Jesus of Kalki

[theist]

 

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.

 

 

 

I am in agreement with your posts Murali Mohan. You have a broad vision. In the above you bring up a reality that shouldn't be. Of course we know that only the basest kanistha would object to hearing Lord Jesus Christ praised. Vaisnavism is not a sectarian state of being but rather the natural function of the soul. Some think Vaisnavism is a product of India and therefore no avatar can appear outside of India but the SB tells us the incarnations of Godhead are more numerous than all the waves of a river and that they appear all throughout the universe and indeed all throughout all the universes. This mentality should not be present in a Vaisnava.

 

Srila Prabhupada praised Jesus Christ laviously. Should we not follow in his footsteps?

 

We know that Vaisnavism is not another faith as in Hindu Christian Moslem Buddhist. I see Vaisnavism awakening in any soul that humbles himself & bows before the Lord. I believe if we can't see Vaisnavism in others then we can't really see it in ourselves. And if someone can't see Vaisnavism in the life of Lord Jesus Christ then that soul is totally blind spiritually.

[Guest guest]

 

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.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

Ya'sa was some how manipulated but Visnu was left alone....probably couldnt find a comparable match he he... (what about vishnu in vishnu yasaa??

[HerServant]

Dear friends,

 

In this (internet) age we are faced with the inevitable reality that cultural and religious boundaries are changing.

 

In the 1960s His Holiness Srila Prabhupada came to the west on the command of his spiritual master to spread the light of the vedas.

 

Any reasonable person in the west needs to bow down and respect him and listen to his message. As I understand Srila Prabhupada made it known that the BG is to be studied first, then the SB, then only study the CC last.

 

I am a middle aged man, being brought up Catholic in a devotional household. I read for the first time BG As It Is about 10 years ago (~1996)

I purchased Srimad Bhagavatam 1st Canto about 8 years ago while visiting an ISKCON temple.

 

I confess my limitations.

 

Apart from you devotees, I sat reading these fabulous perfect Holy Scriptures and my faith in Jesus only increased.

 

Being happy inside, I thought it would be nice to share. The devotees here have been really kind and tolerant of me.

 

Therefore, regarding this thread, if you find it offensive, please accept my apologies.

 

But try to understand, in this internet age, we (all of us), and our future generations will have no choice but to acknowledge that God has spoken to the world ...

 

Just seek out a spiritual master, right? But beforehand, people in general need to investigate. This is seeking. Seek and ye shall find, as Jesus said.

 

The fact is, that the SB came west and I sought. I am merely saying what the scripture means to me.

 

So if there cannot be a discussion on this "coincedence" that the name Yas'aa of SB 1:3:25 is related to the name Yahshua, then I accept it an move on.

 

The Vaisnava community however may wish to note, that to a believer in Jesus, the name Yas'a of SB 1:3:25 can only be affirmation that Yahshua (i.e. Jesus' second coming) will return and is prophesied in the Srimad Bhagavatam!

 

I offer all respects to everyone here. I praise the Lord Krsna, Father of All Living Entities.

 

My manner of worship is to praise the Father Krsna through His Son, Jesus.

 

If I can utter one praise word to the Father in perfect unison with His perfect Son, then I am complete.

 

Please forgive my offenses. Hare Krsna!

[theist]

Prabhupada: But our process is that, you are searching after the center, here is the center. That is our proposal.

 

Allen Ginsberg: But what do you do when different religious groups claim to be the center? What do you do when different religious groups...

 

Prabhupada: No, we welcome every religion. We don't decry any religion. Our point is the love of Godhead. Or Krishna is love, all-attractive. So we want to be attracted by Krishna. Just like a magnetic force and iron. Unless iron is rusty, it is automatically attracted by the magnetic force. Similarly, we are contaminated by material coverings. So we are trying to make it rustless so that immediately we shall be attracted. This is the program. Krishna is all-attractive. That is a fact. And we are attracted. But being covered with this rust, we are, instead of being attracted by Krishna, we are being attracted by maya. This is our whole program. So our central program is how to love Krishna, or how to love God. So we want to see... That is the Bhagavata definition, that how much you have enhanced your love of God. You call Krishna or something else, that doesn't matter. Phalena pariciyate. The result. Your religious principle, what is the result? Are you enhancing your love for God or dog? That we want to see. If you are enhancing your love for God, it is all right. We don't say anything. But if... People should learn how to love. That is the perfection of life. That we are teaching.

 

Allen Ginsberg: If you're identifying love, however, with the sabda Krishna, what of those people who identify love with the sabda Allah?

 

Prabhupada: If that sabda, of course, identifies with God, we have no objection. That Caitanya Mahaprabhu said that namnam akari bahudha nija-sarva-saktis. God has many names. God is attractive, His name is also attractive, because He's not different from His name. If you have got exactly the same attractive name, we have no objection. We simply say, "You chant God's name, holy name." Then you become purified. That is our program. We don't say that you change your Christianity. No. We don't say. If you have got a nice name, all-attractive name, in your scripture-don't manufacture but authorized—then you chant that. We simply request, "You chant."

Allen Ginsberg: Well, then how would you adapt the Krishna chanting to Christianity? By seeing Krishna as Christ or Christ as Krishna and sounding Christ's image in Krishna's name?

 

Prabhupada: Krishna, Christ... Of course, this question was several times put to me. Christ says that "I am son of God." And Krishna says "I am God." So there is no difference. Son of God and God, we respect everyone. If I respect your father, I respect you also. Do you mean to say if I disrespect your father, you'll be pleased upon me? No. That is our philosophy. So Caitanya Mahaprabhu says that I am servant of the servant of the servant of the servant of the servant of Krishna [Cc. Madhya 13.80]. So if anyone loves Krishna, he must love Lord Jesus Christ also. And if one perfectly loves Jesus Christ he must love Krishna. If he says, "Why shall I love Krishna? I shall love Jesus Christ," then he has no knowledge. And if one says, "Why shall I love Jesus Christ? I shall love...", then he has also no knowledge. If one understands Krishna, then he will understand Jesus Christ. If one understands Jesus Christ, you'll understand Krishna.

Allen Ginsberg: Well, then do you think that the Hare Krishna chant could serve as an intermediary to link the religious tendencies of, both of Christianity and Muslim religions?

 

Prabhupada: Yes. Yes. Any religion. Any religion. If he's serious about religion. If he takes the religion as a scapegoat, that is different thing. If he wants to understand religion and if he takes seriously to religion, then he will understand. We want serious persons. Now, according to Srimad-Bhagavatam, religion means creation of the laws of God. Dharmam tu sakshad bhagavat-pranitam [sB 6.3.19]. Laws of God. Who will deny it? Who will deny it? Any religion, Christian, Muhammadan or any. Who can deny that religion is the laws of God? Simple explanation. If you ask what is meant by religion, religion is laws of God. That's all. And if you want to know what is God, that is also replied. "The original source of everything." So one should try to understand in this way. But if one wants to remain in his compact ideas and does not want to go further, then it is very difficult. He should be open-minded and appreciating. Then everything is all right. We say, Caitanya Mahaprabhu says, it is not that you are necessarily to chant Krishna, but if you have no suitable name, then chant Krishna. Why do you make differentiate. Every name is the same.

Allen Ginsberg: So if you have no other suitable name, chant Krishna.

Prabhupada: Yes. Chant Krishna.

Allen Ginsberg: That's Caitanya's...?

Prabhupada: Yes, yes.

Allen Ginsberg: Did He feel there were other suitable names? Did He feel or did He think that...

Prabhupada: Yes. He said many thousand millions names there are. But if you are serious about God, then... You may have many names by your friends, but any name will do.

 

Allen Ginsberg: Okay. So the problem I was posing before is, which I leave open, I don't know. What is the most attractive and suitable name here in this material country?

 

Prabhupada: Now, take for example the Muhammadan name Allah. Allah means the greatest. So God is greatest. So that greatest conception is this Brahman conception. And so far Christian, I don't think they have got any particular name. They say God.

 

Allen Ginsberg: Yes. Lord, God. That is the basic one.

 

Prabhupada: Controller. God means controller. Is it not?

 

Allen Ginsberg: What is the etymology of God? Do you know?

 

Hayagriva: I don't know.

 

Prabhupada: God is the equivalent of isvara. Isvara means controller.

 

Allen Ginsberg: Then the Jews, which were my background, had a prohibition...

 

Prabhupada: Jehovah.

 

Allen Ginsberg: They had Jehovah, but they had a prohibition of pronouncing the highest names. 'Cause they felt that God was imageless, and therefore should not be pronounced or painted. My background is I guess what would be impersonalist.

 

Hayagriva: The Jews are personalist.

 

Allen Ginsberg: Well, what are they? Impersonalists or personalists?

 

Lady: Impersonalists. They believe in just the Absolute. That's all.

 

Prabhupada: That was the difference in Jesus Christ. He was a personalist.

Excerpt from a conversation with Allen Ginsberg

[gHari]

Rust on iron. I'm stealing that one.

[HerServant]

 

Ya'sa was some how manipulated but Visnu was left alone....probably couldnt find a comparable match he he... (what about vishnu in vishnu yasaa??

 

Well I guess this topic seems a bit touchy to quite a few folks. As it turns out, this was pretty much opposite what I expected. I expected devotees from east and west to rally around SB 1:3:25 as a passage that bridges both traditions, but it looks like I've got a bunch up folks a bit bummed. Once again... sorry 'bout that .. not my intent .. I am much more interested in mellow mellow mellow love among the human family on this planet that we all share.

 

So I will post one more tidbit of interest (to me) on this topic then leave the thread. First to answer Guest's question:

 

The etymology on Visnu has been done expertly by many contemporary (open minded, non sectarian) scholars.

 

 

The traditional Sanskrit explanation of the name Vi??u involves the root vi?, meaning "to settle, to enter", or also (in the Rigveda) "to pervade", and a suffix nu, translating to approximately "the All-Pervading One". - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishnu#Etymology

 

Certainly God the Father.

 

For ya and sa together:

 

 

sa the actual base for the nom. case of the 3rd pers. pron.

{ya} , is used to denote Purusha , `" the Universal Soul "') RV -- -- Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon

 

 

Purusha? Is not Purusha expansion of God the Father?

 

hmmm.

 

Next It seems to me that the Hebrew folk worshipped Vasudeva (Visnu) and it can even be proved in the (Catholic) Bible:

 

Below is the Heliodorus column. The column proves that an ancient Greek worshipped Vasudeva. How is it that an ancient Greek could come to worship Vasudeva?

 

 

 

 

The Heliodorus Column

An archaeological discovery proves that there were western followers of Vedic principles twenty-two centuries ago

 

By Jack Hebner & Steven Rosen

 

 

A reproduction of the inscription, along with the transliteration and translation of the ancient Brahmi text, is given here as it appeared in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.

 

 

1) Devadevasu Va[sude]vasa Garudadhvajo ayam

 

2) Karito ia Heliodorena bhaga

 

3) Vatena Diyasa putrena Takhasilakena

 

4) Yonadatena agatena maharajasa

 

5) Amtalikitasa upa[m]ta samkasam-rano

 

6) Kasiput[r]asa [bh]agabhadrasa tratarasa

 

7) Vasena [chatu]dasena rajena vadhamanasa

 

" This Garuda-column of Vasudeva (Visnu), the god of gods, was erected here by Heliodorus, a worshipper of Vishnu, the son of Dion, and an inhabitant of Taxila, who came as Greek ambassador from the Great King Antialkidas to King Kasiputra Bhagabhadra, the Savior, then reigning prosperously in the fourteenth year of his kingship."

 

1) Trini amutapadani-[su] anuthitani

 

2) nayamti svaga damo chago apramado

 

"Three immortal precepts (footsteps)..when practiced lead to heaven-self restraint, charity, conscientiousness."

 

From the inscriptions it is seems clear Heliodorus was influenced by Vedic principles that he could be considered to be a Vaisnava, a follower or worshipper of Visnu. Professor Kunja Govinda Goswami of Calcutta University concludes that Heliodorus " was well acquainted with the texts dealing with the Bhagavat [Vaisnava] relgion." (6)

 

To our knowledge, Heliodorus is the earliest Westerner on record to adopt Vedic principles. But some scholars, most notably A.L. Basham (7) and Thomas Hopkins, are of the opinion that Heliodorus was not the only Greek to adopt such principles. Hopkins, chairman of the department of religious studies at Franklin and Marshall College, has said " Heliodorus was presumably not the only foreigner who converted to Vaisnava devotional practices -- although he might have been the only one who erected a column, at least one that is still extant. Certainly there must have been many others." (8)

 

 

As you can see above, Mr. Rosen and Mr. Hebner conclude (to the best of their knowledge) that Heliodorus was 1st westerner to adopt Vedic principles. That is an honest conclusion. But the Hebrew scriptures held sacred by Catholic and Orthodox Christians, indicate that Heliodorus was "converted" by GOD to Vedic principles, when GOD appeared at the Temple of Jerusalem! The description of God seems to be that of Krsna and Baladeva with Kalki!

 

2 Machabees Chapter 3

 

Therefore, when the holy city was inhabited with all peace, and the laws as yet were very well kept, because of the godliness of Onias, the high priest and the hatred his soul had of evil,

 

It came to pass that even the kings themselves and the princes esteemed the place worthy of the highest honour, and glorified the temple with very great gifts:

 

So that Seleucus, king of Asia, allowed out of his revenues all the charges belonging to the ministry of the sacrifices.

 

But one Simon, of the tribe of Benjamin, who was appointed overseer of the temple, strove in opposition to the high priest, to bring about some unjust thing in the city.

 

And when he could not overcome Onias, he went to Apollonius, the son of Tharseas, who at that time was governor of Celesyria, and Phenicia:

 

And told him, that the treasury in Jerusalem was full of immense sums of money, and the common store was infinite, which did not belong to the account of the sacrifices: and that it was possible to bring all into the king's hands.

 

Now when Apollonius had given the king notice concerning the money that he was told of, he called for Heliodorus, who had the charge over his affairs, and sent him with commission to bring him the foresaid money.

 

So Heliodorus forthwith began his journey, under a colour of visiting the cities of Celesyria and Phenicia, but indeed to fulfil the king's purpose.

 

And when he was come to Jerusalem, and had been courteously received in the city by the high priest, he told him what information had been given concerning the money: and declared the cause for which he was come: and asked if these things were so indeed.

 

Then the high priest told him that these were sums deposited, and provisions for the subsistence of the widows and the fatherless:

And that some part of that which wicked Simon had given intelligence of belonged to Hircanus, son of Tobias, a man of great dignity; and that the whole was four hundred talents of silver, and two hundred of gold.

 

But that to deceive them who had trusted to the place and temple which is honoured throughout the whole world, for the reverence and holiness of it, was a thing which could not by any means be done.

 

But he, by reason of the orders he had received from the king, said, that by all means the money must be carried to the king.

 

So on the day he had appointed, Heliodorus entered in to order this matter. But there was no small terror throughout the whole city.

 

And the priests prostrated themselves before the altar in their priests' vestments, and called upon him from heaven, who made the law concerning things given to be kept, that he would preserve them safe, for them that had deposited them.

 

Now whosoever saw the countenance of the high priest, was wounded in heart: for his face, and the changing of his colour, declared the inward sorrow of his mind.

 

For the man was so compassed with sadness and horror of the body, that it was manifest to them that beheld him, what sorrow he had in his heart.

Others also came flocking together out of their houses, praying and making public supplication, because the place was like to come into contempt.

 

And the women, girded with haircloth about their breasts, came together in the streets. And the virgins also that were shut up, came forth, some to Onias, and some to the walls, and others looked out of the windows.

 

And all holding up their hands towards heaven made supplication.

 

For the expectation of the mixed multitude, and of the high priest, who was in an agony, would have moved any one to pity.

And these indeed called upon almighty God, to preserve the things that had been committed to them safe and sure for those that had committed them.

 

But Heliodorus executed that which he had resolved on, himself being present in the same place with his guard about the treasury.

 

But the spirit of the Almighty God gave a great evidence of his presence, so that all that had presumed to obey him, falling down by the power of God, were struck with fainting and dread.

For there appeared to them a horse, with a terrible rider upon him, adorned with a very rich covering: and he ran fiercely and struck Heliodorus with his fore feet, and he that sat upon him seemed to have armour of gold.

Moreover there appeared two other young men, beautiful and strong, bright and glorious, and in comely apparel: who stood by him, on either side, and scourged him without ceasing with many stripes.

 

And Heliodorus suddenly fell to the ground, and they took him up, covered with great darkness, and having put him into a litter, they carried him out.

 

So he that came with many servants, and all his guard, into the aforesaid treasury, was carried out, no one being able to help him, the manifest power of God being known.

 

And he indeed, by the power of God, lay speechless, and without all hope of recovery.

 

But they praised the Lord, because he had glorified his place: and the temple, that a little before was full of fear and trouble, when the Almighty Lord appeared, was filled with joy and gladness.

 

Then some of the friends of Heliodorus forthwith begged of Onias, that he would call upon the Most High to grant him his life, who was ready to give up the ghost.

 

So the high priest, considering that the king might perhaps suspect that some mischief had been done to Heliodorus by the Jews, offered a sacrifice of health for the recovery of the man.

 

And when the high priest was praying, the same young men in the same clothing stood by Heliodorus, and said to him: Give thanks to Onias the priest: because for his sake the Lord hath granted thee life.

And thou having been scourged by God, declare unto all men the great works and the power of God. And having spoken thus, they appeared no more.

 

So Heliodorus, after he had offered a sacrifice to God, and made great vows to him, that had granted him life, and given thanks to Onias, taking his troops with him, returned to the king.

 

And he testified to all men the works of the great God, which he had seen with his own eyes.

 

Wow.

 

HerServant and yours.

[Yofu]

 

[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?

 

 

There is Christ of History and Christ of faith. The historical Christ is very different from the Christ of faith. Most of modern christianity is based on Saint Paul's version of Christ. Saint Paul even argued against those disciples who actually met Christ. Christ's brother James, who was the first christian bishop, is written out the estabished Christian history. Why? Because James' understanding of Jesus conflicts with Paul's version. James' version of Christ did not involve salvation via the blood of Christ.

 

So Jesus as understood by many Christians today is not the historial Jesus. So trying meld Gaudiya teaching with a politically motivated version of Jesus won't wash with me.

 

Imagine if a devotee started a Prahupadaism cult, and argued against Prahupada disciples, claimed that Srila Prabhupada died for our sins, and this devotee views became widespread. Then 400 years after Prahupada's disappearance this devotee's followers vote to make Srila Prabhupada God, and this view dominated. And this devotees writing became "sastra". Would you accept that?

 

Well this happened with Jesus. Check out Christian history....check out the councils of Orange, Nicea...anyone who didn't argree with politics of the time were banned etc...

 

Check out the writings of James, Jesus' brother...check out the Gospels not found in the official Bible.

 

 

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?

 

Salvation via the death of Jesus is not a rasa, since political theology is not bhakti. Srila Bhaktisiddhnata, in line with our acaryas,criticised salvation as it is reward seeking. Bhakti is devoid of reward seeking as explained by Srila Rupa Gosvami's first verse of Bhakti Rasamrta Sindhu.

 

 

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

 

Radhika is not mentioned by name because Sukadeva would have gone into to samadhi upon uttering her Holy Name., and would not have been able to finish his narration of the Bhagavatam.

 

Although not mentioned by name, she is mentioned. She is mentioned by the gopis as they go looking for the Lord after he vanishes from the Rasa-dance. They glorify her importance.

 

 

 

 

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.

 

Like Radhika, Mahaprabu is not mentioned by name, but he is mentioned by Garga muni as a hidden avatara.

[theist]

 

So Jesus as understood by many Christians today is not the historial Jesus. So trying meld Gaudiya teaching with a politically motivated version of Jesus won't wash with me.

 

 

As if anyone here has done that. Sheesh

[Avinash]

 

Therefore, regarding this thread, if you find it offensive, please accept my apologies.

 

I am not sure about other, but when I say I disagree with you, it does not mean that I find your statement offensive. It is just that I find some logical fallacies in your argument. You have pointed out some similarities between the names Yasha (of Vishnu Yasha) and Yahshua. It is debatable if the similarities are really significant. But, even if they are, it does not prove that Jesus is Kalki. I am saying this because S.B. mentions Yasha not as the name of Kalki but as the surname of Vishnu Yasha. Vishnu Yasha, as per S.B., is not Kalki's name but the name of the Brhamin in whose house Kalki incernation will take place.

 

You may have some valid points in believing Jesus = Kalki. But I do not agree with the points you have raised so far. If you raise some other points, then I will ponder over those.

[theist]

I like Avinash want to make sure you don't take disagreement on any philosophical point to mean I feel in anyway offended. I only feel disturbed by sectarianists and atheists and you are certainly neither.

[Guest guest]

Interesting discussion. Murali mohan das does show a great equal mindedness in all of this.

 

I dont see any hammers of prosetylization here, no one is asking another to believe anything here. There is a great divide when it comes to religious philosophies, and some cannot make even the slightest leap. However, Krsna Consciousness, as it was delivered to the west by His Divine Grace AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, is decalred always as a non-sectarian philosophy and devotional system. I find it greatly encouraging that so many have understood this, and have utilized this movement as an enhancement of their religious faith.

 

Of course, we are speculating here, but baseball season has just begun, so what else is there to speculate on. We converse in friendship, compare notes and ACTUAL realizations. When someone tells how they see things, we examine the motivation and even, as much as possible, the character of the speaker. My personal guideline is that realizations come not from man, not because someone was told something, but via supersoul who is always teaching us, even while we sleep. If one is engaged in sadhana bhakti practices (Sravana, kirtana, visnu smarana), such realizations are welcome, especially in the framework of transcendental istagosthi, an expression session of confidential friendship.

 

Many points have been made on this thread. Lord Kalki comes at the end of this age, which is thousands of decades away according to vedic calculations, which we must honor if we are to even hold that Kalkiavatar is authentic. He comes when humankind has DEVOLVED to a state much more degraded than in the present. Humans are as big as our dogs and may be even less intelligent (if that is possible), and the live in caves. There is no vegetation, no water, no beauty anywhere. Kalkis sword is for those who are to be taken home, because this is a great form of mercy, a relief from the joke of a life one has stayed around too long to enjoy.

 

According to occidental ideology, Lord Jesus Christ can come and depart many times prior to the advent of Lord Kalki. According to the western shastra, total annihilation is not the second coming of Lord Jesus Christ, so he is not that person. Also, Lord Jesus Christ is compared to Lord Brahma and King Prthu, meaning that he is not visnu-tattwa, rather an empowered servant of Lord Krsna, as he Himself asserts in his available teachings. Lord Kalki (correect me if I am wrong) is Visnu Tattwa. The demise prior to Lord Jesus second coming is devastating, but there is the fact that he sets everything right and a glorious golden age happens for survivors and protected ones. This is not Lord Kalkis agenda, where there are no survivors other than the residents of the siddhalokas who are not affected by day to night changes that occur in one day of Lord Brahma. Kalki comes, the earth is an empty asteroid, comet dust, a bad memory.

 

Lord Jesus Christ may be here now for his second appearance. The honeybees are just about extinct (80% depleted), blinded by UV rays and unable to find pollen, and if they do, unable to find their own queen to do their work. The cyto-plankton is 80% depleted as well, killing all the creatures of the ocean. The world in entering an annihilation phase, but this is refered to as partial annihilation, and may happen over and over again during the coourse of a single Kali Yuga. Some annihilations we can even read about in the news, such as sub-saharan afrika, Kampuchea and now the area of a previous Nubian Paradise which has become a true armageddon called the Sudan. Reading about in the news may not be something we can do when our chickens come home to roost. Welcome to the Mad Max world (I say that because its a common phrase, but mel gibsons portrayal pales in comparison to Tank Girl, but if I said "Tank Girl world, no one would get my drift.)

 

So, my opinion is that Lord Jesus Christ is the servant of Lord Kalki, not Him. There is a difference in the last dance of Lord Nataraja (Shiva) and the disolving of the cosmos performed by Lord Sesa Balarama. But what are we talking here, the end of Lord Brahmas day is one thing, the end of his life is quite another. If I typed a "1" and finished this article with one minute of typing "0", thats how many years this that date.

 

Also in the course of this topic, I notice with a bit of agreement with the person who points out the difference between Paul and Lord Jesus Christ. I also have such understandings that Paul was one who provided structure to the clan of Lord Jesus Christ followers, but did not necessarily convey his actual teachings, left many people out, and created, ultimately, a religion quite prone to the horrors of sectarian spirit which is the basis of wholly irreligious acts of genocide throughout history. Paul survived the censors of Trent when the canon was established not by the profound science he presents, rather from the controlling mechanism he established that was fully acceptable to the likes of constantine (and Sylvester for that matter) for their political agendas.

 

Those who reject Paul, yet still are faithful to the queen of Magdalia, the Goddess of Axum, and the Creator Incarnate, are many. The coptics, the abyssinians, akkadians, rastafarians, druids, all have Lord Jesus Christ without the false doctrines of impersonalism created by Paul. The Cathars and even the source of our stories of Pirates, the descendents of St John the Baptist, these devout followers of Mary and Lord Jesus have always been at the wrong end of the sword of the paulists who control the pursestrings of christianity.

 

Haribol, I like these discussions, lets not get all fanatic and angry here. Or do we talk baseball, no less a fighting arena.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[theist]

I have no more baseball in me Mahak so we must talk of Kalki. I can't remeber if He is Visnu tattva or jiva. I don't think I ever knew actually. Curious on that> Anyone with a referrence?

[mahak]

Krsna does as he pleases, including investing ALL of his potency in his devotee whom he sends anywhere he wishes. I do know that some shaktivesa avataras are not visnu tattwa, such as King Prthu and even Lord Parasurama. I also have read that in some cases (not the Brahma of this universe of four directions (thus four heads)) that Lord Brahma is Visnu Tattwa. I believe that I once heard that Kalki was in the visnu catagory, but will defer to the scholar. I heard from goursundara who was quite scholarly, but it was so many years ago (i even forget how many decades).

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[brajeshwara das]

 

Imagine if a devotee started a Prahupadaism cult, and argued against Prahupada disciples, claimed that Srila Prabhupada died for our sins, and this devotee views became widespread. Then 400 years after Prahupada's disappearance this devotee's followers vote to make Srila Prabhupada God, and this view dominated. And this devotees writing became "sastra". Would you accept that?

 

I hate to say it but I can imagine that!