KRSNA and Jesus Christ:If one loves KRSNA, he must love Lord Jesus also

[krsna]

<center>Krsna and Jesus Christ</center>

 

 

 

 

"If one loves Krishna, he must love Lord Jesus also. And if one perfectly loves Jesus he must love Krishna too. If he says, "Why shall I love Krishna? I shall love Jesus," then he has no knowledge. And if one says, "Why shall I love Jesus? I shall love Krishna", then he has no knowledge either. If one understands Krishna, then he will understand Jesus. If one understands Jesus, you'll understand Krishna too"

 

 

(Srila Prabhupada - Room conversation with Allen Ginsberg, May 12, 1969 / Columbus - Ohio)

[theist]

Thanks for that Krsna. One of my all time favorite instructions from Srila Prabhupada.

[Hermenutic]

I think this thread is okay.

 

I do not believe that Jesus is God in the context of the Hebrew faith that he existed in. However I believe that Jesus is a supreme personality and one from whom the world should take advice.

 

Who knows what God is? I don't. I am simply being receptive. I'm crusing through the universe.

[Guruvani]

However, Srila Prabhupada was not so generous with the "Christians".

He personally found it next to impossible to find a true follower of Jesus amongst the "Christians".

So, Jesus might be fine and dandy, but if the religions built up around his legacy are all actually anti-religion, bigotry and hypocrisy, then we have to think long and hard about giving much attention to Jesus.

 

Beef eating religionists are classifed as demons by the Vedic standard.

Cow killers are not religious people, neither are they following any true religion.

Maybe eating fish is not such a big deal, or even eating pigs and chickens is not the end of the world, but cow killers are very sinful.

These cow killers try to pass themselves off as religious leaders and religious people, but they are all in deep ignorance of true religious principles.

[theist]

 

However, Srila Prabhupada was not so generous with the "Christians".

He personally found it next to impossible to find a true follower of Jesus amongst the "Christians".

So, Jesus might be fine and dandy, but if the religions built up around his legacy are all actually anti-religion, bigotry and hypocrisy, then we have to think long and hard about giving much attention to Jesus.

This is a very foolish statement. Because hypocrites claim to be followers of Christ we should avoid Christ. Brilliant Guruvani. This is tantamount to saying because some people promote counterfeit money we should avoid the genuine bills.

 

Same with Srila Prabhupada. We should not avoid Srila Prabhupada just because some of his supoosed closest disciples turned out to be child rapers and theives.

 

 

Beef eating religionists are classifed as demons by the Vedic standard.

Cow killers are not religious people, neither are they following any true religion.

Maybe eating fish is not such a big deal, or even eating pigs and chickens is not the end of the world, but cow killers are very sinful.

These cow killers try to pass themselves off as religious leaders and religious people, but they are all in deep ignorance of true religious principles.

Do you drink commercial milk? If so you are a calve killer yourself. So what is your preaching platform to the other cow killers.

[Yofu]

Here we go again. Christian Vaisnavaism or should that be Vaisnava Christianity? What is it with you guys?

 

As I keep asking, why are there no murtis of Christ in any Vaisnava temple in India? Why isn't this form of "Vaisnavism" found in the writings of the Gosvamis? Why do you have sentimentality towards your former religion? Next you'll be telling us that Jesus died for our sins.

 

Even IF Jesus was an acarya, he is a pretty minor one when compared to the great Vaisnava acarays. Jesus or Haridas Thakura, for example? Haridas Thakura by a long way. Jesus or any of Mahaprahu's associates? Again, Mahapraphu's associates. So in the scheme of things Jesus is, and should be, a minor character in the Vaisnava world. Just because Christianity is the biggest religion on this planet, it doesn't mean that Jesus should be mixed into Vaisnavaism.

 

It makes me cringe when devotees celebrate christmas day or easter by chanting "Jesus ki jaya" at the end of arti or put Jesus pictures on their altars and do puja to him.

 

Be a Christian or be a Vaisnava, you can't be both.

 

Just because Srila Prabhupada says we should love Jesus if we love Krishna, does not mean we should worship Jesus. Not to love all jivas is jiva apradha, so in that sense I respect Jesus.

[Hermenutic]

 

I think this thread is okay.

 

I do not believe that Jesus is God in the context of the Hebrew faith that he existed in. However I believe that Jesus is a supreme personality and one from whom the world should take advice.

 

Who knows what God is? I don't. I am simply being receptive. I'm crusing through the universe.

 

That is my gripe with the 'church'. As a life long Christian, not any longer, but as one raised in the faith I was able to see that those who were bearing his name were not bearing his attitudes.

 

I see a lot of goodness in Jesus, and a lot of goodness in the Bhagavad Gita. I like to take what I find makes sense to me and leave the rest aside until I find a place for it inside of me. Or realize that it is not all that important. I know that Henry Thoreau relied on the 'Gita' for his spiritual nourishment. He was able to die without fear. That is important to me.

[Guruvani]

The point is that Srila Prabhupada complained that he could not find a SINGLE TRUE FOLLOWER of Jesus from within the "Christian" society.

So, if there is not a true follower of Jesus within "Christiantiy", then what use is the Jesus religion?

 

If Vaishnavas are the only true followers of Jesus, then why not just follow the Vaishnava acharyas instead of the Jewish messiah?

[Hermenutic]

 

That is my gripe with the 'church'. As a life long Christian, not any longer, but as one raised in the faith I was able to see that those who were bearing his name were not bearing his attitudes.

 

I see a lot of goodness in Jesus, and a lot of goodness in the Bhagavad Gita. I like to take what I find makes sense to me and leave the rest aside until I find a place for it inside of me. Or realize that it is not all that important. I know that Henry Thoreau relied on the 'Gita' for his spiritual nourishment. He was able to die without fear. That is important to me.

 

The Christian religion is different from the teaching of Jesus.

 

Jesus is important to all of us because he stated that people should be mindful of each other and if one had a need, to fulfill it. This was in his mind, as I understand it, the 'kingdom of god'. To me it is a wonderful way of relating to my fellow human beings, and in the expression of the Church today it is not present. The Church today is hate filled and intolerant. It in no way represents Jesus' teaching.

 

Jesus, in my mind,is not a rival god. He is simply one of those who have appeared among us and has showed us a better way. Like it says in the 'Lao Tzu'. There is a 'way' that can be spoken of, and then there is a 'Way' that cannot be spoken of. Jesus is the 'way' that can be spoken of. Beyond all of that there is another 'Way'. I find Krishna to be in that tradition. Leading us, guiding us, and explaining things to us.

[theist]

So many pompous religionists masquerading as disciples of Srila Prabhupada yet their religious prejudice makes them unable to accept even these simple words spoken by Srila Prabhupada. Should i reject Prabhupada because of you? Hardly. Srila Prabhupada stands on his own merit as does Jesus Christ. If you can't see that then that is your problem.

[Guruvani]

 

So many pompous religionists masquerading as disciples of Srila Prabhupada yet their religious prejudice makes them unable to accept even these simple words spoken by Srila Prabhupada. Should i reject Prabhupada because of you? Hardly. Srila Prabhupada stands on his own merit as does Jesus Christ. If you can't see that then that is your problem.

 

You fail to accept that Vaishnavism has many genuine religious followers and Jesus doesn't have any.

 

So, that is the difference between Christianity and Vaishnvism.

 

Vaishnavism is genuine religious principles and Christianity is 100% pretentious religion.

 

As if you are some paragon of Christianity to make such a critical statement about the devotees of Krishna.

 

You don't appear to be any turn-the-other cheek Jesus freek, so you really have no position to pass judgement on devotees who accept Srila Prabhupada's verdict that Christianity is hoax religion.

 

Your venomous anger towards devotees is quite obvious as you favor the beef-eater Christians above the non-violent devotees.

 

Why don't you turn your anger against the faker Christians instead of hating the devotees of Krishna?

[Guest guest]

For once, I agree with Guruvani prabhu (my old rival from the ritvik camp ).

 

Those who wish to worship Jesus Christ ... please do so but it's futile to try to link Jesus Christ & Vaisnavism. Thought it's my belief that both paths are bonafide, they're two completely different paths. Best leave them alone.

 

 

You fail to accept that Vaishnavism has many genuine religious followers and Jesus doesn't have any.

 

So, that is the difference between Christianity and Vaishnvism.

 

Vaishnavism is genuine religious principles and Christianity is 100% pretentious religion.

 

As if you are some paragon of Christianity to make such a critical statement about the devotees of Krishna.

 

You don't appear to be any turn-the-other cheek Jesus freek, so you really have no position to pass judgement on devotees who accept Srila Prabhupada's verdict that Christianity is hoax religion.

 

Your venomous anger towards devotees is quite obvious as you favor the beef-eater Christians above the non-violent devotees.

 

Why don't you turn your anger against the faker Christians instead of hating the devotees of Krishna?

[Guest guest]

I go with theist. Who cares if some Christians are hypocrites? That does not tarnish the image of Jesus and what he represents.

 

It is not true that all Christians are bogus. There are many who are faithful in their worship of Jesus. Guruvani is judging Christians using non-Christian standards which is ridiculous.

 

If people like theist choose to synchronize their Christian and Vaishnava beliefs, it is perfectly alright to do so.

[Guest guest]

OK maybe I need to be more clear ... I prefer not to mix the two.

 

 

I go with theist. Who cares if some Christians are hypocrites? That does not tarnish the image of Jesus and what he represents.

 

It is not true that all Christians are bogus. There are many who are faithful in their worship of Jesus. Guruvani is judging Christians using non-Christian standards which is ridiculous.

 

If people like theist choose to synchronize their Christian and Vaishnava beliefs, it is perfectly alright to do so.

[gHari]

Like sooo holier than thou, dude. The truth is that both religions, all religion, religion involves surrender to Krsna. Period.

 

Very few can do this - whether Vaisnava, Christian or Muslim. If we cannot see the few hundred surrendered souls who outwardly act like Vaisnavas, then how can we expect to see the few surrendered souls who act like Christians externally?

[Guest guest]

 

You fail to accept that Vaishnavism has many genuine religious followers and Jesus doesn't have any.

 

So, that is the difference between Christianity and Vaishnvism.

 

Vaishnavism is genuine religious principles and Christianity is 100% pretentious religion.

 

As if you are some paragon of Christianity to make such a critical statement about the devotees of Krishna.

 

You don't appear to be any turn-the-other cheek Jesus freek, so you really have no position to pass judgement on devotees who accept Srila Prabhupada's verdict that Christianity is hoax religion.

 

Your venomous anger towards devotees is quite obvious as you favor the beef-eater Christians above the non-violent devotees.

 

Why don't you turn your anger against the faker Christians instead of hating the devotees of Krishna?

You might wanna take a class in some Vaishnava humility. Lots of people don't appreciate this preachy pushy attitude. It's obnoxious and off-putting. You turn off more then you turn on.

[theist]

 

OK maybe I need to be more clear ... I prefer not to mix the two.

 

Hmmm...It seems so elementary that on a forum of individual PRACTICING devotees who are hearing from a pure devotee such as Srila Prabhupada in the opening words to this thread, it is surprising that one need to to remind such people that Vaisnavism is not a mundane "faith" that springs up like a mushroom from the darkness of the material world only to be uprooted in short order by the time factor and never to be heard from again.

 

Vaisnavism is the sole active principle of the liberated soul. Vaisnavism is intergral to every living being.

 

To think Vaisnavism is a product of India and if the symptoms of vaisnavism start to show up outside of India in some way well then it can't be Vaisnavism is mind stuff for fools.

 

Vaisnavism means 'worship of Visnu' and of Visnu as the Supreme Lord one without a second. Now is someone here saying that if someone else referrs to the one Supreme Lord by a name in a different language that that doesn't count? This is sectarianism and party spirit the great enemies of transcendental truth.

 

What are some of the symptoms of Vaisnavism as they start to rise up in an individual?

He starts to bow down and pray and feel himself dependent on the Supreme Lord. This is seen in the four different types of seekers of the Lord as described in Bhagavad-gita. He will start to feel a need to serve the Lord and be pleasing to Him by changing his life to live in accord with Godly principles. This is of course the mixed stages of devotional service and I doubt highly any of us on this forum have risen above the mixed stage of devotional service.

 

So when I see these symptoms in any individual I see him as a mixed devotee and that is irregardless if he carries a flag of Christ or Hanuman.

 

Yes there are two paths being talked about on this thread. The path of mundane sectarianism and the path of Bhakti in it's pure form and in it's mixed stage.

[Guest guest]

 

Vaisnavism is the sole active principle of the liberated soul. Vaisnavism is intergral to every living being.

 

To think Vaisnavism is a product of India and if the symptoms of vaisnavism start to show up outside of India in some way well then it can't be Vaisnavism is mind stuff for fools.

 

I agree. Sectarianism is never a healthy attribute.

 

From the Narada Pancaratra-

 

Sarvopadhi-vinirmuktam tat-paratvena nirmalam. Hrsikena hrsikesa-sevanam bhaktir ucyate.

 

"Bhakti, or devotional service, means engaging all our senses in the service of the Lord, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the master of all the senses. When the spirit soul renders service unto the Supreme, there are two side effects.<I><B>One is freed from all material designations</B></I>, and, simply by being employed in the service of the Lord, one's senses are purified."

[Guruvani]

 

You might wanna take a class in some Vaishnava humility. Lots of people don't appreciate this preachy pushy attitude. It's obnoxious and off-putting. You turn off more then you turn on.

 

You can blame me if you get your cookies doing so, but the fact is that Srila Prabhupada was very critical of the Christians. It is not simply my manufactured opinion.

 

"Christian" is itself a manufactured name.

 

If we called devotees "Krishnas" then that is about the equivelant.

 

Jesus did not give a name or a designation to his followers, as he only claimed to be fullfilling the Jewish Hebrew scriptures.

 

Probabaly Paul manufactured the name "Christian".

 

Jesus never approved any such concept as "Christian" nor did he ever approve the Churchianity manufactured by Paul.

 

Paul and successive thinkers in his line have manufactured the Christian theology and it was never approved or authorized by Jesus.

[Guest guest]

 

"If one loves Krishna, he must love Lord Jesus also. (Srila Prabhupada - Room conversation with Allen Ginsberg, May 12, 1969 / Columbus - Ohio)

 

Seems that SP attributes some form of divinity to Jesus of Nazareth because he addresses him as Lord Jesus in several instances.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

You can blame me if you get your cookies doing so, but the fact is that Srila Prabhupada was very critical of the Christians. It is not simply my manufactured opinion.

 

"Christian" is itself a manufactured name.

 

If we called devotees "Krishnas" then that is about the equivelant.

 

Jesus did not give a name or a designation to his followers, as he only claimed to be fullfilling the Jewish Hebrew scriptures.

 

Probabaly Paul manufactured the name "Christian".

 

Jesus never approved any such concept as "Christian" nor did he ever approve the Churchianity manufactured by Paul.

 

Paul and successive thinkers in his line have manufactured the Christian theology and it was never approved or authorized by Jesus.

 

Way to change the subject, Prabhu!! Of course, you could do a better job of changing the subject. Now your foot is going deeper into your mouth.

 

By your own reasoning, we could say, where did we get this term "Gaudiya Vaishnava"? Krishna Himself did not give this term. Nor did Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.

 

Is Krishna Consciousness all just a "concoction" of the Six Goswamis? After all, *they* have given most of the formal practices of Bhakti, and not Sri Krishna or Mahaprabhu. Is that the Vaishnava vision?

 

What you say might be true in a sense, but does it really have any bearing on the topic at hand?

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Like sooo holier than thou, dude. The truth is that both religions, all religion, religion involves surrender to Krsna. Period.

 

Very few can do this - whether Vaisnava, Christian or Muslim. If we cannot see the few hundred surrendered souls who outwardly act like Vaisnavas, then how can we expect to see the few surrendered souls who act like Christians externally?

 

Well said!!!

 

Wasn't it Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Prabhupada who, after completing parikrama of Vrindavan, lamented that, in all of Vrindavan, he had not found a single Vaishnava?

[theist]

 

Seems that SP attributes some form of divinity to Jesus of Nazareth because he addresses him as Lord Jesus in several instances.

Yes there are literlly hundreds of such instances where Srila Prabhupada referres to Lord Jesus Christ as a Shatya-vesa avatar of krsna. Other shakya-vesa avatars are Lord Buddha Narada Muni Prithu Maharaja.

 

Here is one such instance.

 

From coversations.

Martin: Can a true devotee come face-to-face with God through the teachings of Buddha, the teachings of Christ?

 

Prabhupäda: Yes. Teachings of Christ, teaching of Buddha, they are meant for a particular type of men. Generally it is meant for everyone, but specifically for a particular type of men. Just like Lord Buddha, he preached ahimsä. They were a particular type of men. Lord Jesus Christ also preached to a particular type of men. "Thou shall not kill.'' That means they were killing. Is it not? If I say, "Thou shall not steal,'' that means you are thief, you are stealing. So a kind of preaching among the thieves and a kind of teaching among the philosophers must be different. That is the difference. Lord Buddha is Krsna, Lord Jesus Christ was Krsna incarnation, but they were preaching to a different type of people. Therefore you'll find difference of Lord Jesus Christ teaching, Buddha's teaching, Krsna's teaching. Krsna's teaching also is there, which is also Buddha's teaching. But more than that, because the persons amongst whom He was teaching, they were far, far elevated than the thieves and the rogues. That is the difference.

[Guruvani]

Well, if you want to quote Srila Prabhupada on Jesus, we can also recall his writing in Chaitanya Caritamrita that devotees like Vasudeva Datta and Haridas Thakur are MILLIONS of times GREATER than Jesus Christ.

 

So, why would anyone bother with Jesus when we can worship great devotees of the Lord who are MILLIONS of times greater than Jesus.

 

If somebody offers you a nickel and somebody else offers you a million dollars, which one would you take?

 

I'll take the millions dollars and you can have the nickel.

[theist]

 

Well, if you want to quote Srila Prabhupada on Jesus, we can also recall his writing in Chaitanya Caritamrita that devotees like Vasudeva Datta and Haridas Thakur are MILLIONS of times GREATER than Jesus Christ.

 

So, why would anyone bother with Jesus when we can worship great devotees of the Lord who are MILLIONS of times greater than Jesus.

 

If somebody offers you a nickel and somebody else offers you a million dollars, which one would you take?

 

I'll take the millions dollars and you can have the nickel.

 

You are so offensive to Lord Krsna's shaktya-vesa incarnation as Jesus Christ that you don't get a cent guruvani. At this rate you will becursed to have to listen to yourself for a billion births.

 

Please stop advertising yourself as a representative disciple of Srila Prabhupada. That much honesty is required. Drop the game imposter.

 

Having a veda base you know I could pull up a thousand similar quotes as the one I posted and as Krsna posted to start this thread. No disciple would so opening mock the teachings of his own guru as yo have consistently done on this forum.