I originaly posted the thread. My questions concerned the importance payed to Japa Sankirtan in Srivaishanam. My question came as i have heard a lot about how Gaudiyas place importance on Namasankirtan. Now with response to Mano ratnam points, i have a few points.
1) Gaudiyas vaishnavas place importance on Japa/sankirtan and often quote the verse from Brhad-naradiya Purana, yes this is not an authoratative shastra in Sri Vaishanvam. But after speaking to Gaudiyas i dont think they take the verse (hare nama kevalam etc....) as meaning that all we should do for bhakthi is Japa... Remember Arca-Vighrah seva, homa, etc are still practiced by Gaudiya bhakthas.
I think we should consider the Bhagavatham in this context which states that Japa/nama sankirtan is the most important practice in Kaliyuga.
Bhagavatam 12.3.51-52
My dear King, although Kali-yuga is an ocean of faults, there is still one good quality about this age: Simply by chanting the mahā-mantra, one can become free from material bondage and be promoted to the transcendental kingdom.
And yes the Gaudiyas also quote the verse utered by Prahalad, the in the Bhagavatam which speaks of the 9 processed of Bhakthi.
Now i dont think Nama Japa can soley and exlcusively take one to paramapadam, and yeas Mono, this sort of beleif is on par with Jivan
mukthi, which is not in line with Vishsitadvaitam. Takin the above Bhagavatam slokas into consideration and from what Gaudiyas have told me, Japa/sankeertan is given so much importance as
1) In kaliyuga most people lack the qualifications, knowledge and purity to perform Vighra puja, tapas and homas.
2) Japa/sankeertan is very versatile in kaliyuga where most of our world to too impure to do pujas, homa etc... I see ISKCON doing keertan in large cities and market places.
3) Also a Gaudiya bhaktha told me that hearing and chanting the harinama is the first steps to bhakthi, he told me that they chant in the street so that others who would never have heard about bhakthi can hear the holy names and receive some good Karma.
Jai Sri Krishna
mano ratnam <mano1205@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Namaskaram Bharath
> Does this mean that there are other methods (though
> more difficult) as well and if one chooses, he may
> adopt one of the other means while giving up chanting?
> I am aksing this because in the Gaudiya philosophy,
> the chanting is all important in Kali Yuga. In other
> words, there is no other way in
Kali Yuga but
> chanting> which translates into Chanting is the only way.
1) The verse is from from Brhad-naradiya Purana, not a Sri Vaisnava (SV) pramana (authority).
2) It may be the only way (eva nasty) in Gaudiya Vaisnavism (GV), but not so in SV. There are 9 processes of bhakti, each and every one of them is a mean.
3) The purpose of chanting Hari nama is to attain liberation, this is confirmed in Chaitanya Charitamrta 1.7.73
krishna mantra haite habe saMsAra mocana
krishna nAma haite pAbe krishnera carana
By chanting the Krishna mantra one will be liberated from material existence.
And by chanting Krishna?s name, one will attain his lotus feet.
To the above liberation add the GV philopsphy - Lord is non-different to His
Name.
The combination tantamounts to jivan mukti, an advaitin concept rejected in SV.
4) The position of SV is that all means (upayas) are difficult, instead SV advocates performance of Prapatti (self-surrender), as prescribed by Lord Krishna in Gita 18.66 "sarva dharman parityajya ... " (carama sloka).
Salvation comes from the Saviour Himself, through His Causeless Grace (nirhetuka krpa). The Lord is the only way, mean (upaya) and End. Prapatti, involves the renunciation of an individual's self effort (upaya) in salvation
However, this does not mean SV abandons, bhakti, jnana or karma. In SV chanting is performed as a kainkaryam (service) just like arcana etc and the result is offered to the Lord in satvika tyaga, without accepting the benefits of chanting.
> Also, I would like to know specifically if
in the Sri
> Vaisnava philosophy, the Lord is considered
> non-different from His name? For example, the name
> water and water itself are different. By chanting the
> name water, one cannot quench his thirst. What is the
> stance of the Sri Sampradaya philosphy on this?
Refer to point no 3
Using your example, i.e the name water is non-different to the substance water.
The simultaneously oneness is inconceivable to me (achintya abedha).
Adiyen Yatiraja Ramanuja dasan
Azhvar EmberumAnAr JeeyAr ThiruvadigalE Saranam
http://www.vedics.net
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index ]
[Thread Index ]
[Author Index ]