Tattva-viveka
The ways we chant
Zvonimir Tosic - March 15, 2008 12:50 pm
The ways we chant
We attracted to Gaudiya Vaisnavism chant, of course, but after some time in Krsna Consciousness I've started to ask myself why I do that? And especially: how I do that, which way is inspiring and dear to me? I also had some conversations about the subject matter and I'd like to share my thoughts with you, looking for your valuable insights and inspiration.
Sanatana Goswami's Hari-bhakta-vilasa (17.154-161) states and summarises that chanting within mind (manasa) is much more effective (and powerful) than chanting with murmur (upamshu, opening lips slightly, whispering), and that chanting with murmur / whispering is much more effective than loud chanting (vachika).
This, however, is contradicted by some other statements, like that one from Haridas Thakur in Caitanya Bhagavata,
apato hari-namani sthane shata-gunadhikah...
where he says that a person who loudly chants the Holy Name is hundreds of times better than one who performs japa, obviously because the former benefits many other living beings, nor just himself/herself.
In the book The Divine Name, Raghava Caitanya (a disciple of Bhaktivaibhava Puri Goswami Maharaja) seems to over-emphasise this idea of loud chanting, especially through this example of Haridas Thakur.
It seems majority prefer the latter explanations, thus supporting the idea of loud chanting. For example, during the time I've spent with ISKCON devotees, I never saw anyone chanting silently -- but by whispering, or even very loudly, yes, and it seems it was a common practice no one questioned.
This brings me back to present, and now I observe this subject matter from the perspective of my new, personal experiences. I recently had a conversation with a friend of mine. After some very disturbing and difficult time in ISKCON (and the loss of his diksa guru, Harikesa Swami), he has found an all new inspiration, new vision and also new diksa guru (Sadhu Maharaja). He tells me that since then, his japa has so much improved, that he finally started to realise how beautiful maha mantra is, how sweet Krishna's name is and he told me that more he chants .. more he chants in his mind. He has spent 10 years chanting loudly and he never experienced such changing, inspiring sensation.
So he also confirmed Sanatana Goswami's words with his own experience. I somehow smiled favourably to his inspiring words because in myself I felt exactly the same; I find myself chanting more and more in my mind than loudly or whispering. That change intrigued me, and then I started exploring the mystery of silent, intimate prayer.
In Christianity, there are many examples of saintly persons praying to Lord silently, or barely whispering. It seems to be very common thing in their private meditations. Loud chanting seems to be more reserved for the mass, resembling kirtana in Gaudiya tradition, where other peole are encouraged to participate. Bible also indicates that Jesus has prayed silently or almost silently in his solitude, and that his disciples tried very hard to hear what he was praying.
In Gaudiya Vaisnavism, the example of Haridas Thakur seems to be used to emphasise loud chanting, but by pursuing that idea alone, many forget that Haridas was chanting in his mind as well. It is said, he uttered 1/3 of his prayers in the mind alone.
I couldn't compare or explore Buddhism in this brief study because Buddhism is not focused on adoring the personal God.
I have also noted that translation could have caused some confusion: chanting can be translated in so many different ways. Chanting in certain ways can be japa, then bhajan, and kirtan. Whispering and singing and shouting. Although all is about Krishna's beautiful name, there are some nuances and differences between them.
Today we live in a very loud world. Cars, trams, radio, TV, so much noise all around us. Our hearing is not as good and fine as it was hundreds of years ago. We actually hear less. Chanting inside my mind and in a quiet place seems to be a perfect antidote, intimate prayer, that somehow developed all by itself. Hopefully, thanks to Sanatana Goswami and Swami Tripurari.
So, despite what others say, I believe in Sanatana Goswami's words in Hari-bhakta-vilasa and he's my inspiration.
* * *
I would certainly love to hear from you and your valuable experiences. Philosophical and practical views. I hope you don't mind my personal observation and revealing a secluded part of my life I usually don't share with other people. But it was needed, to explain the subject matter better. I believe this is vital, very important subject matter to us all. Thank you.
Madan Gopal Das - March 15, 2008 1:51 pm
Guru Maharaj has answered this question several times recently that I can remember. One instance that comes to mind is on our sanga call where Nanda Tanuja asked this question, referencing what you have from Hari Bhakti Vilasa. Maybe Mr. NT can give you his purport to Swami's answer, but here is what I remember, along with personal experience.
Swami also brought out the example of nama-acarya Thakur Haridas that you have noted is often emphasized. Our emphasis is on loud chanting because of the the benefit for others; we do have such an emphasis on outreach. While emphasizing this angle GM also makes the point that chanting in any of these three ways is not better than another, but rather we need to do what is most effective for us. A positive aspect of loud chanting that you neglected to mention is that out loud chanting captures the mind much more effectively than silent chanting. And this is where we must gauge our own level of "mind control", focus or concentration. It is very difficult to keep the mind concentrated on the mantra while keeping silent. The mind will run to the out loud chanting much more easily. But then again, if one's mind is that strong that one can keep concentrated, silent chanting may be very beneficial.
My own take is that there is not a general rule you can make about this. The best chanting for you is the practice that works best for you. 
I notice the effectiveness of all three types of chanting depending upon circumstances.
Today we live in a very loud world. Cars, trams, radio, TV, so much noise all around us. Our hearing is not as good and fine as it was hundreds of years ago. We actually hear less. Chanting inside my mind and in a quiet place seems to be a perfect antidote, intimate prayer
As you say, we live in a very loud world. And I am saying that the mind follows the senses. If there are a lot of loud things to hear, the mind is very easily distracted. When I am in "loud" circumstances, or my mind is recovering from being in a loud environment, loud chanting serves my mind much better. When things in my mind and the world have quieted down, I love to chant silently. But I remain on the watch for when my mind is not engaged and then it truly is helpful to chant loudly and "bring the mind back" to the mantra. What can I say? All three types of chanting are the best!
I think also that in the past I have been turned off by my experiences of people "beating the mind" with the mantra by gathering in a large group and everyone trying to chant louder than the others so they can hear themselves chant. That is totally distracting and can be frustrating to me - making me want to go to a silent place and chant silently. When chanting in a group, one should only chant loud enough to hear oneself. Others don't need to hear us, they need to hear themselves. Big difference here between kirtan and japa.
Zvonimir Tosic - March 15, 2008 2:47 pm
Guru Maharaj has answered this question several times recently that I can remember. One instance that comes to mind is on our sanga call where Nanda Tanuja asked this question, referencing what you have from Hari Bhakti Vilasa. Maybe Mr. NT can give you his purport to Swami's answer, but here is what I remember, along with personal experience.
Thank you for your purport.
I've tried to search TV for the subject matter beforehand, but I've found that process to be very exhausting. I presumed something was already written about it ...
As in everything else, there's no definite answer, as you say. I personally find myself same as you; sometime I like chanting slightly louder, then quieter, then silent. And that silent part was completely unknown to me for a long time, an unknown road. That's why I've started this thread, just to hear from you. And I was also inspired by my friend who has found an all new devotional life, all new energy.
But then I was asking myself about the intimate nature of the silent, quiet prayer, which is present in human society through centuries. That one seemed to me to be a basis for loud kirtan, or congregational chant and that's how I've understood Sanatana Goswami's words.
Prema-bhakti - March 15, 2008 3:05 pm
Nice topic Zvonimir. Nice reply Madana.
I also prefer chanting softly but as you say when I catch my mind wandering off I raise my voice so I can capture the mind again. I find a combination of chanting softly and sometimes more loudly works for me. As you say, there are no hard and fast rules to chanting glorious and merciful Sri Nama.
Swami - March 15, 2008 3:48 pm
I've tried to search TV for the subject matter beforehand, but I've found that process to be very exhausting. I presumed something was already written about it ...
The search method onthe Sanga archives may be better. This is a good place to look for references in general.
As in everything else, there's no definite answer, as you say.
I think there is a definitive answer to the apparent contradiction you have raised.
Bhrigu - March 15, 2008 3:59 pm
Thank you for your posting, Zvonimir! I also see that Guru Maharaja's call for more shastra has paid off. Personally, I prefer upamsu japa if I do it at home in a (more or less) silent environment. I sometimes do manasika-japa, but I find it harder, and paradoxically slower than upamsu. If there is a lot of outside noice I usually go vacika, without even thinking about it.
It was something of a revelation for me when I started to associate with Gaudiya Matha devotees to notice that nobody did vacika-japa. I'm not sure why, but very quickly I got used to upamsu, and nowadays I usually find it very distracting to do japa around loud chanters, especially if they walk back and forth (though I perfectly well remember from my brahmacari-days a good reason for why people do it -- so that they won't fall asleep).
Still, there must be a reason for the ISKCON style of loud japa. Even the word chanting for japa brings to mind (at least for a non-native speaker like me) something loud, almost aggressive. I wonder whether it is just some kind of fashion that just took over (like the style of wearing the dhoti seems to be -- in old pictures you'll see men wearing their dhoties like in the Gaudiya Matha) or if Prabhupada wanted his disciples to chant like this? At least that was the impression I got in ISKCON, that one should chant loud enough for the one sitting next to hear.
Guru-nistha Das - March 15, 2008 4:12 pm
Hey Z.
here are a couple of threads that I found very helpful in this regard:
http://tattvaviveka.ipbhost.com/index.php?...&hl=anartha
http://tattvaviveka.ipbhost.com/index.php?...amp;hl=lethargy
Prema-bhakti - March 15, 2008 4:45 pm
Just a few more thoughts:
If I remember correctly there is an article by Srila Sridhara Maharaja where he explains BSST's emphasis on sankirtana and he describes japa almost as merely an obligation. I'll try to find it and post the link.
There is also a nice discussions in Bhakti-sandarbha how kirtana, the loud chanting of the holy names, is the most efficacious process in Kali-yuga It is the yuga dharma and more than that the prema-dharma. Japa is discussed in the section on smaranam. In Jiva Goswami's commentary he descibes how a pure heart is required to remember the Lord's names and therefore it is not as effective as kirtana. Japa is dyana and so it requires purity. So kirtana purifies us to chant japa more effectively. Japa and kirtana specifically purifies us so we can develop purity and as a result when we do sankirtana we can truly benefit others.
Prema-bhakti - March 15, 2008 4:50 pm
Syamasundara - March 15, 2008 5:31 pm
Oh what a nice thread!
To me, the most efficacious form of chanting is the one I pay attention to. Our mind's attention is like the engine of a car, and the gears are the above-mentioned three ways of chanting; if the two are not connected there is no moving forward.
Chanting in the mind, in my experience and understanding, is superior in that it has the potential to be constant: if I am chanting out loud, I can clear my voice, sneeze, cough, and the flow of the mantra is uninterrupted. With the due practice, not even sleep can interrupt it.
Kirtana is superior because of the outreach factor and because it's harder to space out if you have to sing along with others, and you can cry out your heart better than by monotonous repetition.
The drawbacks of both are that if I chant in the mind, that chanting is of the same quality or substance of any other thought that may arise, and the two may mix like milk in tea. With kirtana it's also very easy to mechanically follow the cadence of the melody or to not pay too much attention, as kirtana can also be monotonous.
At Audarya only recently people chant silently (well, make it 7 years), while the old schoolers may or may not, GM included who can be heard from his room. Thank God for that, the liberty I mean, because I like to pace and chant in a soft but reverberating way. To have to go silent, because that's the fashion within the mission would just be a waste of time for me, but it's good to know that, if and when I go silent, no one is thinking I am falling asleep of spacing out, especially since I don't even do that annoying jiggling of each bead for the duration of the mantra.
One thing that I cannot explain, and do not recommend, is that my japa (whispered) is most efficacious and becomes alive, when and where I am not supposed to chant, like on the bus, or in an unclean state... go figure. Nama Prabhu is a person, and quite independent, but that's also a reason to keep attentive while having audience with him.
Zvonimir Tosic - March 15, 2008 10:25 pm
The search method onthe Sanga archives may be better. This is a good place to look for references in general.I think there is a definitive answer to the apparent contradiction you have raised.
Dear Swami,
Thank you for joining in this thread.
Also, as you have probably noted, my message was partly about Sri Guru, and obviously about his important role in this subject matter.
And that part was very important to me because after I was thinking about the friend of mine, and his wonderful new vigour and strength -- an all new person -- I couldn't but notice that a new diksa guru has brought in something new into his life. Something unknown to him, unseen, untasted before.
I was so happy for him, but I was also saddened ... the sad conclusion was his own remark, when he observed his past life and also his other friends and people he knew. Many didn't go and look for a new diksa guru, but have rather remained within the embrace of the institution.
"Was I living just in theory", he queried, "and the fall of the ex-guru was a curtain that finally has shown an illusion I was fed with"?
"I was living to experience this, and yet it took a radical move in order to get it. I was feeling trapped like inside some labyrinth, and whomever I've asked for a direction, gave me no real answer. I was circling around. The only thing left to me was heading straight through the walls of the labyrinth, hoping my head was strong enough and that I'm close enough to the outside world. If I was trapped too deep inside, I'd never escape".
Zvonimir Tosic - March 16, 2008 1:07 am
Just a few more thoughts:If I remember correctly there is an article by Srila Sridhara Maharaja where he explains BSST's emphasis on sankirtana and he describes japa almost as merely an obligation. I'll try to find it and post the link.
There is also a nice discussions in Bhakti-sandarbha how kirtana, the loud chanting of the holy names, is the most efficacious process in Kali-yuga It is the yuga dharma and more than that the prema-dharma. Japa is discussed in the section on smaranam. In Jiva Goswami's commentary he descibes how a pure heart is required to remember the Lord's names and therefore it is not as effective as kirtana. Japa is dyana and so it requires purity. So kirtana purifies us to chant japa more effectively. Japa and kirtana specifically purifies us so we can develop purity and as a result when we do sankirtana we can truly benefit others.
The article you mentioned is "Totalitarian War Against Illusion".
Let me note few things about wars. I think I can add something an correlate with this subject because I've survived one war and I went through tough military training.
Everyday people going into war without any formal training are just that -- everyday people. Cannon fodder. They don't know what they're fighting with, or fighting for, they don't how to fight and what's more important, they don't know how to survive. They can duck and cover or they can grab a rifle, jump out of trenches and shout out loudly, for a second or two maybe, shortly before they fall down struck by machine gun fire. And they're gone. Were they great? Shall we call them martyrs? Who's gonna fight now instead of them, and who will fill up our breaking defence lines? They were careless. And also ignorant.
So, you see, training is crucial. Discipline, experience, following orders but also thinking clearly with your own head. On many occasion you will be left alone, for weeks maybe, deep into enemy's territory. You'll be also thrown into a situation where you can judge if your designated commanding officer in the new operation tells you nonsense or a cunning strategy. More training you have, and more versatile it is, the better you will be and better you will sense potential danger. Now correlate all this with our devotional path.
We must have our training. That's where guru helps enormously. He is crucial. But we also MUST have our strength, our stamina. A will to survive. That's our dhyana, our japa, our personal prayer. What are we fighting for? We alone have to answer that question, not someone else. Without that, only thing we can do is to show ourselves in front of the others and start shouting loudly, playing a "crazy moment of glory" suicidal act that can only fool others, less experienced soldiers, to follow us blindly. And they all will die with us.
So we must be careful. We cannot imitate great heroes. Haridas Thakur was more an exception than a rule, and we cannot imitate him. Well, maybe I'm wrong, but sometimes I ask myself why everyone talks about his ecstasy and his loud chanting and yet, it seems, people forget the words of Dasa Goswami and Sanatana Goswami, who are carefully instructing us how to chant, how to pray, how to build up strength and stamina.
Swami has mentioned in one of his lessons lately, that Goswamis left so many instructions for us, we need to follow them, especially Rupa and Sanatana. And there were others, big personalities, who were with Mahaprabhu and full of love, mad of love, but we cannot follow them and their example. We need training, thorough and tough training, so we're not fooled. We need it to survive. Yes, it is a war outside, but a careful soldier worths two. And when the time comes, and we know what we're doing, we can surely jump out and shout out loudly, following our generals. Then everyone can follow safely, because realised and smart people are leading the way. We feel protected by their mere presence. Then victory is at hand.
Prema-bhakti - March 16, 2008 1:33 am
One reason I posted the article by Srila Sridhara Maharaja was to demonstrate how sadhus/acaryas may have different viewpoints, as you pointed out in your initial post. BSST expanded the concept of kirtana beyond even what Mahaprabhu and the Six Goswamis taught.
Zvonimir Tosic - March 16, 2008 3:01 am
One reason I posted the article by Srila Sridhara Maharaja was to demonstrate how sadhus/acaryas may have different viewpoints, as you pointed out in your initial post. BSST expanded the concept of kirtana beyond even what Mahaprabhu and the Six Goswamis taught.
Dear Prema Bhakti,
Yes, thank you for this.
I loved that input and just wanted to show things I've witnessed. Hope it's ok.
Kirtana is beautiful and its concept is vast. Yet before, I had a strange feeling sometimes, that a kirtana I'm in .. I didn't feel it right. I was looking for my shortcomings and yet, after some time, I've also found that people who were leading them, such kirtans, abandoned the path and I also realised later that many of them just wanted to be loud. They just wanted to shoot. And in the front of everyone else.
So the motive was all wrong. They wanted to imitate Haridas, and other great devotees, but the substance was missing.
And then I went back to Dasa Goswami's explanations and were thinking about them. What he wanted to say? There must have been a very good reason, very deep thought behind his words.
Madan Gopal Das - March 16, 2008 3:54 am
So we must be careful. We cannot imitate great heroes. Haridas Thakur was more an exception than a rule, and we cannot imitate him. Well, maybe I'm wrong, but sometimes I ask myself why everyone talks about his ecstasy and his loud chanting and yet, it seems, people forget the words of Dasa Goswami and Sanatana Goswami, who are carefully instructing us how to chant, how to pray, how to build up strength and stamina.
Please don't forget that Haridas Thakur is given the title namacarya - One who's example of chanting should be followed. Not imitated, but he is a teacher of teachers in how to chant. If maya-devi herself comes to test me (which she does so often that I have forgotten that there is a test anymore) I would probably best be suited with screaming the name with all the wind in my lungs! I just keep thinking back to that point that loud chanting pulls on the mind and is needed as often as the mind requires some reigning in. The more tamed our mind, the more we can trust it a little - but be careful! Very important to be wise to where our mind is at. Thus the emphasis on kirtan. Hard to be distracted in kirtan except by leaving...
I detect an underlying theme in your posts in this thread with the purpose of favoring contemplation/dhyana over outreach/kirtan. Maybe this comes from experiencing the over(?) emphasis on outreach without substantial meditation and realization to back it up. I can relate to that, but we have to be careful to keep all instructions in balance.
Syamasundara - March 16, 2008 11:16 am
Kirtana is beautiful and its concept is vast. Yet before, I had a strange feeling sometimes, that a kirtana I'm in .. I didn't feel it right. I was looking for my shortcomings and yet, after some time, I've also found that people who were leading them, such kirtans, abandoned the path and I also realised later that many of them just wanted to be loud. They just wanted to shoot. And in the front of everyone else.
One thing SSM said that stuck with me is that a kirtan is not worth taking part in, unless there is a pure devotee chanting. Many times in Eugene it was just us 3 or 4 newbies. My conclusion was that if you invoke the pure devotees and keep them in your heart, that's probably the second best thing and a valid compromise.
I used to sing loud enough for GM to hear me from his cottage. Gonna be tough now with the temple so far away. Also, I wanted to chant prayers, but again, my underdeveloped concept of humility prevented me from doing such, lest I'd look like a show-off, while the devotees are waiting to have a kirtana. But I am going to change that pretty soon. GM takes his time when he prays before class, because his humility is not theoretical, and his prayers are not a routine. If and when I ever think of what I would do if I was to give a class, I conclude that I would just pray in such a way, that at the end of that, it will be just as good as having given a class, and maybe I'd say a few words about that. Vandana alone can bestow all perfection.
Even if it's reduced to the ajñana timirandhasya at the beginning of an arati, it must be heartfelt and chanted with cognizance, that's like the pin that keeps the whole following kirtana together.
Hari-nama sankirtana is a yajña, and as such it must be executed correctly. The fact that there are no hard and fast rules means that all the space is given to feeling and consciousness, but if that's not in place, then forget it, "apaga y vamonos" (I love that Spanish phrase).
Swami - March 16, 2008 3:14 pm
One thing SSM said that stuck with me is that a kirtan is not worth taking part in, unless there is a pure devotee chanting. Many times in Eugene it was just us 3 or 4 newbies. My conclusion was that if you invoke the pure devotees and keep them in your heart, that's probably the second best thing and a valid compromise.
The idea is more that the kirtana should be one that is about krsnanusilanam of uttama bhakti and thus conducted with the belssing of a suddha-bhakta. Don't enter the kirtana of the mayavadins, etc.
Brahma Dasa - March 16, 2008 5:06 pm
Here is a Sanga on this point:
Professional Performance Kirtana
Zvonimir Tosic - March 16, 2008 10:18 pm
I detect an underlying theme in your posts in this thread with the purpose of favoring contemplation/dhyana over outreach/kirtan. Maybe this comes from experiencing the over(?) emphasis on outreach without substantial meditation and realization to back it up. I can relate to that, but we have to be careful to keep all instructions in balance.
Thank you for this observation.
In fact, I was very interested to hear your opinions about the positive change of my friend, who has started to feel something new and encouraging. It's not about favouring dhyana, but just about change, and him tasting new things he never tasted before (and the one also encouraged by our acaryas).
But after many experiences in life, yes, you're right, I tend to be careful. Starting from myself, I wouldn't like to lead others in kirtan if I'm not fit for the task. Responsibility is important: I may a have driver's licence to drive a car, but not the licence required to drive a bus.
However, I'd gladly join the kirtan performed by a suddha bhakta or a devotee with a proper licence!
Swami - March 17, 2008 4:20 am
This verse tells us how to perfect our chanting:
manah-samharanam saucam maunam mantrartha-cintanam
avyagratvam anirvedo japa-sampatti-hetavah
“In order to perfect one's chanting of japa, one needs to cultivate the following qualities: control of the mind, internal and external purity, silence, contemplation of the mantra's meaning, patience, and steadfastness.” (Hari-bhakti-vilasa 17.129)
Here manah-samharanam means to repeatedly bring the mind back when it wanders to sense objects. Avyagratva means that one should not rush one's chanting in order to finish the fixed number of rounds. Anirveda means that one should not lose hope when one does not attain results as quickly as expected.
Bhaktivinoda Thakura has also given us this instruction on chanting:
japa-kale manake ekagra-bhave lao citte suddha thak vatha katha nahi kao,
namartha cintaha sada dhairyasraya kara namete adara kari krsna-nama smara
“While chanting japa, remember Krsna's name with affectionate respect, concentrate the mind on the chanting alone, be pure in mind and avoid speaking uselessly, contemplate the mantra's meaning, and remain patient.”
Here ekagra-bhave lao (concentrate the mind on the chanting alone) is not intended to preclude thinking of the meaning of the mantra (mananam/contemplation) nor remembrance of the form, qualities and lila (smaranam) of Bhagavan that follows it. While only mananam is mentioned in this song, smaranam is also implied.
Swami - March 17, 2008 1:22 pm
“There are some who are of that opinion because smarana is exclusively connected with consciousness, or more concerned with the subtle part of our existence; so that should be the most effective form of sadhana, or means to the end.
‘Nama-sankirtana has been considered best of all. It has been delineated by the Acaryas. That was especially given by our Guru Maharaj, and the basis is supported by the sastra, Scriptures. But if other Acaryas have shown preference for smarana in any instance, that will be in the sense that kirtana may be in the relativity of the material environment, whereas smarana is independent of the material consideration. From that point of view, smarana may be recommended as the highest, but that is not accepted in a general way. It may be a special opinion.”
Here Pujyapada Sridhara Maharaja is essentially explaining that the reason given for the differing values attributed to the three forms of japa is that where there is audible utterance the mind may not be controlled. It may think of the words and the process of correct utterance, etc. In this sense chanting out loud implies that one’s mind may be less absorbed in the Holy Name and thus distracted from a fixed attention to the significance of the mantra.
Sri Sanatana Prabhu explains it as follows in the section originally cited in this thread.
dhiya yad akshara-srenya varnad varnam padat padam |
sabdartha-cintanabhyasah sa ukto manaso japah ||158||
"Manasa japa involves repeated and intense practice of deep contemplation and meditation on the meaning of each and every syllable of the mantra in one's heart as one slowly progresses from one syllable or part of the mantra to another while chanting it mentally."
Digdarshini tika:
varnad ekasmat kramenanya-varnam vyapya | evam padat padam vyapya | ittham sabdasya arthasya ca yac cintanam anusandhanam tasya abhyasah punah punar avrittih ||158||
"In manasa japa one meditates with one pointed attention on each syllable of the mantra. When the meaning of one syllable fills the heart, then the chanter should move on to concentrate on the meaning of the next syllable of the mantra. Then the mind should be focused on the divine meaning of a word of the mantra and then one should go on to the next word of the mantra. In this way the constant drilling and training of the mind and the heart to repeatedly investigate, visualize and realize the transcendental meaning of each word of the mantra through the process of deep and profound contemplation, reflection, and meditation on it is most powerful."
mantrarnave-
pasu-bhave sthita mantrah kevalam varna-rupinah |
saushumnadhvany uccaritah prabhutvam prapnuvanti hi ||160||
In the Mantrarnava, it is stated that: "Those who chant the mantra while simply uttering the syllables but not meditating on their meaning, are chanting pasu-bhava or animal consciousness. However, the utterance of the mantra with profound contemplation on its meaning arising through the sushumna which runs from the base of the spine to the crown of the head enables the chanter to attain mastery and perfection over the art of chanting if the mercy of the Lord is there.”
Digdarshini tika:
saushumnye sushumnakhya-nadi-sambandhini adhvani cchidra-marge uccaritah santah | prabhutvam samarthyam ||160||
"When someone performs japa with the sound vibration of the mantra passing through and arising from the hole of the sushumna nadi and this chanting is accompanied by the mercy of God, , one becomes a sage and attains success."
So it should be clear that Sanatana Goswami is not merely saying that chanting in one’s mind is inherently superior to chanting out loud, but rather that having control of the mind in japa is superior to not having control of it, and that in as much as manasa japa implies that this control is accomplished, such manasa japa is superior to the other two forms of japa in which this is not accomplished.
Furthermore this section of Hari-bhakti-vilasa does not appear to address of nama japa of Krsna nama or the Hare Krsna maha mantra, but rather mantra japa. The two are not entirely the same. Nor has Sanatana Goswami addressed the value of nama kirtana in comparison to smaranam as he has in Brihad-bhagavatamrta.
Finally, although in many respects we can learn more from Sanatana Goswami, with regard to chanting the Holy Name, we have been directed to the example of Thakura Haridasa by Mahaprabhu himself for advice on chanting. Thus Gaurasundara dubbed the Thakura “Namacarya.” Although it is true that we cannot imitate his standard, we are to learn from it. He chanted in all three forms, and we should not think that when he chanted out loud that his chanting was any less potent than when he chanted in his mind. In all instances he paid attention to the chanting. This is what we should do, and relatively speaking whichever form helps us to do that is superior, as others have pointed out.
Madan Gopal Das - March 17, 2008 3:17 pm
Thank you Guru Maharaj. That is what I call the final word; very conclusive.
I felt like this thread can start to go in the direction of smarana vs. kirtana and led me to think of Chp. 2 of Sri Guru Parampara which clearly spells out BSST's approach to smarana through kirtana - kirtana prabhave smarana haibe se kale bhajana nirjane sambhava. Love that book!
Also, the discussions we've had here about pujala ragapata.... matala harijana kirtana range: great thread
Zvonimir Tosic - March 17, 2008 9:58 pm
Although it is true that we cannot imitate his standard, we are to learn from it. He chanted in all three forms, and we should not think that when he chanted out loud that his chanting was any less potent than when he chanted in his mind. In all instances he paid attention to the chanting. This is what we should do, and relatively speaking whichever form helps us to do that is superior, as others have pointed out.
This is a beautiful conclusion.
I'm glad I've started this thread just to witness this fine explanation. We should all benefit from this. My, Swami, I apologise for using ordinary words only, but you're amazing!
Zvonimir Tosic - March 17, 2008 10:48 pm
I'd like to continue this nice thread. If I may talk about something else too?
Some 10 years before ....
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - March 17, 2008 11:42 pm
looks like new thread to me, lets move this out
Zvonimir Tosic - March 18, 2008 12:09 am
Brian Peterson - April 21, 2008 2:09 am
I was wondering if I could get some chanting advice from anyone here. I've been trying to chant anywhere from one to three rounds every day for quite some time. I find it very powerful as it provides a release from the stress of the day. However, I'm wondering how should one fixate one's mind when chanting? For instance, do you visualize the words of the chant? Divine imagery? Whatever inspires you? I guess I'm lacking in knowledge about this area (I'm obviously a novice) and am curious to see what works for others. Or maybe there is a prescribed method?
Thanks!
Shreekrishna - April 21, 2008 2:27 am
From what little I've heard, one is supposed to listen to the sound of the Mahamantra as one chants it's divine syllables... perhaps that's why it's called attentive chanting (one is listening attentively to oneself chant). I could be wrong, and this is definitely not my forte in devotional service! Something I need to improve long-term for sure!
I usually chant in front of deities, or think of Them as I chant. I sometimes chant in front of my computer's screensaver with deity pictures... but even with this, I feel it's another subtle way of spacing out visually.
Maybe Swami can give us some chanting tips, or advice. I know I desperately need it!
Syama Gopala Dasa - April 21, 2008 6:36 pm
Chant with your heart in the mood of service, that properly ties in with your other thread.