Jesus of Kalki

[HerServant]

I've found an interesting old thread on this forum debating whether Jesus is Kalki. On the Jesus is Kalki side of the debate, similarities between the mission and appearence of Jesus' second coming and the mission and appearence of the Kalki avatar are referenced. On the opposite side of the debate various objections were raised.

 

While both sides tried to defend their points, neither side referenced the Srimad Bhagavatam. I thought that was strange so I looked up the list of Incarnations in the 1st Canto.

 

In the reading of SB 1:3:25 I observed that the name Jesus (Yas'aa) is there in the verse describing the Kalki avatar.

 

 

 

TRANSLATION

 

Thereafter, at the conjunction of two yugas, the Lord of the creation will take His birth as the Kalki incarnation and become the son of Visnu Yas'aa. At this time the rulers of the earth will have degenerated into plunderers.

 

Checking the sanskrit utilization of Yas'aa indicates that this name is a reference to Purusha. The hebrew for Jesus, Yahshua is also based on the same diety name (Ya) and Ya has the same meaning in both languages.

 

Pronouncing the Yas'aa palatial s in Sanskrit makes the pronounciation for Yas'a sound, in my opinion, identical to the name Yahushua, the actual Name of Jesus.

 

I asked a brahmin acquaintance (native of India and student of sanskrit from an early age) about this verse and he told me that the name Kalki is not a name. It is there to indicate the age in which (son of) Vishnu Yas'a appears.

 

In any case, Yas'aa is there in 1:3:25. The name Yas'aa cannot be removed. He is immovable.

 

Hare Krsna. Om Shanti.

HerServant and yours.

[gHari]

Didn't some visitors on a number of occasions prove that Mohammed (PBUH) was the Kalki avatara?

[Yofu]

Speculation....and more speculation.

[Guest guest]

 

Didn't some visitors on a number of occasions prove that Mohammed (PBUH) was the Kalki avatara?

 

Does the name Mohammed appear in the SB 1:3:25 ?

[Guest guest]

 

Speculation....and more speculation.

 

 

Srimad Bhagavatam 1.3.25

TRANSLATION

 

Thereafter, at the conjunction of two yugas, the Lord of the creation will take His birth as the Kalki incarnation and become the son of Visnu Yas'aa. At this time the rulers of the earth will have degenerated into plunderers.

 

Yas'aa! Yas'aa! Yas'aa! Vyasa doesn't speculate.

 

Because of this, God greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Yahshua every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Yahshua Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Phil.2:9-11

[theist]

 

Yas'aa! Yas'aa! Yas'aa! Vyasa doesn't speculate.

 

Because of this, God greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Yahshua every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Yahshua Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Phil.2:9-11

 

As I understand it, and Her Servant will correct me if I am wrong, the Name Yeshua or Yas'aa or Yesu as they say in India, means salvation through Jehovah. Jehovah is a name of the Father. The Son always holds the Father's name above his own just as he holds the Fathers will above his own.

 

It is common for devotees to take on the name of the Father in some form as their own, ie Krsna das which means servant of Krsna. So when someone calls to that person they are also calling out the Fathers name simultaneously.

 

In the final analysis however we must be careful to understand that the Son's name is dovetailed into the Father's name and never stands apart from the Fathers name or is in anyway superior to it.

 

Same principle when Jesus said if you have seen me you have seen the Father for I and the Father are one. And later in John(same chapter and conversation with his disciples) we read where Jesus says, "The Father is greater than I". One but different simultaneously.

 

If we ignore or slight the Father the Son is displeased, and if we ignore or slight the Son the Father will be displeased. We need to see them both simultaneously as they are.

[theist]

Guest(kalkiisdog).

 

A slight correction.

 

You got your handle wrong sport. kalki is God and you are dog. Guestdog. You inadverdently reversed the spelling. Dyslexia perhaps?

[Guest guest]

LOL!

 

Or perhaps he missed an apostrophe and actually intended to write Kalki'sdog?!

 

But then that is too exalted a position for him.

 

 

Guest(kalkiisdog).

 

A slight correction.

 

You got your handle wrong sport. kalki is God and you are dog. Guestdog. You inadverdently reversed the spelling. Dyslexia perhaps?

[theist]

LOL as well. Yes we all should aspire to be the loyal dogs of the Lord

[HerServant]

 

As I understand it, and Her Servant will correct me if I am wrong, the Name Yeshua or Yas'aa or Yesu as they say in India, means salvation through Jehovah. Jehovah is a name of the Father. The Son always holds the Father's name above his own just as he holds the Fathers will above his own.

 

It is common for devotees to take on the name of the Father in some form as their own, ie Krsna das which means servant of Krsna. So when someone calls to that person they are also calling out the Fathers name simultaneously.

 

In the final analysis however we must be careful to understand that the Son's name is dovetailed into the Father's name and never stands apart from the Fathers name or is in anyway superior to it.

 

Same principle when Jesus said if you have seen me you have seen the Father for I and the Father are one. And later in John(same chapter and conversation with his disciples) we read where Jesus says, "The Father is greater than I". One but different simultaneously.

 

If we ignore or slight the Father the Son is displeased, and if we ignore or slight the Son the Father will be displeased. We need to see them both simultaneously as they are.

 

I completely agree with you.

 

The Father can send the Son anytime and for any mission. Would a worthy son ever say he is greater than his father? Yet, the father always wants more for his son than himself. If the Father desires that His Son should carry out the mission of the Kalki avatar, then that is His Will!

 

Also, it is interesting that even this passage references the Son of Visnu! As you know, Sanskrit word play is very common. Like Son of God Jesus .. Son of Vishnu Yas'aa.

 

The Phil 2 quote previously has a greater part than "at the name of Jesus every knee shall bend" .. The whole verse in context says that Jesus renounced His position of "equality" with God the Father. Jesus rejects therefore, the idea of His equality with the Father.

 

 

"Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance,

he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross." Phil 2:6-8

 

Also, it is well known among acharyas that within the hearing of any Holy Name one can hear other Holy Names.

 

It was not my arrangemnt that the name Yas'aa should be included in the Srimad Bhagavatam. Is was not my arrangement that it should be pronounced so identically with Yahshua and it was not my arrangment that the Sanskrit Ya (with Sa) connote Purusha and it was not my arrangement that the meaning of the sanskrit is the same as the Hebrew.

 

The name Yas'aa is there. Sectarianism in not an option. All will be treated accordingly. Yas'aa will not favor Christians or any other sect, but rather His sword will judge by the love of God in each person's heart.

[theist]

Good stuff Her Servant. I am not educated to know languages and word meanings as you are. It would be helpful but I will rely on others as yourself in these matters. Even the ignorant can find the essence of knowledge just by hearing from the correct source.

 

I see the point on Kalki and Jesus but not sure I accept it. I will leave it as a maybe in my mind. I have accumulate far more maybe's than realizations =:-) but slowly they get worked out.

 

I am more attracted to the similarities between Haridas Thakur and Jesus Christ. There are some very striking connections between the two.

 

Have you noticed the same Her Servant?

[HerServant]

 

Good stuff Her Servant. I am not educated to know languages and word meanings as you are. It would be helpful but I will rely on others as yourself in these matters. Even the ignorant can find the essence of knowledge just by hearing from the correct source.

 

I see the point on Kalki and Jesus but not sure I accept it. I will leave it as a maybe in my mind. I have accumulate far more maybe's than realizations =:-) but slowly they get worked out.

 

I am more attracted to the similarities between Haridas Thakur and Jesus Christ. There are some very striking connections between the two.

 

Have you noticed the same Her Servant?

 

Dear Theist,

 

I have not yet studied the life of Haridas Thakur or Nityananda Prabhu. The Vaisnava literatures are so many that I have barely scratched the surface.

 

Also, I want to point out that I am not taking an authoritive position for anyone else. I am merely relating what I observe.

 

As members of this forum have noticed, I don't really care about sectarianism. As soon as a devotee goes down that path, it doesn't take long to get covered with external things.

 

I am also saying to the forum members, I have had no vision or revelation of the Kalki avatar's form and identity.

 

All I am saying, is that WHEN I READ the SB 1:3:25, I IDENTIFIED the name Jesus (Yas'aa). I am relaying that experience to each of you as a point of interest. I don't have any desire that anyone "convert" to a particular set of beliefs about it one way or another.

 

I am not a fundamentalist, and even don't pay much attention to the Book of Revelation in Bible. This at the advice of priests because we don't speculate on the hidden meanings of that scripture.

 

Our job as PEOPLE is to be ready for Kalki. He doesn't care what banner we wear. If He is Jesus .. then Amen. If He is not, and I am following Jesus, then I will beg to run to Kalki's side to serve Him.

 

And if He will not have me, then I accept because I love and trust Him. He knows better than me what to do with me.

 

To say, "I don't accept Kalki and Jesus are the same" is of no consequence to the Lord.

 

But to specifically reject Him or His representative, then Kalki will settle it.

 

And should anyone reject Kalki if He be Jesus on account of Jesus, then Kalki will also settle it.

 

The reality is that this verse SB1:3:25 creates controversy on both sides! Christians will reject SB because it boggles their mind that SB is God's Word!

 

And the portion of ISKCON that are fundies will hate that the name Yas'a appears in SB because then they must bow down to Him and cannot no longer claim themselves equal to Jesus.

 

See .. SB 1:3:25 is a sectarianism buster!

 

Come Lord Kalki son of Visnu Yas'a!

[Murali_Mohan_das]

OK, I just looked up the verse on the Vedabase, HerServant, and there's one problem with your proposition--there's a comma missing.

 

http://www.vedabase.net/sb/1/3/25/en

 

It doesn't say " the son of Viṣṇu, Yaśā", it says " the son of Viṣṇu Yaśā" (note the missing comma between Vishnu and Yasha). So, the name is "Visnu Yasa", and that's the name of Kalki's father, not Kalki. Look in the purport for further confirmation:

 

 

Therefore at the end of this period, the incarnation of Kalki will take place, as foretold in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The name of His father, Viṣṇu Yaśā, a learned brāhmaṇa, and the village Śambhala are also mentioned.

So, it's a neat theory (and true in a sense), but, without that comma...

[HerServant]

 

OK, I just looked up the verse on the Vedabase, HerServant, and there's one problem with your proposition--there's a comma missing.

 

http://www.vedabase.net/sb/1/3/25/en

 

It doesn't say " the son of Vis?n?u, Ya??", it says " the son of Vis?n?u Ya??" (note the missing comma between Vishnu and Yasha). So, the name is "Visnu Yasa", and that's the name of Kalki's father, not Kalki. Look in the purport for further confirmation:

 

 

So, it's a neat theory (and true in a sense), but, without that comma...

 

But .. is there actually such a thing as a comma in sanskrit? I've not see one, but (punctuation) point taken.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

But .. is there actually such a thing as a comma in sanskrit? I've not see one, but (punctuation) point taken.

I'm not a Sanskrit grammarian (haven't actively studied the language since I was 5), but, I do recall seeing a news article discussing how Sanskrit would be an ideal language for use in artificial intelligence. I assume this has something to do with the precision of the language. Of course, folks still find many different ways to translate/interpret a given Sanskrit text.

 

In any case, in this particular verse, without being able to parse the Sanskrit myself (anybody else care to?), I would think there would be a clear grammatical distinction between "Yas'aa, son of Vis'nu" and "Vis'nu Yas'aa".

 

Ultimately, though, I trust Srila Prabhupad to translate the verse for me in an accurate fashion.

 

Anyhoo, I admire your ability to straddle many fences, build bridges, see commonalities, etc. Your insights are often illuminating.

 

Gauranga!!

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Looking at the word-for-word in the Vedabase, Yas'aa is said to be a surname.

 

So, whether one takes the name Visnu Yas'aa to be that of the father of Kalki Avatar, or Kalki Himself, Yas'aa is a family name, not a first name.

 

http://www.vedabase.net/sb/1/3/25/en

[url="http://www.vedabase.net/a/atha"]

[Yofu]

 

Thereafter, at the conjunction of two yugas, the Lord of the creation will take His birth as the Kalki incarnation and become the son of Visnu Yas'aa. At this time the rulers of the earth will have degenerated into plunderers.

 

This verse does not apply to Christ, since Christ did not appear at the conjunction of two yugas.

 

I find it alarming that "Christian-Vaisnavas", try to mould the two different faiths together.

 

Christianity as practised today is actually St. Paulism and churchianity.

 

Just a few questions:

 

Why are there no pictures or "murtis" of Christ in any temple in Vrndanava or Navadvip?

 

Why is this Jesus-vaisnava concoction not mentioned in the writing of the Gosvamis?

 

Why is that the "son of God" not mentioned directly in the Vedas?

 

Why is it that the main Chrisitian belief of salvation through the violent death of their saviour not found as a limb of bhakti in Gaudiya sastra?

[Avinash]

In SB, it is mentioned that Kalki will be born in the house of Visnu Yasa. Visnu Yasa is a single person. Here Yasa is not used for Kalki.

 

Proofs have been given to claim different people as Kalki - Bahaullah, Muhammad, Jesus.

[Yofu]

 

In SB, it is mentioned that Kalki will be born in the house of Visnu Yasa. Visnu Yasa is a single person. Here Yasa is not used for Kalki.

 

Proofs have been given to claim different people as Kalki - Bahaullah, Muhammad, Jesus.

 

Therefore, Christ is not Kalki. The information that is being ignored by these Jesus=Kalki, Muhammad=Kalki people is that Kalki is to appear at the conjunction of two yugas. Neither, Jesus or Muhammad fit this description.

 

The saddest thing of all, is how Jesus=Kali etc "devotees" minimise Sri Chaitanya by their claims.

 

Jesus does not give the highest rasa, nor does Muhammad. Only Chaitanya gives the highest prema that's one of the reason's he appeared in this Kali yuga.

[theist]

At this point I will raise what many will experience as an uncomfortable question.

 

Kalki is said to come at the conjunction of the two yugas, Kali & Satya, and that conjunction is said to be 427,000 years away. We are expected to believe that the geography of the earth will be like it is today with Shambala in the north of India etc.

 

A lot of changes come in 427,000 years.

 

Do you really believe this prophecy to be factually correct? If so, why do you believe it?

[Yofu]

 

At this point I will raise what many will experience as an uncomfortable question.

 

Kalki is said to come at the conjunction of the two yugas, Kali & Satya, and that conjunction is said to be 427,000 years away. We are expected to believe that the geography of the earth will be like it is today with Shambala in the north of India etc.

 

A lot of changes come in 427,000 years.

 

Do you really believe this prophecy to be factually correct? If so, why do you believe it?

 

What's wrong with saying yes?

[HerServant]

 

The saddest thing of all, is how Jesus=Kali etc "devotees" minimise Sri Chaitanya by their claims.

 

 

How? Could Sri Chaitanya even be minimized by anything? Please answer. I am also curious, has Sri Chaitanya asked for you to come to His defense? I don't see how this thread conflicts in anyway with the glories of Sri Chaitanya.

[Yofu]

 

How? Could Sri Chaitanya even be minimized by anything? Please answer. I am also curious, has Sri Chaitanya asked for you to come to His defense? I don't see how this thread conflicts in anyway with the glories of Sri Chaitanya.

 

Of course Sri Caitanya hasn't asked me to come to his defense. Silly question.

 

Kalki is due to appear at the end of Kali-yuga. Since Jesus walked the earth 2000 years ago, this would mean that Kali-yuga ended then (if Jesus was Kalki.) So Sri Caitanya would have been incorrect when he spoke about this age being Kali-yuga. His sankitana movement being the process for awakening Krishna-prema in Kali-yuga could not be true, since it is no longer Kali-yuga accorrding to the Jesus=Kali devotees.

 

What age is it, if not Kali-yuga? Or is it that Jesus forgot to mention to Mahaprabhu that Kali-yuga ended 25th December 5 B.C.?

[theist]

 

What's wrong with saying yes?

 

Is that an answer to my question or just another question? If you mean to say you believe it then please explain why. Just because it is in SB? That's OK as that is your business but the question was meant to draw out some conversation on the subject Yofu.

 

Personally I have no idea on what will happen in 427,000 years from now. I believe in the rise and fall of various human civilizations on this earth planet and I have trouble accepting that this present situation of so-called human life will continue on for 427,000 years while continuing to decline at the pace we are witnessing today. I am expecting some major upheavals. IOW's I would expect kalki to advent Himself much much sooner.

 

This is just philosophical speculation and I am in no way saying what I think is fact.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

This verse does not apply to Christ, since Christ did not appear at the conjunction of two yugas.

I would assume that HerServant was referring to the *second* coming of Christ as prophecied, not the first, historical appearance.

 

 

I find it alarming that "Christian-Vaisnavas", try to mould the two different faiths together.

Is that how you view it? Especially in the case of HerServant, I see it more as trying to find common ground between our faiths than trying to meld the two together. No doubt there is the danger of Rasa-Abhas (improper mixing of devotional moods) in the endeavor, but I can find no fault in the aspiration. This is a forum for "Spiritual Discussions", of which, this is an example.

 

That said, I would also mention to HerServant--while your mood seems wholly devotional (and not manipulative), be aware of how your proclamations might be received. Praising Jesus in a room full of aspiring Vaishnavas is kinda like bragging to a lady friend of yours (who is in a committed relationship) about how great this guy you know is. The guy might be a great guy, but hearing his glories might not be that palatable to the friend.

 

 

Christianity as practised today is actually St. Paulism and churchianity.

[Rolling my eyes] Right, right. I'm sure HerServant (and most of the rest of us) are well aware of this fact. Let's add to that that much of Hinduism as practiced today is a perversion of the Vedic ideals. Same goes for Islam (and Muslim ideals). Why did you bring this up? Feeling a little bitter, maybe?

 

 

 

Why are there no pictures or "murtis" of Christ in any temple in Vrndanava or Navadvip?

What does this have to do with anything??? How many murtis are there in Gaudiya Vaishnava temples of Radha-Krishna in divine union? Does that mean that it is not so? Bitter? Time to taste the sweetness??

 

 

Why is this Jesus-vaisnava concoction not mentioned in the writing of the Gosvamis?

Can you be so certain that Jesus is *not* mentioned in the writings of the Goswamis (I'm not claiming that he is)? Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is not mentioned by name in Srimad Bhagavatam, but the sages with greater insight than you and I have pointed out the evidence for the rest of us.

 

 

Why is that the "son of God" not mentioned directly in the Vedas?

Why is Srimati Radharani not mentioned by name in the Srimad Bhagavatam?

 

 

Why is it that the main Chrisitian belief of salvation through the violent death of their saviour not found as a limb of bhakti in Gaudiya sastra?

Once again, this is off the topic. Time, place and circumstances. Gaudiya Vaishnavas might not find the Christian mood to be palatable, but, obviously, there are many souls for whom this Rasa resonates. Is this Christian doctrine not also part of the mercy of the Lord?