17 thoughts on “An analysis on whether the sixteen syllabled Mahāmantra can be used in saṅkīrtana or not.

  1. All the arguments and counter-arguments from their and our side (they have been deleted from that thread by the defeated Vaisnavacarya Candan Gosvami now) – are available here.

    Note – Clarification denotes our stand and objection indicates Vaisnavacarya Candan Gosvami’s stand and his agent one woman known as Govinda Dasi.

    Further clarification – * The commentary of Srila Jiva Goswami on the stava-mālā verse.

    This commentary is as follows: hare kṛṣṇeti mantra-pratīka-grahaṇam | ṣoḍaśa nāmātmanā dvā-triṁśad akṣareṇa mantreṇoccair uccāritena sphuritā kṛta-nṛtyā rasanā yasya saḥ | nāmnām uccāritānām gaṇanāyai kṛtā yā granthi-śreṇī tayā subhagaṁ sundaraṁ kaṭi-sūtraṁ tena tad-añcalenojjvalaḥ karo vāma-hasto yasya saḥ | viśālākṣaḥ karṇānta-netraḥ | dīrghaḥ yad-argala-yugalaṁ tasya khelayā vilāsitenāñcitau bhujau yasya saḥ | ājānu-bāhur ity arthaḥ | “argalā paridhaḥ smṛta” iti halāyudhaḥ | nidarśanālaṅkāraḥ |

    Note: It says gaṇanāyai kṛtā, which means he was counting.

    (in opposition to the conclusion):

    * Japa can also have ucca svara. Please check Hari-bhakti-vilāsa 17.155 – 158 (especially the verse beginning with yad ucca nīca svaritaiḥ)

    (in favor of the conclusion):

    * Kīrtana can also have ucca-svara, as given in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu 1.2.145) — nāma-līlā-guṇādīnām uccair-bhāṣā tu kīrtanam

    * There is a sacī-sūnvaṣṭakam of Srila Raghunath Das Goswami, (http://kksongs.org/songs/h/harirdrstvagosthemukura.html )

    Which has the following quote:

    hare kṛṣṇety evaṁ gaṇana-vidhinā kīrtayata bhoḥ (Verse 5)

    So, the term “kīrtayata bhoḥ” solves the problem. This also means that he was counting while performing kīrtana.

    Objection – vaishnavacharya chandan goswami– Nowhere in the above post, it shows the Kirtan of ‘Mahamantra’. The author is contradicting in its own words, First, how is it possible or where is the instruction given to count the Mahamantra during kirtan? Or does it mean, when Mahamantra kirtan started, Mahaprabhu or His associate used to count?

    By the author, “harekṛṣṇetyuccaiḥsphurita” is taken as a Mahamantra. But according to Chaitanya Bhagwatam Antya Lila, 3.199, it says, “Sarva anga shrimastak shobhite chandane, nirvidhi “Hare-Krishn” bole Shri-vadane.” Mahaprabhu was looking beautiful by the Sandalwood paste which was applied on His forehead and full-body and from His Srimukha He was contentiously chanting “Hare Krishn” “Hare Krishn” “Hare Krishn”.” So, Hare Krishn is one of the form of Harinaam here, not Mahamantra nor it was performed as a Kirtan.

    Similar type of Hari-naam was used in Antya lila, 1.194, “Sarvada Shrimukhe “Hari Krishn Hare Hare”, “From His Srimukha He was constantly chanting “Hari Krisihn Hare Hare”.

    So, harekṛṣṇetyuccaiḥsphurita, doesn’t advocate kirtan specifically, (Maybe the author has connected Hare Krishn with Mahamantra) but loud “Hare Krishn” speaking which many people in ISKCON do when they meet or want to show their excitement.

    Clarification – 1) The above counter-argument by the honourable contender that Hare Krishna was not uttered by CM during those instances (i.e. CB 3.3.199 and 1.194) is his own interpretation. There is no explicit reference there stating that CM only uttered the initial syllables of Mahamantra and not the full form.
    2) Kīrtana is specifically done in ucca-svara, as given in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu 1.2.145) — “nāma-līlā-guṇādīnām uccair-bhāṣā tu kīrtanam”. There is a Sacī-sūnvaṣṭakam of Srila Raghunath Das Goswami, ( http://kksongs.org/songs/h/harirdrstvagosthemukura.html )

    Which has the following quote:

    “hare kṛṣṇety evaṁ gaṇana-vidhinā kīrtayata bhoḥ” (Verse 5)

    So, the term “kīrtayata bhoḥ” solves the problem. This also means that He was counting while performing kīrtana. So, the honourable contender’s position that CM’s utterance of Hare Krsna doesn’t indicate its kirtana – is baseless.

    Objection – Honourable contender’s counter-reply (provided by Bhakta Vikas Verma) – Vaisnavacharya Goswami Chandan Would like to know his interpretation on CB 3.3.199 and 3.1.194.

    nijatve gauDIyAn jagati parigRhya prabhur imAn
    hare-kRSNety evaM gaNana-vidhinA kIrtayata bhoH |
    itiprAyAM zikSAM janaka iva tebhyaHparidizan
    zacI-sUnuH kiM me nayana-zaraNIM yAsyati punaH || 5 ||
    “When will that son of Mother Saci – who, taking the residents of Bengal as His own, inspired them to chant Hare Krishn a prescribed number of times daily and who like a father gave them many cherished instructions – again become visible to me?”

    So where is kirtan in this verse? kīrtayata means kirtan?

    Clarification – Our clarification – “The term “evam” here acts in the meaning of “and”. Alternatively, it also means “in this way”. “kirtayata” specifically is intended towards “kirtanam”. This proves that the Mahamantra can be served by doing the three-fold japa (vacika, manasika, and upansu) and during japa process, it can be counted (ganana-vidhina). But, “evam” specifically indicates that it can also be applied in kirtanam (kirtayata bhoh). Evam should be taken to mean “and” i.e. indicating towards three-fold japa and kirtanam.”

    Our further clarification – CB 3.3.199 is CB 3.3.206 in our Gaudiya Mutt edition. It is specifically indicating ‘kirtanam’. Why? Because, immediately after 5 verses, in CB 3.3.211 (according to our edition) or CB 3.3.204 (according to the Harinam Press’s edition that honourable contender is referring to), VDT is writing that “sarva-ratri sindhu-tire parama-virale / kirtana karena prabhu maha-kutuhale //”. Its translation is – “During all nights, Mahaprabhu would do kirtana solitarily with great pleasure”.

    Our further clarification – CB 3.1.194 (according to Harinam Press’s edition) or CB 3.1.199 (according to Gaudiya Mutt edition) clearly states – “sarvada sri-mukhe ‘hare krsna hare hare’ / balite ananda-dhara niravadhi jhare //” – Translation – “Always from His opulent mouth, the Lord was continuously uttering “Hare Krsna Hare Hare”. This doesn’t refute our stand. How? Because, VDT has just mentioned the same 16 syllabled Mahamantra in a shortened way by saying “Hare Krsna Hare Hare”. Also, the usage of the term “balite” means loudly uttering as done in Sankirtana.

    If Sripad Vaisnavacarya Candan Goswami leaves his purva-agraha or pre-fixed bias, he can openly accept our stand. But, rather he has commenced to send personal messages to our via media now. Also, he has blocked both me and Sriman Pundrik Goswami from entering into his pages and groups on FB.

    Objection – Vaisnavacharya Goswami – “Its ‘Hari’ Krishn Hare Hare. Not ‘Hare’ Krishn Hare Hare in bengali text.”

    Clarification – Our reply – “In our edition of Caitanya Bhagavata printed both by the reliable Harinam Press (in Devanagari) and by the reliable Gaudiya Mutt (both in Devanagari and Bengali), despite the mutual numerical differences of verse number, the reading is same in all versions. All versions of CB 3.1.199 give the same earlier reading – “…hare krsna hare hare…”. Only the CB 3.1.196 gives the reading “……hari bale uccaih svare…” or that “the crowds loudly uttered ‘Hari’.”

    Objection – Vaisnavacharya Goswami – “Please post the screen shot. And again it doesn’t prove it is a short form of Mahamantra.”

    Clarification – Our answer – “First kindly provide the screen shot from your side. Again, the contender is forgetting that both the ‘samasa’ (in short) and ‘vyasa’ (in detail) styles of expressing the siddhanta have been considered bonafide. Kindly refer to the very first chapter of Mahabharata for more on the validity of these styles. “Hare Krsna Hare Hare” is a shortened (samasa-paddhati) form used to indicate the otherwise full-fledged Mahamantra.”

    Objection – Vaisnavacharya Goswami – “I am not a contender. He is now mixing bengali poetry writing with Sanskrit rules. I know what is that style but how does it relate with Hari Krishn Hare Hare? I do not have any access to the camera, but would like to see his screen shots of the shastras.”

    Clarification – Our reply – “Your Grace is an “honourable contender for us”. Why? Because, you are trying to contradict my view and I yours. Kindly check the dictionary meaning of the term. Its not a disrespectful vulgar or abusive word. We are not mixing any Bengali or Sanskrt rules. Its hard to believe that a financially well-to-do and internationally travelling acarya doesn’t have an access to a digital camera for taking screen shots! The screen shot of the original Bengali edition published by Gaudiya Mission in 1930’s is as follows –

    Objection – Vaisnavacharya Goswami – Last night, I personally made a phone calls to many our Gaudiya Acharyas from Vrindavan, Navadwip and Oddissa to re-check. They all agreed (except one) that Kirtan on Mahamantra is not mentioned in biographies nor it was performed by Mahaprabhu and His associates. I found out, in our Sampraday, it is a debatable topic last 80-90 years (Since Prangoapl Goswami time). Regarding what people are claiming that this is ‘my’ own idea or I am coming up with new philosophy or I am attacking on some faiths. Here are some real facts which should be seen before making such stupid claims:-
    Not a single lineage of Nityanand prabhu (except Prangopal Goswami family) does kirtan on Mahamantra. They do the Kirtan on “Shri Krishn Chaitanya prabhu Nityanand, Sri Advaita Gadadhar Shrivas-adi Gaur bhakt vrinda.”
    In Gadadhar Parivar, they do not do Kirtan on Mahamantra. I had seen couple of times, few Babajis followers of them do so. Didn’t see Acharyas doing it.
    In Gambhira, they do the Kirtan on “Caitanya prabhu Nityanand, Hare Krishn Hare Ram Shri Radhe Govind” not on Mahamantra again.
    No authentic lineage of Advaita prabhu does the Kirtan on Mahamantra.
    In Radharaman temple, there is no record of the Kirtan on Mahamantra, nor even in the books of (Pads)songs, it is instructed. Yes, those Radharaman Goswamis who are doing the Kirtan on Mahamantra at some degree preach in ISCKON or Gaudiya Math communities. So, it is a new acceptance or new preaching strategy. Again, if one or two families of Radharaman Goswamis are doing the kirtan, doesn’t mean 38 other families are in acceptance.
    In my opinion, devotees should follow their Guru-Paramparas to avoid such issues. I see one issue as a clash, wherever Loud chanting is mentioned, some devotees take that loud chanting as Kirtan whereas some don’t.
    Personally, in my lectures/kathas, people do kirtan on Mahamantra too, I never object but enjoy without participating. Two books are written in bengali, they are good to read that why and why not one should do the kirtan on Mahamantra. One book is written by Radharaman Charan Das Babaji family with all shastric evidences. Second book is written by Bhuneshwar Sadhu Thakur, that why kirtan should be done (In Prangopal Goswami family).
    Debates on facebook are useless. Debates take place when Acharyas sit and talk. This thread was also not to start a debate but to inform our Gaudiya followers who follow our Guru-varg.

    Clarification – Our answer – We don’t need to give him any answer because he is trying to make the ‘aitihya-pramana’ overrule the ‘sastra-pramana’. And Jiva Goswami doesn’t agree with the strategy where ‘aitihya-pramana’ transgresses the authority of ‘sastra-pramana’. But, in his case, even the aitihya-pramana is divided and not completely in his favour (only half in his favour). Why? Because, he himself accepts that many lines including the one of Shri Prangopal Goswami accept the loud kirtana of the Mahamantra. Also, the followers of SBSST viz., GM and ISKCON – are a branch coming from the diksa-parampara of Sri Advaitacarya Prabhu’s son Sri Krsna Misra and Sri Nandakisora Gosvami – the diksa-guru of Srila Gaurakisoradasa Babaji. So, if we i.e. the followers of SBSST do the loud kirtana, our ‘acarana’ or examples should also be counted among the ‘aitihya-pramana’ or the ‘conventional evidence’. This makes even the aitihya-pramana divided and not fully in his favour.

    Objection – Gauranga Dasi (anti-party supporting Chandan Gosvami) – Here are few stanzas from Raghunatha Dasa Goswami, Rupa Goswami and Baldeva Vidya Bhusana.
    nijatve gaudiyan jagati parigrihya prabhur iman
    hare-krishnety evam ganana-vidhina kirtayata bhoh
    iti prayam shiksham janaka iva tebhyah paridishan
    shaci-sunuh kim me nayana-sharanim yasyati punah (Sri Saci-Sunvashtakam 5)
    “Saci-sunu, taking the residents of Bengal as His own, inspired them to chant Hare Krishna a prescribed number of times daily and like a father gave them many cherished instructions. When will the son of Saci again become visible to me?”
    Raghunatha Dasa Goswami clarified here, Hare Krishna Mahamantra, a prescribed number of times daily. He did not mention Kirtana anywhere.
    Rupa Goswami said:
    hare kRSNety uccaiH sphurita-rasano nAma-gaNanAkRta-
    granthi-zreNI-subhaga-kaTi-sUtrojjvala-karaH |
    vizAlAkSo dIrghArgala-yugala-khelAJcita-bhujaH
    sa caitanyaH kiM me punar api dRzor yAsyati padam || Stavamala, Prathama Caitanyastakam (5)
    “When will Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu – whose tongue is always dancing by loudly calling out ‘Hare Krishna!’; who counts the names which He is calling out on the splendorous strip of cloth from around His waist which has been tied with knots for chanting; whose eyes are so large that they seem to reach His ears; and whose arms extend down to His knees – again become visible to me?”
    Again Hare Krishna Mahamantra counting on the strip of cloth. Here the word “uccaih”, “loudly”, is used for Mahaprabhu’s chanting of Hare Krishna while counting not Kirtana. How anyone can do Kirtana when hands are busy tying knots for chanting? Baladeva confirms in his Stava-mala-vibhusana-bhasya that this indeed refers to the thirty-two syllable maha-mantra Japa not Kirtana:
    hare kRSNeti mantra-pratIka-grahaNaM. soDaza-nAmAtmanA dvAtrIMzadaksareNa mantreNoccair-uccAritena sphuritA kRta-nRtyA rasanA jihvA yasya saH.
    “The Hare Krishna mantra was resounding in His mouth. The mantra consisting of sixteen names and thirty-two syllables was uttered and dancing on His tongue.”
    Constant chanting of Mahamantra is mentioned by Baldeva Vidyabhusana in his commentary too. FYI, Mantra was dancing on Mahaprabhu’s tongue, He was not dancing. “uccaih” is not mentioned as Kirtana here.
    Therefore, He was not doing kirtana on Mahamantra.
    Goswami Maharaja nicely said in his one comment- “If I am chanting loudly Updendra Upendra, it doesn’t mean I am doing kirtan of Upendra Name. So find the difference between loud chanting and kirtan. We are talking about kirtan not loud chanting.”

    Objection – Gauranga Dasi – Gauranga Dasi For every mantra there is a Dhyana. Dhyanacandra Gosvami gave the reference here for Hare-Krishna Mahamantra for Jap in his scripture.
    Dhyanacandra Gosvami describes the Hare Krishna maha-mantra in his Gaura Govindarcana-smarana-paddhati (132-136) in the following words, drawing from the Sanat-kumara Samhita:
    asyaiva kRSNa-candrasya mantrAH santi trayo ’malAH |
    siddhAH kRSNasya sat-prema-bhakti-siddhi-karA matAH ||131||
    tatrAdau mantroddhAro yathA sanat-kumAra-saMhitAyAm–
    hare-kRSNau dvir AvRttau kRSNa tAdRk tathA hare |
    hare rAma tathA rAma tathA tAdRg ghare manuH ||132||
    hare kRSNa hare kRSNa kRSNa kRSNa hare hare |
    hare rAma hare rAma rAma rAma hare hare ||133||
    “There are three Krishna-mantras that are very pure and powerful; they are famous for bestowing prema-bhakti on their chanters.
    A reference for the first mantra is from the Sanat-kumara-samhita:
    ‘The words Hare Krishna are repeated twice, and then Krishna and Hare are both separately twice repeated. In the same way, Hare Rama, Rama and Hare are twice repeated.’
    The mantra is thus: ‘Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare’”
    asya dhyAnaM yathA tatraiva–
    dhyAyed vRndAvane ramye gopa-gobhir alaGkRte |
    kadamba-pAdapa-cchAye yamunA-jala-zItale || 134 ||
    rAdhayA sahitaM kRSNaM vaMzI-vAdana-tat-param |
    tribhaGga-lalitaM devaM bhaktAnugraha-kArakam || 135 ||
    vizeSato dazArNo ’yaM japa-mAtreNa siddhi-daH |
    paJcAGgAny asya mantrasya vijJeyAni manISibhiH || 136 ||
    “The meditation which accompanies this maha-mantra is also found in the Sanat-kumara Samhita: Sri Krishna is sporting in the cooling waters of the Yamuna, or in the shade of a kadamba tree in the beautiful Vrindavana forest. He is ornamented (surrounded) by the cows and gopas, and is accompanied by Sri Radha. He is very skillful at playing the flute as He stands in a charming tribhanga pose, bestowing mercy and kindness upon the bhaktas. Merely with this japa, perfection in this specific vision is attained. The wise know the five limbs of the mantra thus.”

    Clarification – Our answer – The point here is that since there is no explicit reference given by the anti-party about Mahamantra’s only being used in the japa and not in the kirtana i.e. since the anti-party is not giving any valid sastra-pramana clearly forbidding the japa of the maha-mantra during sankirtana, theirs stand that Mahamantra cannot be chanted loudly in public looses any scriptural verification. All the pramanas they are giving do not substantiate their hardline stand. We all know that Mahamantra can be chanted both in the japa and in sankirtana. They are not able to provide any pramana which forbids the usage of the Mahamantra during Sankirtana. Also, the phrase “kirtayata bhoh” is specifically referring to ‘kirtana’ and which means that both the Mahamantra can be chanted as japa and counted on a thread or beads and that it can also be used in the kirtana. This greatest evidence they are avoiding and manipulating.

    Also, when, according to the scriptures like Kali-santarana Upanisad, there is no scriptural injunction regarding the formal processes of ‘purascarana’, ‘suddhi’, ‘desa’, ‘kala’, and ‘patra’ in regards to the usage of Mahamantra, its (this Mahamantra’s) public usage in congregational chanting (sankirtana) automatically gains momentum, unless an explicit sastra-pramana would forbid its usage publicly.

    Chanting of Mahamantra doesn’t even require mantra-diksa. Its another aspect that the ‘guru-padasraya’ is done for advancing on the path of sadhana-bhakti (because it has been declared in the scriptures that bhakti can only be received by ‘mahat-krpa). But, as far as Mahamantra is concerned, for an average person, initiation is nor mandatory. However, once becoming aware of the importance of ‘guru-padasraya’, ‘guru-padasraya’ becomes mandatory. This is well explained in VCT’s commentary to a verse in SB. However, one thing is established that since Mahamantra doesn’t even require any diksa, its public usage cannot be denied.

    Even this logic (srutarthapatti-pramana) supports our stand. Antagonists are neither able to provide any explicit sastra-pramana in their favour nor any logic based on scriptures (srutarthapatti-pramana).

    Since, the 32 syllabled and 16 named (8 conjugal names) Mahamantra has been counted in category of ‘nama’ by the verse of Kali-santarana-upanisad – “iti sodasakam namnam kali-kalmasa-nasanam / natah parataropayah sarva-vedesu drsyate //” (thus are the 16 names which destroy the dirt of Kali-yuga and in all the Vedas, there is not seen a better solution than this) and since CB 2.16.281 (according to GM’s edition) proclaims – “japile se krsna-nama apanase tare / ucca-sankirtane para-upakara kare//” (translation – By chanting that Krsna-nama, only the chanter is delivered. But, by doing the loud congregational chanting of it, even others are delivered.), it is to be concluded that the Mahamantra has been specifically placed in the category of ‘nama’ (because, this Mahamantra omits the peculiar features that every other existing Vedic, Puranic, and Pancaratric mantra has viz., ‘svaha’, ‘svadha’, ‘bija’ and ‘namah’). Since, Mahamantra has been placed in the category of the ‘nama’, if CB 2.16.281 is made applicable to it, its loud congregational chanting (sankirtana) is also allowed. “sankirtana” is not merely the ‘ucca-vacika-japa’ or the ‘loud audible chanting’. Sankirtana means “bahubhir militva yad krsna-namatmaka-kirtanam krsna-sukhaika-ganam tat eva sankirtanam” (when the loud utterance of Krsna-nama is done congregationally solely for the sake of pleasing the Lord, it is known as sankirtana). Furthermore, Ananta-samhita (after mentioning the Mahamantra ditto in earlier verses) says – “utsrejyaitat maha-mantam ye tu anyat kalpitam padam / maha-nama iti gayanti te sastra-guru-ullanghinah //” (By rejecting this Mahamantra, if others sing other imagined stanzas considering them to be the Mahamantra, they are certainly to be considered transgressors of the maryada set by sastra and guru.). Note – The term “gayanti” specifically denotes ‘sankirtanam’ and not the ‘vacika-japa’.

    Objection – Govinda Dasi (anti-party) – I am not here to please your highly intelligent soul.
    As asked by Chandan Maharaja earlier, prove it in theory, how “kirtayata bhoh” reveals Kirtana. Answer is not given from your side yet. The word “kirtayata” to describe Mahaprabhu’s chanting, adding that this chanting is “ganana-vidhina”, “counted as prescribed.
    http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?tinput=kIrtayat
    Why have you ignored other given verses revealing Mahaprabhu did chanting not Kirtana? If Mahamantra was popular in Sankirtana, give ample of examples and stop showing your false intelligence that “kirtayata bhoh” talks about Kirtana. Hope soon you would not claim “Kirtanaiya Sada Hari” also talks about Kirtana too.
    FYI, Mahaprabhu direct words are for Japa of Mahamantra and Kirtana of ‘haraye namaḥ, kṛṣṇa yādavāya namaḥ gopāla govinda rāma śrī-madhusūdana’ at few places (not just one), mentioned in both biographies. These are not valid pramana? You’re unable to provide any pramana of Mahaprabhu doing Sankirtana of Mahamantra with His associates?
    I read in this thread, Chandan Maharaja wrote, “In Kali-santarana Upanishad, Brahma ji says in 10th verse, “Trikoti Japati Tada” “Do jap 3 crore times. So again not ‘Kirtan”. But chanting with counting.
    Initiation is not required at first to recite but later it is required. Ask Pundrik Maharaja, why does he give proper Mahamantra diksha in ear, when ISKCON Gurus don’t speak Mahamantra in ear? Why does his standards are different from ISKCON?
    Mahamantra initiation is mentioned in Chaitanya Bhagavata 3.5.404-410, Gadadhara prabhu asked Kazi to take Harinaam initiation. For your Srutarthapatti-pramana, Radha Tantra speaks about Mahamantra initiation. Hope you’ve read that.
    “chandan ji himself accepts that many lines including the one of Shri Prangopal Goswami accept the loud kirtana of the Mahamantra.”
    In this thread, Maharaja didn’t use ‘MANY’ word anywhere. He shows how only one and now couple more Acharyas from some lines have started Kirtana. Where is the evidence of Mahaprabhu doing Sankirtana of Mahamantra with His associates in Srivas Aangan or in Gambhira or anywhere? Follow the footsteps of Acharyas!
    Vikas! Get away from facebook world, approach acharyas in real. There are hundreds of devotees on facebook who are not participating but do not do Kirtana of Mahamantra.
    Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit
    spokensanskrit.de
    Spokensanskrit – An English – Sanskrit dictionary: This is an online hypertext dictionary for Sanskrit – English and English – Sanskrit. The online hypertext Sanskrit dictionary is meant for spoken Sanskrit.

    Govinda Dasi (anti-party) – Its such a joke, I pointed in my reply, Dhyanachandra Goswami took that Dhyana from Sanata Kumara Samhita. it was a shastra-pramana. RadhaK Brahmachari is opposing aitihya pramana when it is a matter of Sampradaya scriptures, Mahaprabhu & His associates doings. A complete essay on “aitihya pramana” is given below in the link with all Acharyas sayings including Srila Prabhupada:
    http://www.oneiskcon.com/aitihya-tradition-as-authority/
    Why did RKB give aitihya pramana on the first hand when he was giving clarification of Rupa Goswami verse hare kRSNety uccaiH, “Vācika-japa is the audible form of chanting, but not ‘loud in high pitch’. Whereas, ‘uccaiḥ’ means ‘high pitch’.”
    He did not respond on my hare kRSNety uccaiH reply but ignored my reply by saying aitihya pramana?
    Vikas: Your aitihya pramana of SBSST followers doing Kirtana is 100 years old. It is not a Pramana of the whole means not from Mahaprabhu time. What is the Pramana before SBSST? Prangopal Goswami Pramana is also 80-90 yrs old.

    Clarification – Our reply – Answer our earlier comments first and then only we will be interested in debating with you. Our earlier comments are again reproduced below. In those comments, we have produced sastra-pramana. Since, there is no sastra-pramana on your side explicitly forbidding the usage of Mahamantra during sankirtana, our following reply acts as a boost for our side –
    “Since, the 32 syllabled and 16 named (8 conjugal names) Mahamantra has been counted in category of ‘nama’ by the verse of Kali-santarana-upanisad – “iti sodasakam namnam kali-kalmasa-nasanam / natah parataropayah sarva-vedesu drsyate //” (thus are the 16 names which destroy the dirt of Kali-yuga and in all the Vedas, there is not seen a better solution than this) and since CB 2.16.281 (according to GM’s edition) proclaims – “japile se krsna-nama apanase tare / ucca-sankirtane para-upakara kare//” (translation – By chanting that Krsna-nama, only the chanter is delivered. But, by doing the loud congregational chanting of it, even others are delivered.), it is to be concluded that the Mahamantra has been specifically placed in the category of ‘nama’ (because, this Mahamantra omits the peculiar features that every other existing Vedic, Puranic, and Pancaratric mantra has viz., ‘svaha’, ‘svadha’, ‘bija’ and ‘namah’). Since, Mahamantra has been placed in the category of the ‘nama’, if CB 2.16.281 is made applicable to its, its loud congregational chanting (sankirtana) is also allowed. “sankirtana” is not merely the ‘ucca-vacika-japa’ or the ‘loud audible chanting’. Sankirtana means “bahubhir militva yad krsna-namatmaka-kirtanam krsna-sukhaika-ganam tat eva sankirtanam” (when the loud utterance of Krsna-nama is done congregationally solely for the sake of pleasing the Lord, it is known as sankirtana). Furthermore, Ananta-samhita (after mentioning the Mahamantra ditto in earlier verses) says – “utsrejyaitat maha-mantam ye tu anyat kalpitam padam / maha-nama iti gayanti te sastra-guru-ullanghinah //” (By rejecting this Mahamantra, if others sing other imagined stanzas considering them to be the Mahamantra, they are certainly to be considered transgressors of the maryada set by sastra and guru.). Note – The term “gayanti” specifically denotes ‘sankirtanam’ and not the ‘vacika-japa’.”

    Our reply contd. – And kindly inform your dear Goswamiji to stop hiding behind the back of a woman and come in the front, if he at all thinks he is an ‘acarya’ in the Gaudiya Sampradaya. This game is not that of hide and seek.

    Objection – Reply from Vaisnavacarya Candan Gosvami – “I just found out this thread is still active. From now on, no new comments will be entertained. All comments will be deleted. Keep faith on your Guru-Varg and chant Hare Krishn. Radhe Radhe!!”

    Conclusion – Our introspection – Vaisnavacarya Candan Gosvami has deleted all of our above replies on his thread – where the debate was going on originally. The thread link is – https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152384280831103

    However, we are blocked to participate on this thread and so our agent was posting it there.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Caitanya-bhagavata Adi 14.143-47 (according to GM’s version) is clearly refuting the stand of Vaisnavacarya Candan Gosvami and Sri Radharamancaranadasadeva. Lord Caitanya is instructing Tapana Misra herein. At 143 CM says that harinama-sankirtana will give one all sadhana and sadhya. The specific term ‘sankirtana’ is used. Then He quotes the famous Brhan-naradiya Purana verse. Then He recites the whole HK mantra. Then He dubs this mantra as the maha-mantra. Then He says that one who continually chants this mantra will get love of God and know everything of sadhya and sadhana. And in the commentary to 146 SBSST writes “According to the process of Pancaratra, this maha-mantra should be chanted both in japa and in loud kirtana.”

    So Lord Caitanya is speaking only of sankirtan, not japa, and recommending chanting Hare Krishna. How could one screw out an interpretation from this passage that Tapan Misra is being instructed NOT to chant the maha-mantra in sankirtan?

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Not in Kali-yuga. In the present age, even the manasika-dhyanam has to be accompanied by the loud utterance in the form of ‘kirtanam’.

      Like

  3. There is No Question as to whether the Mahamantra can be used on Sankirtan. Srila Prabhupada authorized it, therefore it is absolutely correct, appropriate and should continue to be so.
    “Do not invent new things. Nothing new should be added. New things means the brain is not clear. Whatever I have introduced should remain. Carefully manage things as I have established.” (Letter to GBC men. Dallas, 1974)

    Like

  4. That is all right; but,for those Gaudiya Vaisnavas who don’t accept SP’s validity, there was still a need to give direct quotations from the original classical literature of the sampradaya and hence, we have tried to fulfill that need.

    Like

    1. Dear Radhakrsna das Brahmacari, obeisance at your feet. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
      I both respect and admire your Sanskrit scholarship prabhu, but I must admit I am somewhat perplexed regarding this endeavor. If these “Gaudiya Vaisnavas” do not accept the “validity” as you say, of Srila Prabhupada then what is the use or the goal of your preaching to them? If they refuse to recognize and accept the supremacy of Srila Prabhupada, then what value does your preaching possess? That is offense. If you are wholeheartedly representing Srila Prabhupada, are you not offended by their repudiation? Will Prabhupada’s position be accepted as a result of this endeavor? I think not. Perhaps you may want to consider elucidating Prabhbupada’s supreme position. Otherwise what is the use of your preaching in this way? Prabhupada said; “The intelligent should not disturb the minds of the ignorant.” The word ignorant implies “ignore”. It’s not that they do not understand, or that it is beyond their capacity to comprehend, rather they choose to ignore Prabhupada’s position. That is their great misfortune. It may not be in your best interest to continue in this way prabhu as you risk implication in the offense.
      One should neither argue with nor present counter-arguments to impostors because they simply will not heed, because by doing so, instead of obtaining merits for the service, they become implicated with half of the impostors sinful offense. Chanakya Pandit has stated; “Just as every hilltop doesn’t contain a ruby, and a pearl isn’t found inside the head of every elephant, and sandalwood trees are not found in in every forest; similarly true devotees are not in every gathering of people who seem like devotees.” Wise true devotees shouldn’t argue, confront or fight with wicked-minded impostors because they have not yet changed their hearts to become real devotees. Which is why they will gang up on one and destroy them just like meat-eating fiery ants gang up and attack even a poisonous cobra who is very angrily hissing, yet they persist to kill and eat it.
      Your well wisher and humble servant,
      Priyavrata das

      Like

  5. SP is not an acarya coming in all the lines of Gaudiya Sampradaya. Hence, many don’t take him as an authority for their own lines. Whereas, the Six Gosvamis are unanimously accepted as authority by all lineages of the Gaudiya Vaisnava Sampradaya. If preaching is done to melcchas and yavanas not following Sanatana Dharma, why it cannot be done to the fellow Gaudiya Vaisnavas who have misunderstood the siddhanta? This is a simple point not requiring long debates to understand.

    Like

  6. All what lines? Where did they start from? Who and where are their end line acaryas today? We have Srila Prabhupada. Who do they have? And if they do have someone, did he not lock arms with Prabhupada? The Emporer is the King of Kings and the Acarya is the Guru of Guru’s. Is there anyone who can compare to Srila Prabhupada? I think not. If they are not in the factual line, yet purport themselves to be, without Srila Prabhupada’s inclusion, they should be rejected. “We accept that which is favorable to our Krsna consciousness, and reject that which is not.”

    Like

    1. “In the later age the Brahma Sampradaya was handed down though Madhva Acarya; in this Madhva Acarya disciplic succession came Isvara Puri. This Isvara Puri was accepted as Spiritual Master of Lord Caitanya. Therefore, we being in disciplic succession of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, we are known as the Madhva Sampradaya. And because Lord Caitanya appeared in Bengal, which country is called Gaudadesa, our Sampradaya party is known as Madhva Gaudiya Sampradaya. But all these Sampradayas are non-different from one another because they believe and worship the Supreme Lord. Any other Sampradaya who are Impersonalist or voidist or non-devotee, they are rejected by us.”

      Srila Prabhupada Letter to Upendra, 02-13-68

      Like

  7. So guru is one. Guru cannot be two. As soon as you find two opinions of guru, either both of them are rascals, or one is still at least rascal. There cannot be two.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s