View source for I don't think there's just one mantra, sir. I feel that the entire mantra would be Om. And so Hare Krsna Rama would be just one part of Om. Now, isn't that true?

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"I don't think there's just one mantra, sir. I feel that the entire mantra would be Om. And so Hare Krsna Rama would be just one part of Om. Now, isn't that true"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Mangalavati|Rishab}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|17Apr11}}
{{last|05Jul12}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Questions asked to Srila Prabhupada]]
[[Category:Questions asked to SP... 1967]]
[[Category:Questions On... Chanting the Holy Name]]
[[Category:Questions On... Scripture, Mantras]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="1" parent="Lectures" text="Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures"><h3>Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB7634SanFranciscoMarch81967_0" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="751" link="Lecture on SB 7.6.3-4 -- San Francisco, March 8, 1967" link_text="Lecture on SB 7.6.3-4 -- San Francisco, March 8, 1967">
<div class="heading">It is in the Bhagavad-gītā said, akṣarāṇām oṁkāro 'smi. Kṛṣṇa says that "Amongst the alphabets, I am oṁkāra." Therefore oṁkāra is not different from Kṛṣṇa. As soon as we say "Kṛṣṇa," the oṁkāra is there.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 7.6.3-4 -- San Francisco, March 8, 1967|Lecture on SB 7.6.3-4 -- San Francisco, March 8, 1967]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Guest (1): Apparently, I have trouble with the definition of meditation. You say that chanting is the way to attain...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. I don't say, it is there...</p>
<p>Guest (1): Yeah, okay, right. Transcendental meditation by the Maharishi is not a form of meditation under concentrating powers. I was wondering...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: What is that transcendental meditation? Can you explain?</p>
<p>Guest (1): If I could I would do.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: You cannot. You cannot explain?</p>
<p>Guest (2): I think he had an explanation.</p>
<p>Guest (3): We're talking of the teaching of the Maharishi.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So what is that teaching? You don't know. Then don't talk. (everyone laughs)</p>
<p>Guest (1): Okay, well, I'll try. May I try for a minute...?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Don't try artificially. If you don't know, why should you artificially try?</p>
<p>Guest (1): Well, that's why I'm here, because I don't know everything.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That's all right, don't talk back. Which is the subject matters which you do not know, don't talk.</p>
<p>Guest (1): Okay.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Now, so far I know, that Maharishi says that you meditate for fifteen minutes daily. Is it correct?</p>
<p>Guest (1): Twice a day.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Twice a day, for thirty minutes.</p>
<p>Guest (1): Anywhere from fifteen minutes to an hour.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: All right, two hour. (laughter) That's all right?</p>
<p>Guest (1): Pardon me?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: For two hours daily, one hour morning, one afternoon.</p>
<p>Guest (1): All right.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So if one is engaged in meditation for two hours and if other is engaged for twenty-four hours, whose meditation is perfect?</p>
<p>Guest (1): Uh, I don't know.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: You don't know?</p>
<p>Guest (1): The Maharishi hasn't...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, don't take the Maharishi. I mean to say, if somebody is engaged in meditation for two hours and other is engaged for twenty-four hours, then whose meditation value will be greater?</p>
<p>Guest (1): Then there are two types of meditation, there's a two-hour meditation...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: First of all you answer this.</p>
<p>Guest (1): Pardon me? I missed it.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: I am just telling that a person is engaged in meditation for two hours, and another person is engaged in meditation for twenty-four hours. Whose meditation is valuable?</p>
<p>Guest (1): The twenty-four hours.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Is it not?</p>
<p>Guest (1): Are you asking me to go out and chant all day long?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Huh?</p>
<p>Guest (1): Are we supposed to chant twenty-four hours?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Not only chanting. There are other engagements.</p>
<p>Guest (1): Right. That's what the Maharishi says also.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So, twenty-four hours... Now, that meditation, what is that, what Maharishi says you do not know you say just now, that you do not know.</p>
<p>Guest (1): I don't know as well as the Maharishi knows, but I'd like to. Perhaps you can explain.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: But then explain. What is that?</p>
<p>Guest (1): He says that to meditate twice a day.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That's all right. What is that meditation process?</p>
<p>Guest (1): Okay, you're given your mantra, and when you sit there and meditate, you think...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Do you know that mantra?</p>
<p>Guest (1): Yes, but I can't speak it.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: You cannot speak. It is secret?</p>
<p>Guest (1): It's not secret. If I speak it, I'll ruin the power. (laughter)</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Therefore, our mahā-mantra is so nice that as we chant this loudly, the power becomes loud. (laughter continues)</p>
<p>Guest (1): Okay, this is where the problem lies then. Because I think that that's fine. And I agree. And yet, I don't think there's just one mantra.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: And there is no secret; it is open. It is open.</p>
<p>Guest (1): I don't think there's just one mantra, sir. I feel that the entire mantra would be Om. And so Hare Kṛṣṇa Rāma would be just one part of Om. Now, isn't that true?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Is there any difference between Om and Hare Kṛṣṇa?</p>
<p>Guest (1): Yeah, Om is the total, isn't it?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Huh?</p>
<p>Guest (1): Well, okay. I'll reword that. Isn't Om the total expression sound of nature?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. Do you know the definition of Om?</p>
<p>Guest (1): The Bhagavad-gītā defines it.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: It is in the Bhagavad-gītā said, akṣarāṇām oṁkāro 'smi. Kṛṣṇa says that "Amongst the alphabets, I am oṁkāra." Therefore oṁkāra is not different from Kṛṣṇa. As soon as we say "Kṛṣṇa," the oṁkāra is there.</p>
<p>Guest (1): Right. And I imagine that as soon as I say my mantra, Om is also there, is it not?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So oṁkāra... In every Vedic mantra the oṁkāra is there. But when Kṛṣṇa is there, oṁkāra is automatically there. Because it is said in the Bhagavad-gītā, akṣarāṇām oṁkāro 'smi: "Amongst the alphabets, I am oṁkāra." So when you speak of Kṛṣṇa, the oṁkāra is automatically there. When there is fire, the heat is automatically there.</p>
<p>Guest (1): Okay, one more thing. Transcendental meditation by the Maharishi is not a concentrating process. It's a process of using the mantra to get into the meditation. And once reaching the point of deep meditation, thoughts will just occur. And there's no concentrating procedure at all. And this is why I had a question in the first place, in that you said meditation'w impossible because it's a concentrating process. Well, Maharishi's meditation is not the concentrating...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Then he has manufactured something. It is not stated in the standard book. You see Bhagavad-gītā and Patanjali system, yoga system, that is differently stated.</p>
<p>Guest (1): I see.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: In the Bhagavad-gītā, the meditation has to be concentrated upon the Viṣṇu. Mat-para. The word is mat-para. One has to concentrate his meditation upon the form of Viṣṇu. Nothing else. That is real meditation. But if Maharishi has manufactured his own way of meditation, I cannot comment upon it. Because we have to comment on the books of authority. Any other question? All right. (end)</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>