View source for According to Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, simply calling the name of his son was not sufficient. He remembered Narayana. But according to sastra, the holy name of the Lord, if one chants even neglectfully, he also gets the chance of being liberated

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"According to Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura, he supports that simply calling the name of his son was not sufficient. He remembered Nārāyaṇa. But according to śāstra, that Nārāyaṇa, the holy name of the Lord, if one chants even neglectfully, he also gets the chance of being liberated"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|SharmisthaK}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|2022-12-28T07:53:56Z}}
{{last|2022-12-28T07:53:56Z}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:According to Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura]]
[[Category:Simply]]
[[Category:Call]]
[[Category:Name]]
[[Category:Son]]
[[Category:Was Not]]
[[Category:Not Sufficient]]
[[Category:Remember]]
[[Category:Narayana]]
[[Category:Sastra]]
[[Category:Chanting the Holy Names of God]]
[[Category:If One]]
[[Category:Neglectful]]
[[Category:Chance]]
[[Category:Being]]
[[Category:Liberated]]
[[Category:Pages Needing Audio - SHARMISTHA]]
</div>
<div id="section">
<h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="sub_section">
<h3>Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div class="quote">

<div class="quote_link">
[[Vanisource:740104 - Lecture SB 01.16.07 - Los Angeles|740104 - Lecture SB 01.16.07 - Los Angeles]]
</div>
<div class="text">
Ajāmila was a great sinful man. So at the time of death, somehow or other, he remembered Nārāyaṇa. Nārāyaṇa. So he was very fond of his youngest child, and the Yamarāja, not directly, by sending his men, Yamadūta . . . so they are very fierceful. So at the time of death this Ajāmila saw these fierceful creatures, very odd-looking. So he was very much afraid, "Who are they?" So he thought, because he was very much affectionate to his youngest child . . . so his name was Nārāyaṇa. He called him, "Nārāyaṇa, please come here. I am very much afraid." But just see the power of chanting the name of Nārāyaṇa. He immediately become eligible to go to Vaikuṇṭha.

He did not mean Nārāyaṇa. But Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura, he gives his commentation that he remembered real Nārāyaṇa after reference to the context. When he called for his child Nārāyaṇa, he remembered real Nārāyaṇa. Because in his boyhood, when he was . . . up to his youthhood, he was very sincere devotee of Nārāyaṇa, a son of a brāhmaṇa. But he fell under the clutches of a prostitute. Therefore, after mixing with the prostitute, his all spiritual activities stopped. That is natural. So he became too much inclined to the prostitute, and he became a drunkard, he became a thief, he became a gambler, meat-eater and debauch. All these qualification he acquired, by the association of one prostitute. And in this age our only business is to mix with prostitute. Just see our position. How much fallen they should be. There is open market for prostitution. This is modern civilization. By the association of one prostitute . . . Ajāmila was a brāhmaṇa's son, very regulated, following all the rules and regulation. But as soon as he associated with a prostitute, he became fallen down. So this man remembered Nārāyaṇa. According to Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura, he supports that simply calling the name of his son was not sufficient. He remembered Nārāyaṇa. But according to śāstra, that Nārāyaṇa, the holy name of the Lord, if one chants even neglectfully, he also gets the chance of being liberated. That's a fact.

There is one statement in the Nṛsiṁha Purāṇa that a Muhammadan was attacked by a white boar. They kill by the tusk of the nose. So while the boar was killing that Muhammadan, he uttered, "Hārāma, hārāma." Hārāma is an Urdu word, but this word is found inPurāṇas also, hā rāma. Hārāma means condemned, condemned. So the Muhammadans, they do not eat, I mean, the flesh of pig. Just like the Hindus, they do not eat the flesh of cow, similarly, this flesh of pig is hārāma. So he did not mean Rāma. He wanted to say "condemned. "This boar is condemned, hārāma." But he got the result of chanting hā rāma, hā rāma, "O my Lord Rāmacandra." He got the result.
</div>
</div>
</div>