to dissolve in him

--no.. it is impossible and not attractive. To chant means to call a lover.. and to love there's the need of simultaneous union and separation, not only union.

[vishiva 0]

 

yes friend, i agree what you say.

 

I am optimistic in all ways by saying that God is in you. so don't shout at yourself. just call him with love he will bloom in you and you will relish.

 

God is not sitting 1000000 miles away from you and you have to call him shouting or yelling . infact he is with in you and to realise this. we do all unusual things and make your mind comfortable.once you stop he will go 1000000 miles away and you do your rubbish activities of world.thats fun isn't thats what many do. but its not true.

 

mind is the center point when you calm it you see God in self. else if he comes in front of you also you won't find much different.as you know God is everywhere right? just tell me can you go and worship your neighbour and say you are god i am worshiping you now onwards....no right why so because you have put him in your mind space as so and so and have put an opinion. and like wise you are also created a beautiful opinion for God in your mind as powerful and lovable.but truth is he is in you. try today call him with love from your heart and he will reflect on you.that is power of love and God.

 

mind - creates you world. nobody can change it. you alone can change it. chanting is done to control your mind and when your mind rests there is God in you.

 

experience it. you will shout to everybody that God is in you. not away. we are not to call him and love him and send him back. but he is always withinus to love. its wakeing yourself to see him and then dissolve. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

Chant Hare Krishna: Hare Ram:

[Azygos 0]

There can be either god or you???

 

God is within you, the brahman is within you.....

 

Sri Krishna explicitly mentions in the geeta that karma

can lead to the highest.... the warrior who dies in the

battlefield can attain moksha

 

Gyana is not dry intellect....it is the knowledge of

discrimination....gyana is ALWAYS greater than bhakti

 

The path of bhakti is beautiful for one can enjoy god

in it. Yet, it will not the highest realization....

It can never serve the purpose of the agnostic

 

Hence, gyana is true merging of the atman with the

brahman.....it is only in the path of gyana that

maya....the power emanating from brahman which is the

root cause of time, space and causation, dissolves

Only when maya dissolves can the state of sat-chit-ananda

be acheived.

 

Prabhupara, great as he was, was ultimately a dualistic teacher

The final conclusion of vedanta is advaita....or absolute monism

Hence, Vivekananda;s assertion that all 3 paths of

dvaita, visitadvaita and advaita are true, and advaita is the highest truth is the fundamental truth which has to be realized.

A dualist can never attain the state of nirvikalpa samadhi

(absolute loss of body consciousness), hence he can never envisage the absolute true nature of brahman

 

Regards,

Saurav

 

[Guest guest]

God is not sitting 1000000 miles away from you and you have to call him shouting or yelling

--from a practical point of view god is completely away from us. We have not to use our speculation and fantasy to imagine a fake perception or oneness with god. We have to go to a real guru and ask the necessary advices and practices to follow his steps, that's bhagavad gita.. that's the only way to get results. If to find god was an easy thing, to be done with speculations everyone should be perfectly conscious..

 

mind is the center point when you calm it you see God in self.

--god s independent by the fact that i calm my mind. I am not the one who makes god appear, it is god who mercyfully appears.. or not... as he wants

 

god is great... mind is little... it is not mind who finds god

 

i do not believe blindly in anything.. the remaining your message about fusion and so on is surely very satisfying for you, but for me there's not logic..

 

so.. having not the same feeling as yourself.. i offer to you my respect

 

[vishiva 0]

 

there need not be any logic to see the perception of God my dear friend.

 

" it is god who mercyfully appears"

 

God is not there to appear or disappear . and he is neither mercyful or merciless but we ourself close our eyes(not physical one)and don't see him.he is all the time with us only . we need to open our eyes. these eyes are now just seeing with minds opinion or assumptions.as we have surrendered with mind and no control.which sees only logic everywhere.

 

God in you - means what you percieve to be God is with you only. as you mentioned correct "so.. having not the same feeling as yourself"

 

that feeling is your own mind space. ask yourself but don't see logic in everything. your mindspace has different things and aswell mine. may be different or unique. that can never match that is greatness. as we have to let our mind know that God is ourselfs and it can only be see by our minds perception not with others or logic.

 

not all things have logic my friend. as logic itself is The branch of philosophy that analyzes inference. and again inference is nothing but the sayings of different minds perception. then where shall you end. just think it over.

 

i too offer your respect. God in you shall let you know in your way. (my words are not to hurt any reader but if it makes one understand in his way . that is very beautiful)

 

Hare Krishna Hare Rama

[Guest guest]

"There can be either god or you???"

 

yes.. god is everything... so he's also variety. There's father and sons, there's supreme and servants. So how can i relationate with god? In the absolute there's also relationship, otherwise how can it be in our conditionated world?

 

"Sri Krishna explicitly mentions in the geeta that karma

can lead to the highest.... the warrior who dies in the

battlefield can attain moksha"

 

liberation from suffering is not better than love. And the karma yoga in bhagavad gita is action with bhakti, it is actually bhakti "man mana mad bhava..." think of me "sarva dharma...." leave every dharma and surrender to me...

 

"Gyana is not dry intellect....it is the knowledge of

discrimination....gyana is ALWAYS greater than bhakti"

 

jnana is inside bhakti.. who knows the beloved better than the lover?

 

"It can never serve the purpose of the agnostic"

 

agnostic means "who is ignorant".. So let us inform him. Where's the problem?

 

"Hence, gyana is true merging of the atman with the

brahman...."

 

who cares of merging if there's love?

 

"Only when maya dissolves can the state of sat-chit-ananda

be acheived."

 

opposite.. is when we , through god's mercy, get sat-cit-ananda state that maya leaves tha place

 

"Prabhupara, great as he was, was ultimately a dualistic teacher"

 

wrong... Prabhupada taught "acynthia beda abeda tattva".. we are simultaneously and inconcevaibly different and not different from the supreme lord. Advaita and dvaita are both not complete knowledge

 

"The final conclusion of vedanta is advaita....or absolute monism"

 

no.. because it depicts a god worst than humans and a spiritual environment with less features that the material one. It is real.. but nirguna brahman is not the only reality. There's Bhagavan.. the one who has all opulences and features. Simultaneously at the same level of transcendence

 

"there need not be any logic to see the perception of God my dear friend."

 

so why are you discussing?

 

"my words are not to hurt any reader"

 

mine too.. what's the utility of hurt?

 

 

harekrsna!!!

 

[vishiva 0]

"So how can i relationate with god?"

 

If there is relation you can't see him,in many janma's. there can only be one and if you see him in yourself,and dissolve in him. there is no question of relating and explaining to otherse. relation is just to identify someone to somebody.for self realisation there is no relation and maintaining that relation that is earthtly.(In-laws's,son,father,mother,lover)..

 

God is a feeling in yourself. take it in any name any form which your mind space has percieved. your feelings which is real love. he is not just a person who sits on your head and seeing if you are reciting and understanding BG and give liberation.

 

God is calm,quite,knower of your own mind. that is greatness and wisdom. you will flower love and compassion when you see him within you. not apart from you.

 

he is in you . He shall reveal in you. and you shall have his love and compassion.

[Guest guest]

everything you have said about human relationship as false identification is right..

 

this world is maya..

 

but if something exists under maya's realm.. it exists also under god's realm.. because god is everything and the origin of everything..

 

like two lovers you and god are simultaneously one and different...

 

god says in gita "surrender to me..." not "let us merge"

 

do not be limited, to understand that we are only one with god is a limited human consideration. Because we see that in this world the relationships are conflicts, we imagine that in the absolute there's no relationship..

 

but it is wrong as to say that we and god are'nt one..

 

so we are one and different simultaneoulsy..

 

god is inconceivable..

[Azygos 0]

The problem is you are interpreting the bhagavad geeta from prabhupara's viewpoint and it is in direct contradiction to the highest viewpoint. Karma will lead to the highest, so will gyana, so will bhakti...

 

Buddha was agnostic, yet he attained nirvana

 

Secondly, the path of the bhakti is very good only for the emotional type

For the active person -> karma

for the psychic -> raja

for the philosopher -> jyana

 

Since, no person is absolutely classifiable under any of these cateogires, following an amalgum of all 4 paths is the ideal

 

No dualist can attain nirvikalapa samadhi.....at that point man will stand on Krishna;s head according to Krishna himself.......

 

Dualism and qualified monism are lower truths than advaita....Prabhupara couldnt realize advaita but that doesnt mean Vivekananda, Ramana Maharshi, etc didnt realize it. Even brahmaloka will disappear when the true feeling of oneness is attained......

 

Also, Prabhupara;s idea that only those who surrender to Krishna will be saved is just a parallel of catholics who say those who surrender to jesus will be saved......this is the disadvantage with dualism because it is NOT all inclusive, all embracing like advaita

 

THe debate on dvaita and advaita i feel is immaterial.....if you feel dvaita is the highest stick to it, but i dont feel you have the right to point fingers at advaita before realizing nirvikalpa samadhi......

The religion of Hinduism is based on principles, not on personalities, not even is it based on Krishna.

 

Regards,

Saurav

 

[Guest guest]

The problem is you are interpreting the bhagavad geeta from prabhupara's viewpoint and it is in direct contradiction to the highest viewpoint.

--i simply read bhagavad gita. Krsna says "think of me...".. "leave other duties, surrender to me and you'll be free".. that's all. So love does the job.. and inside love there's action (karma) and knowledge (jnana).

 

Buddha was agnostic, yet he attained nirvana

--gita's purpose is not nirvana, simple stopping of material suffering in an eternal coma. Gita is to revive a relationship with bhagavan, the one who has every opulence

 

Secondly, the path of the bhakti is very good only for the emotional type

--no.. that's wrong. Material emotions bring to sahaja, simulation, the more anti bhakti behaviour existent. Bhakti is natural.. for first is achieved by acting, practicing and studying.. then.. naturally, when krsna starts to manifestate, being the all attractiv, cannot inspire love in the practitioneer..

 

Since, no person is absolutely classifiable under any of these cateogires, following an amalgum of all 4 paths is the ideal

--again.. inside love there's everything. It is an activity (karma), a behaviour (raja), a consciousness (jnana)... everything done to please the lover

 

Dualism and qualified monism are lower truths than advaita

--prabhupada (and my humble self) does not speak anything about monism or dualism. I have alredy said.. chaitanya and gaudya parampara speaks of acynthia beda abeda.

 

Also, Prabhupara;s idea that only those who surrender to Krishna will be saved is just a parallel of catholics

--it can be a parallel.. but it is also gita who says that who surrenders to krsna, leaving all other duties, he's saved.

 

THe debate on dvaita and advaita i feel is immaterial.....

---no... it is useless, every each philosophy is not complete

 

if you say that prabhupada is a dvaitist, you have not studied him enough to criticize.. maybe you have not opened a book

 

The religion of Hinduism is based on principles

---hinduism means everything and the opposite.. Who cares?

[Guest guest]

"cannot inspire love in the practitioneer.."

 

is .. cannot avoid to inspire love ...

[vishiva 0]

 

Dwitha or adhvaitha. is nothing but minds perception. Let may be adi shankarar or may be bhuddha.

 

they followed what they perceived in there mind and they both were definte in getting there liberation.

 

so we need to learn that the contradictions are done only by the followers.

 

as both are the path ways to lead to oneness . it can't be easily taken that once you follow this you will never get liberation.

 

its like a wheel and the paths are like the spokes in that wheel. all lead to the center. if you sit in the center and see its adhvaitha. and if you are following the spoke to the center that is dwitha as you are seeing the center as well as you.

 

but the spokes are the path for the center and its is the goal of all life. being yourself wise you can march and attain the goal. just sitting and discussing on philosophy you shall hardly march ahead and will be in confusion.

 

no philosophy has said that don't follow other philosophy it only says that if your in one philosophy please do follow the same.that will take to your heights of reality.as it has meaning and values with respect to there view point.

 

if any philosophy says follow mine and don't follow others then that is just joke. just smile don't feel bad.

 

and regarding Dwitha which is dualism

and adhvaitha which is oneness.

 

Krishna is in both the philoshophy. may be arujuna and krishan discourse in BG is limited but has lot of values which din't cover much practice or may be undefined.

 

like arjuna was in dualism first and at the end he was with the oneness. like he was in he spoke of the wheel and krishna lead him to center.

 

just keep your mind clear . the rest will flow on its own. make your mind space to choose the path and the path will be lit by the higher souls.This is truth.

 

God in you will reveal that.

[Guest guest]

Dwitha or adhvaitha. is nothing but minds perception

--yes.. you are right. I am speaking of "acynthia beda abeda tattva" who is, as said, acynthia... unconcevaible by the mind

 

just sitting and discussing on philosophy you shall hardly march ahead and will be in confusion.

--yes.. even krsna says it... "think of me with love... man mana mad bhava bhakto...". One of these way of thinking is chanting with love hare krsna mahamantra..

 

i am not interested in negating your way of thinking.. if you want you have a system to enhance your spirituale research whatever can be..

 

the system is chanting in concentration ten minutes everyday (then if you like you can increase) this mantra:

 

hare krsna

hare krsna

krsna krsna

hare hare

hare rama

hare rama

rama rama

hare hare

 

that's a more practical and effective way to call the revelation of god, instead of simply keeping mind clear.

A clear table is necessary to have a good dinner... but on the clear table we have to bring food, otherwise the clean table will make us remain hungry

 

so keep everything... add hare krsna? this is my (actually krsna's) gift

 

 

[Azygos 0]

Reading bhagavad geeta as it is, without a good commentary is dangerous for beginners because there is great danger of misinterpreting the statements of Krishna.....

 

Sorry, you have reduced Hinduism to a dualistic religion like Christianity. THat is not the essence of Hinduism

The problem with all abrahamic faiths is if the existence of their founders like Jesus becomes disputed, the whole religion will fall flat. But in Hinduism, even if Krishna;s existence is belied, nothing will happen because the very basis of Hinduism is in its principles. There is no place for personalities.

 

but it is also gita who says that who

surrenders to krsna, leaving all other duties, he's saved.

->>here Sri Krishna assures us that if we want to go beyond all Dharmas (actions and endeavours to become Free), the desire that springs from the sattvik guna of Prakriti, the only recourse left to us is to seek God without the adjunct of Maya. This is Advaita, pure monism!

 

->>The important point to remember here is that as a concept, Sri Krishna preaches only Advaita, but as method - Yoga - to reach that level of Absolute Consciousness, to realize the Highest Truth in principle (the Tattva of it) one has to start with the worship of God with adjuncts of Maya -the personal God or Ishwara.

 

 

if you say that prabhupada is a dvaitist, you have not studied him enough to criticize.. maybe you have not opened a book

->> Any person who declares that freedom is only in believers of Krishna but not for others, who declares that jyana takes us merely to higher materialistic worlds, who declares that mayavadis are fools, who delcares that the highest goal is to be in brahmaloka seems to be a dualist and nothing more.

 

Read this article to clear some doubts

http://www.geocities.com/neovedanta/gitac.html

 

Regards,

Saurav

 

 

[Guest guest]

Reading bhagavad geeta as it is, without a good commentary

--in my bhagavad gita there's no shortage of commentaries

 

Sorry, you have reduced Hinduism to a dualistic religion like Christianity. THat is not the essence of Hinduism

--hindusim is many religions together.. even opposite sometimes. So it is very difficult and actually useless to find his essence. For the dualism fact... it is manifest that you are prepared to discuss with dualists, and you go on with your objections even if i have said that dualism is not my philosophy

 

But in Hinduism, even if Krishna;s existence is belied, nothing will happen because the very basis of Hinduism is in its principle

-- If the personalities of the literature are fakes, why the message is not a fake? This is not a good propaganda for hinduism

 

the only recourse left to us is to seek God without the adjunct of Maya. This is Advaita, pure monism!

--no.. that's not monism. Monism means one, here we have two subjects, god and the god's seeker... and it is not ended with searching, it is ended with surrendering. Surrendering means that i give up my opposition and i become a lover, a servant... if gita wanted merging, the message should have been "first find then merge...".

But we have "find god (approaching and following instructions given by a spiritual master) than surrender"

 

Any person who declares...

--definitely you don't know... first study, then have an opinion... and if you aren't dualist, why your opinion is good and mine is bad?

 

so be coherent with your idea...

 

so.. go on with your beliefs, there's no harm. This thread is simply about chanting hare krsna and other god's names..

 

if you find it positive.. chant them.. where's the difficulty?

..

 

thanks for the link you have provided...