krsna or krishna, singing along or following the kirtan leader

[Haridham 0]

Hare Krsna everyone. I have a couple of curious questions or comments....I think.

 

My comment is about the word Krsna commonly used in iskcon and the word Krishna which is commonly used by the rest of the world. Why is this so?

 

I thing that it was originaly Krsna and the British changed it to Krishna because they coudnt pronounce it. Just like they changed mumbai to bombay and such. Any comments on this.

 

Also I see many Indians when Kirtan is happening they often sing along and devotees wait until the kirtan leader stops to sing.

 

I find the singing along with the kirtan leader to be quiter rude as its like if I am talking and you start talking as well. Plus its Hearing and THEN Chanting.

 

I think Swaranam, Kirtanam, etc etc etc or however that quote goes.

 

So, Chant Hare KRSNA

 

and hear and then chant

 

Haridham

[Guest guest]

"Also I see many Indians when Kirtan is happening they often sing along and devotees wait until the kirtan leader stops to sing."

 

in the hinduism there's not much chanting in the style we do in gaudya vaishnava sampradaya, more often, when it is the time to do so, people chant the devotional songs in choir from start to end (like i have seen in many temples all over india, also in vrindaban... "om jaya jagadisha hare", "hanuman chalisa", "dasavatara" etc..) so it is not a bad behaviour, .. and ... who cares? let everyone chant hare krishna, it is the purpose of kirtan.

 

if one chants also together with the leader, he's very intelligent because he chants twice!!

 

for the pronounce.. both krsna and krishna are bona fide

[Guest guest]

 

My comment is about the word Krsna commonly used in iskcon and the word Krishna which is commonly used by the rest of the world. Why is this so?

 

 

 

The reason it is so is because ISKCON devotees have a tendency to spell transliterated Sanskrit even when they cannot reproduce the diacritical marks.

 

The spelling "Krsna" presupposes that there is a nukta (dot) under the r-kAra, the s-kAra, and the na-kAra. Thus, the actual pronounciation is preserved.

 

However, without the proper diacritical marks, the spelling "krsna" makes no sense. Thus, people will often spell as "Krishna" in order to approximate the pronounciation.

 

However, even this is only an approximation. The "ri" is not an exact reproduction of the R^i-kAra though it is probably close enough for most purposes.

 

If you want to spell transliterated Sanskrit without diacritical marks, but also without sacrificing the pronunciation, I recommend to devotees that they use an adopted transliteration standard like Harvard-Kyoto or ITRANS. In such systems, the name would be spelled as kRSNa or kR^iSNa for the purposes of internet discussions such as these.

 

 

[Guest guest]

please clarifiy that, even if your recomendation for more authenticity is welcomed, people who is chanting hare KRISHNA on japa and kirtan is actually chanting the name of the lord