The so called 64... -

Radhe !


I do like the idea of chanting many rounds and I always find peace when practicing. So I do not have objections about chanting lakhs and lakhs of Japa daily. I really would like to come to and stay fix in that stage!

However, after seeing the strange reactions of one devotee in particular and specially the way he was mistreating the animals (after chanting the so-called 64 rounds) I start to question if there is any (negative) side effects when chanting so many rounds?

Does this type of intense chanting require special place, like Vrindavana or any other holy place, or a special person, process, Guru, etc.?

Seriously, I can easily count at least 5 devotees that make me think about the negative effects of chanting “many” rounds...

Nevertheless, the Maha Mantra Hare Krishna is the process of liberation for this Iron Age and one has to embrace it as his life and soul.

Any thought why some devotees have that strange reaction after chanting.

I hope, after reading my question, someone might not think, "Hari Saran Das has doubts about the purifying process of meditating on Maha Mantra Hare Krishna". Definitely that is not the case in here! My question was based on wittiness someone that was chanting 64 and possibly (i'm not sure) the heart had not been touched by mellows of Harinama.

My personal experience about chanting many rounds even more than 64 were that the desire for material activities diminishes and the thirst to dive and taste Lilas increases.

At any rate, I think I read somewhere in here that Kripalu-ji recommends his followers to concentrate on chanting the Maha Mantra in-group (sankirtana) rather than individually (japa). He might has a different approaches on Japa (individual chanting)...

Perhaps, the divine audience here is so absorbed in the nectars of the holy names that nothing else matter. Good to know that more are chanting Hare Krishna, rather than online.

Radhe Radhe !

I have not heard of the name having such qualities. However, for example zealous renunciation is said to harden the heart. Perhaps those people whom you think of are zealous renunciates. If such a renunciate, while lacking taste for the name, bites the tongue and chants a certain quota daily, then it is quite possible he will be a bit disturbed afterwards, as after any forced endeavor.

Japa or kirtana should not make any difference in this case. The name is the name, however you pack it.

Thanks Madhava,


Considering that renunciation is for the great part of the population a difficult task, you maybe right.

However, wouldn’t the quality of chanting be dependable on the candidate, as well as the place where he/she is practicing sadhana? 64 rounds, I believe, takes one to higher sphere of spiritual experiences all together.

If for some reason there is not enough purity being generated by some external means, like for example, the influence of a holy-dhama, or sufficient sadhu-sanga than the solitary chanter could indulge himself in a chain of illusory feelings and imagination that might not be conducive for the progress of sadhana.

In other words, if the candidate does not have the proper atmosphere for a progressive chanting that could create contrasts and interruptions, which wouldn’t allow a satisfactory result to take place, therefore, causing mental disturbances.

Those maybe are some possibilities which I would consider “obstacles” for progressive meditation.

One referance to negative results from bhajan is found in the Bhagavat, skandha 9 chapter 4 sloka 70;

tapo vidyA ca viprAnAm nihsreyasakare ubhe/
ta evadurvinItasya kalpete karturanyathA//

Asceticism and worship are both condusive to the highest good for brahmanas endowed with humility and other virtues. In the case, however, of a doer who is lacking in modesty, those very practices lead to contrary results (prove harmful).
(Gita Press edition)

The Holy Name has the power to purify everything, so mabe we just need to be aware of when we go into fantasy and other egoic places. And to have a spiritual friend to help reflect where we don't see ourselves and what ego stuff we are habitually indulging.

That is a nice view, but a bit too easy to be true… 64 takes one to higher spheres of realizations, so, to maintain those 64 (which is my focus in here) that would take much more than just being aware of faults, it would take serious purity, specially those which were accumulated from previous birth. Of course, karma can be changed, than we will need the good (dhama) environment to help...

Let's read the verse again:

tapo vidyA ca viprAnAm nihsreyasakare ubhe/
ta evadurvinItasya kalpete karturanyathA//

Asceticism and worship are both condusive to the highest good for brahmanas endowed with humility and other virtues.

does not the Bhagavatam say that if one chants and one's heart remains like stone then that chanting is useless?

Actually, what that verse says is that one's heart is surely made of stone if even after experiencing ecstatic transformations from chanting, one does not transform one's entire being.

In other words, the Holy Name gives a taste of prem. If one does not subsequently live a life transformed by faith and piety, then surely one has committed some offense that interferes with the Holy Name doing its work fully.

If it is the Song for the Yuga at hand
Surely a little stone could not make a stand?

Good point Jagat - and our offences come from egoic thoughts & attitudes that cumulate in egoic actions, which are offensive to all (even oneself).

I share the same feelings with you, but do not worry, this is Niyama-Seva, what he really means by stones is actually Silas; The transcendental jewels in the heart.

The Lord's abode (the heart) is always decorated with precious stones of devotion. Whereas, the non-devotees sees stones everywhere...

Radhe Radhe!

As tempting and easy as it is to apply the label offender to someone who does not respond as we would like to our tradition, isn't this approach all too simplistic and unsatisfactory? I have seen it happen to others and experienced it myself. This calling someone an offender is an easy way to circumvent the particulars of the situation and the influence they might have had as well to avoid considering whether oneself is partially responsible.

Indeed you're onto something there, and I believe this is what frequently happens. Say, you come to think of me as an exemplary devotee. Subsequently I mistreat you and you leave the community of devotees, becoming disheartened with the entire tradition as what you saw as the emblems of the tradition fell short of what you expected. The conclusion is that you have left because of your offenses. More particularly, if you read between the lines, you have left because of your offenses against me, whom you should not have questioned or taken for granted.

Inevitably, those great wallahs also become disheartened, as they clould their own hearts with the mist of aparadh, and as eventually the enjoyment out there surpasses the enjoyment of position, which had thus far -- after the day when the nectarine name no longer tasted good -- been the sustaining force that kept them around.

However I don't think Jagat intended to present that as an universalized simple formula free for all to apply.

Yes, it does happen frequently. When it happened to me, I realized just how simple-minded such an explanation is. I wrote back to my then guru pointing out that his explanation (i.e. that I must have committed offenses) was simplistic and continued to explain that many factors were involved, calling for a more wholistic appraisal. Having his wonderful explanation referred to as simplistic obviously hurt his intellectual pride (predictably he threw the word simplistic right back at me) and he proved incapable of seeing things in a broader perspective. That is the problem with people who believe themselves to be beyond making mistakes.

A wise person once told me, "Beware of those who claim to have found the truth. They have simply stopped looking."


I realize that, but still wanted to point out that one should be careful with statements such as "surely one has committed some offense."

I vaguely remember someone telling me how my Baba once said that, if a disciple leaves, then half the blame is for him, and the other half is for the guru. However don't quote me on that just yet.

It certainly works both ways. Nobody is infallible.

Speaking of a 50-50 division of blame, then someone once told that Bhaktivedanta had made such a statement.

I suppose this might well be one of those urban legends. Like you hear these folklore stories of Variable Babaji, which all traditions have adopted as their own and filled in the blanks.

I guess that you are right. My ex-guru said in private that those who took up KRSNa consciousness under Bhaktivedanta and then later left are the lowest of all and the least qualified. I guess that Bhaktivedanta had a similar attitude. At least I cannot imagine him taking half the blame on his own shoulders.

What about the devotee who was chanting 64 and kicking the animals in the farm, can that be shared between him and his Guru... 50% 50%?