Is Jesus also Vishnu?

[Guest guest]

 

Text 41 Purport,

THE THEOLOGICAL CONTROVERSY REGARDING SRI BALADEVA AS JIVA TATTVA IS NOT ONLY BETWEEN THE SHANKARITES, SHAIVITES AND VAISHNAVAS, BUT IS ALSO FOUND BETWEEN THE VARIOUS SCHOOLS OR LINEAGES OF VAISHNAVISM AS WELL.

 

Christian thought is a branch of devotional Vaisnavism. The theology of Jesus and the teaching of His divinity is very similar to Vaisnava teaching on Baladeva.

 

The way I understand this controversy among the Vaishnavas as to the identity of Baladeva is that some Vaishnavas see Lord Baladeva as a jiva, just like they see Srimati Radharani as a jiva. Not every Vaishnava school accepts Lord Krsna's brother as identical with Sankarsana, the direct expansion of Lor Vishnu. Thus there are many different Vaishnava teachings on Baladeva.

 

As to the similarities of Baladeva to the divinity of Jesus it is a very hard sell if one speaks of the Gaudiya Vaishnava understanding of things.

 

Best to avoid such comparisons as theological blunders seem inevitable here and chances of satisfying both mainstream Christians and mainstream Vaishnavas with our analysis are very slim.

[theist]

We need to understand the nature of a shaktyavesa avatar.

[Guest guest]

I just prefer to be the servant (which is what I am, whether I like it or not). I have no intention of being 'one' with the Lord whether it is simultaneously or exclusively.

 

 

Simultaneously one and different is diffucult to grasp. Vaisnavas mostly seem to give short play to the oneness aspect in preference to the dualism. Thinking the acceptance of oness cancels out the difference. Advaitins only like what they conceive to be oneness canceling out all dualism.

 

The key word to grasp is simultaneously, and this is what our material molded minds have so much trouble with.

[Guest guest]

I don't see what Lord Balaram being 'one' with the Lord has anything to do with me. Lord Balaram is Visnu tattva, I am not.

 

 

You may respectfully disagree, but you are not correct to quote Sri Caitanya in this way. Please review the following:

 

From CC Adi-Lila Ch. 5. The Glories of Lord Nityananda Balarama

 

Text 5

"They are both one and the same identity. They differ only in form. He is the first bodily expansion of Krishna, and He assists in Lord Krishna’s transcendental pastimes."

 

Purport

 

"Balarama is a svamsa expansion of the Lord, and therefore there is no difference in potency between Krishna and Balarama."

 

 

Text 10 Purport

 

"Sri Balarama is the servitor Godhead who serves Lord Krishna in all affairs of existence and knowledge."

 

Text 18 Purport

 

"That transcendental abode exists by the energy of Sri Baladeva, who is the original whole of Shesha, or Ananta. The tantras also confirm this description by stating that the abode of Sri Anantadeva, the plenary portion of Baladeva, is called the kingdom of God."

 

Text 41 Purport

 

"Sankarshana, the second expansion, is Vasudeva's personal expansion for pastimes, and since He is the reservoir of all living entities, He is sometimes called jiva."

 

[For more important discussion of Lord Balarama as jiva, see especially numbered points 1 and 2 on page 170 regarding refutation of Adi Shankaracharya’s teaching that Sri Baladeva as jiva is the ordinary living entity.]

 

Text 41 Purport,

 

"In the spiritual sky there is a spiritual creative energy technically called shuddha-sattva, which is a pure spiritual energy that sustains all the Vaikuntha planets with the full opulences of knowledge, wealth, prowess etc. All these actions of shuddha-sattva display the potencies of Maha-Sankarshana, who is the ultimate reservoir of all individual living entities who are suffering in the material world. When the cosmic creation is annihilated, the living entities, who are indestructible by nature, rest in the body of Maha-Sankarshana. Sankarshana is sometimes therefore called the total jiva."

 

THE THEOLOGICAL CONTROVERSY REGARDING SRI BALADEVA AS JIVA TATTVA IS NOT ONLY BETWEEN THE SHANKARITES, SHAIVITES AND VAISHNAVAS, BUT IS ALSO FOUND BETWEEN THE VARIOUS SCHOOLS OR LINEAGES OF VAISHNAVISM AS WELL.

 

Christian thought is a branch of devotional Vaisnavism. The theology of Jesus and the teaching of His divinity is very similar to Vaisnava teaching on Baladeva.

[theist]

 

I don't see what Lord Balaram being 'one' with the Lord has anything to do with me. Lord Balaram is Visnu tattva, I am not.

 

Jiva tattva also comes with oneness....and difference, and that's the difference.

[theist]

 

I just prefer to be the servant (which is what I am, whether I like it or not). I have no intention of being 'one' with the Lord whether it is simultaneously or exclusively.

 

Then you will have to find another existence because you are made of nothing but Krsna as well as endowed with your own minute independence as an individual which incidently came from Krsna.

[Guest guest]

As far as GVs point about visnu not being able to be murdered, this is a fact, but doesnt settle the issue. Because Lord Jesus Christ also defeated death.

 

The great mahabhagavatas defeat death, especially King Dhruva. King Bhisma could not be killed in any manner. Shakta avesa avatars come and go as they please, which is another point that should be discussed in any thread concerning Lord Jesus Christ. His mother is actually shaktavesa avatar, because SHE DOES COME AND GO AS SHE PLEASES, appears by her own will to countless individuals throughout history. Jesus may have knocked Saul of Tarsus off his mount, but who else? Mary of Axum has appeared at Fatima, Lourdes, Guadaloupe, and there is always a big deal when she does, usually opposed by christians who deny that She can do such things.

 

So, Jesus is not visnu, and those who say he is are NOT pleasing to him, because he admonishes his disciples for even calling him "good rabbi", saying only god is good.

 

All glories to the shaktivesa avatar, Mary of Axum, Daughter of Solomon, born of Hanna and Joachim, Israel, the wife of God.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[HerServant]

 

The way I understand this controversy among the Vaishnavas as to the identity of Baladeva is that some Vaishnavas see Lord Baladeva as a jiva, just like they see Srimati Radharani as a jiva. Not every Vaishnava school accepts Lord Krsna's brother as identical with Sankarsana, the direct expansion of Lor Vishnu. Thus there are many different Vaishnava teachings on Baladeva.

 

As to the similarities of Baladeva to the divinity of Jesus it is a very hard sell if one speaks of the Gaudiya Vaishnava understanding of things.

 

Best to avoid such comparisons as theological blunders seem inevitable here and chances of satisfying both mainstream Christians and mainstream Vaishnavas with our analysis are very slim.

 

PAMHO

 

I am not trying to "sell" the similarities. I don't want sell anything and I am not asking you to buy anything.

 

I am pointing out 2 things. First there is difference of theological interpretation of the relationship of Baladeva to jiva tattva.

 

Second, that the catholic credo (statement of core belief) says:

 

"We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth];" - The Nicene Creed - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicene_Creed

 

So the person who wrote the thread asked "Is Jesus Visnu?"

 

To the body of christian believers, the answer has been "yes" and can be historically documented as such since the 1st century.

 

Now if you compare the CC Adi Lila and Vaisnava and Shaivaite theologies on Jiva Tattva, the only honest academic conclusion is that the Christian teachings on Jesus divinity and 2nd person of Godhead, and Vaisnava teachings on Baladeva have strong similarity.

 

Also, IF we were to expressed or decribe the Jesus Son of God, of the Nicene creed in sanskrit terminology, then WHO would we describe and how?

 

You can tell me Jesus is not Visnu and I am happy to respect your opinion.

 

But I can tell you what our belief is, and that is He is God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God.

 

I personally do not see any conflict in the scriptures between our traditions. The only conflict arises in the commentary and evangelists.

 

Peace.

 

HS and yours

[HerServant]

 

Burn the unbelievers

 

If a man does not believe in me, he is cast forth as

the branches of a tree, and is withered; and men

gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are

burned.

 

John 15:6

 

Seek and ye shall find.

 

First of all you must seek and ask the meaning. Do you think this passage refers to physical fire?

 

Or is the the fire of prana? Try translating Jesus words into sanskrit terms and see what you will find.

 

( .. not that "scholar" is really interested as all of "scholar's" posts to date are atheistic..)

 

For those really interested, here is a basic explanation:

 

"If you don't believe in me " (that means all of the spiritual precepts that Jesus teaches as they are one and the same with Him, the Word)

 

"he is cast forth as

the branches of a tree, and is withered" - that means anyone without spiritual discipline and devotion to God becomes weak and "withers" and covered in maya. Hence Withered branches are pruned from the Kingdom of God and are "cast forth" into the material modes of passion (fire) and ignorance.

 

"and men

gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are

burned."

 

Lusty affairs of "men" bond the withered vines and they burn in the fires of passion.

[theist]

 

Second, that the catholic credo (statement of core belief) says:

 

"We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth];" - The Nicene Creed - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicene_Creed

 

This describes Jesus as Lord Brahma, as is stated in the begining of John, and not Vishnu.

 

The Word Became Flesh

 

*John 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning.

 

**3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

 

 

 

4In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood^[a] it.

6There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. 7He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. 8He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.^[b]

10He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13children born not of natural descent,^[c] nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.

14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,^[d] who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

 

 

*This is Lord Caotanyas acintya bhedabheda.

**This describes the role of Brahma as the secondary creator (visarga)

 

Clearly John saw Jesus as the person Hindus call Brahma. But not a Brahma coming up to the post while in the cycle of samsara but a Brahma descending to fill the role.

[HerServant]

 

Shakta avesa avatars come and go as they please, which is another point that should be discussed in any thread concerning Lord Jesus Christ. His mother is actually shaktavesa avatar, because SHE DOES COME AND GO AS SHE PLEASES, appears by her own will to countless individuals throughout history. Jesus may have knocked Saul of Tarsus off his mount, but who else? Mary of Axum has appeared at Fatima, Lourdes, Guadaloupe, and there is always a big deal when she does, usually opposed by christians who deny that She can do such things.

 

So, Jesus is not visnu, and those who say he is are NOT pleasing to him, because he admonishes his disciples for even calling him "good rabbi", saying only god is good.

 

All glories to the shaktivesa avatar, Mary of Axum, Daughter of Solomon, born of Hanna and Joachim, Israel, the wife of God.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

Jesus appears as servant of servants. Does Visnu? If St. Paul is correct, Jesus also renounces equality with God (Visnu) because Jesus' Himself does not deem equality with God "something to be grasp at/for"

 

But this does not mean the Jesus is not Visnu. IF Visnu wished to take birth and take the form of a servant, would He still be Visnu?

 

These are some of the questions that I have.

 

And one more question:

 

Where, anywhere in Vedas, Upanishads, and Vedic literature is there a reference to such a thing as Shakta avesa avatar?

 

I have not been able to find this term anywhere! (expect among the HK commentaries). No scripture seems to have such a term.

[theist]

Balarama considers Himself the servant of Krsna even though He is Visnu tattva.

 

This is a very important area of disccusion and a point which has bedeviled Christian theologians for 2,000 years. Seen through the eyes of Lord Caitanyas devotees however it all becomes crystal clear.

[HerServant]

 

This describes Jesus as Lord Brahma, as is stated in the begining of John, and not Vishnu.

 

I'll add the quote from John in a minute.

 

I have no problem with Jesus being Lord Brahma either.

 

I do not view this thread as a debate. It is place to present different ideas.

 

I think I can make the following observation:

 

A realization of Jesus as master reveals His Lordship which is the same realization of Jesus as Visnu.

 

But Jesus says He reveals the Father. Then there must be a realization of Visnu as Visnu and in this realization, Jesus must be an associate.

 

We should remind ourselves we are "talking" about realizations we really could not describe with words.

[theist]

 

I have no problem with Jesus being Lord Brahma either.

 

I do not view this thread as a debate. It is place to present different ideas.

 

I think I can make the following observation:

 

A realization of Jesus as master reveals His Lordship which is the same realization of Jesus as Visnu.

But Jesus says He reveals the Father. Then there must be a realization of Visnu as Visnu and in this realization, Jesus must be an associate.

 

We should remind ourselves we are "talking" about realizations we really could not describe with words.

 

No I am not debating either although I see the answer in Lord Caitanya's oneness and difference. I also see that Jesus taught this same oneness and difference even before the appearance of Lord Caitanya.

 

We read the quotes where he says "I and the Father are one...If you have seen me you have seen the Father" Then later in the same chapter he says, "the Father is greater than I."

 

Srila Prabhupada used the term, the Supreme Personality of Servitor Godhead to describe the pure devotee. I love this expression because it so perfectly reveals the actual position of the perfected jiva.

[mahak]

Creator and annihilator, this is the position.

 

In Chaitanya charitamrta (which I actually prefer the classic Teachings of Lord Chaitanya), the avatars are explained. Srila Prabhupada also, in the chapters of SB concerning King Prthu, describe Him as shaktiavesa avatar. A key, to me anyway, is that such a person is OBVIOUSLY not an ordinary person, at any stage in his life. King Prthu was born fully grown with his queen arci (partial incarnation of Srimati Laxmidevi) from the funeral pyre of the evil king vena. If one wants to delve into the history of the person, Lord Jesus Christ, one can also make a case for an extra-ordinary being, from his very birth. There are historical accounts (without sanction from any christian eccliastic religion) of extraordinary activities of both Lord Jesus and Mary, even while in exile in the early years in Egypt. If not for the mysogenistic book burnings at the council of trent by the sol invinctus worshipper constantine and his lac key pope sylvester, we would have the authorized biographies undertaken by the REAL scholars of the time, i.e. the midwife Salome who actually never left the presence of Lord Jesus Christ from birth to the purported ascension.

 

From my understanding of Lord Jesus Christ, I reject his claimed (by others, not himself) divinity for the very reason that this would nullify all his teachings of rasa. He says, Pray as I do". This would be an ultra-cruel joke for Visnu to tell jiva to do such a thing. He says "Take my yoke", another impossible task is he were visnu. If he is the self-same Father, who he says sent him, then there is no relationship there, it is an imagined deal. No, jesus christ teaches us by example how to establish our relationship with OUR father. He has descended (avatar) to take us by the hand and lead us to the real Love of our life. This descending may not be classic avatar, but it is certainly the description of acarya, one who leads the way by shining example, one who invokes the DESCENDING process of God revealing Himself through his confidential servant who is never away from Him.

 

Same goes with prabhupada. I dont need to give him an "avatar" stamp, because acarya is sufficient and not lacking in any spiritual potency whatsoever. I dont need to declare him to be as good as god because he actually has God in his pocket and can give him freely to whomever he wishes. I dont need to say jesus is god, because I have come to realize that perhaps the Mother is even greater in spiritual potency than the Son, that She actually controls the son (rasa, not understood by most) by telling him to wait before he starts his mystic display, tells him to not disappear even if his purpose is to fix the misconceptions of the religionists. Jesus went on about how his mother was rather lame, but when all was said and done, he did get back into the station wagon (typical pre-teen, eh?).

 

Lord Jesus Christ is who he is, who he says he is, and realized by the faithful followers. None of which, BTW, make the critical blunder of destroying the father-son relationship he teaches and demonstrates as acarya by making him out to be the father. If Lord Jesus Christ is Lord Visnu, God the father, then he is a liar and all visnu religions are a lie as well. We already know that christian religions who say he is the father are liars influenced by constantine and sylvester.

 

Visnu did not appear as Lord Chaitanya. Lord Chaitanya is primeval Lord, the original personality of Godhead, from which Visnu is as avatar. Lord Chaitanya is the internal potency of Krsna, a form of Sri Sri Radha Krsna. Lord Visnu is the maintainer of the mahat tattwa, but Sri Sri Radha Krsna are not at all involvede with such things. They play in the forests of Talavana, they have sub-forms that do all that bestowing of maintenance as Visnu-laxmi. Teachings of Lord Chaitanya, blow the dust off, and read it, the best of books.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[theist]

 

We should remind ourselves we are "talking" about realizations we really could not describe with words.

 

Yes I agree this is essential. Our materially molded minds and intellects cannot house the transcendental reality...that is why it is called transcendental. The acintya in acintya bhedabheda.

 

We take in words that hold certain concepts but the concepts and words are not the thing itself. They are meant to be springboards for our turning to our spiritually directed intutions which is how we start receiving impressions of truth from the Lord in the heart.

[theist]

 

From my understanding of Lord Jesus Christ, I reject his claimed (by others, not himself) divinity for the very reason that this would nullify all his teachings of rasa. He says, Pray as I do". This would be an ultra-cruel joke for Visnu to tell jiva to do such a thing. He says "Take my yoke", another impossible task is he were visnu. If he is the self-same Father, who he says sent him, then there is no relationship there, it is an imagined deal. No, jesus christ teaches us by example how to establish our relationship with OUR father. He has descended (avatar) to take us by the hand and lead us to the real Love of our life. This descending may not be classic avatar, but it is certainly the description of acarya, one who leads the way by shining example, one who invokes the DESCENDING process of God revealing Himself through his confidential servant who is never away from Him.

 

 

I have to disagree with this one mahaksa on the basis of the below.

 

 

TRANSLATION Bg 3.23

For, if I did not engage in work, O Partha, certainly all men would follow My path.

 

PURPORT

In order to keep the balance of social tranquility for progress in spiritual life. there are traditional family usages meant for every civilized man. Although such rules and regulations are for the conditioned souls and not Lord Krishna, because He descended to establish the principles of religion, He followed the prescribed rules. Otherwise, common men would follow in His footsteps because He is the greatest authority. From the Srimad-Bhagavatam it is understood that Lord Krishna was performing all the religious duties at home and out of home, as required of a householder.

 

 

 

TRANSLATION 3.24

If I should cease to work, then all these worlds would be put to ruination. I would also be the cause of creating unwanted population, and I would thereby destroy the peace of all sentient beings.

 

PURPORT

Varna-sankara is unwanted population which disturbs the peace of the general society. In order to check this social disturbance, there are prescribed rules and regulations by which the population can automatically become peaceful and organized for spiritual progress in life. When Lord Krishna descends, naturally He deals with such rules and regulations in order to maintain the prestige and necessity of such important performances. The Lord is the father of all living entities, and if the living entities are misguided, indirectly the responsibility goes to the Lord. Therefore, whenever there is general disregard of regulative principles, the Lord Himself descends and corrects the society. We should, however, note carefully that although we have to follow in the footsteps of the Lord, we still have to remember that we cannot imitate Him. Following and imitating are not on the same level. We cannot imitate the Lord by lifting Govardhana Hill, as the Lord did in His childhood. It is impossible for any human being. We have to follow His instructions, but we may not imitate Him at any time. The Srimad-Bhagavatam affirms:

naitat samacarej jatu manasapi hy anisvarah

vinasyaty acaran maudhyad yatha 'rudro 'bdhijam visham

isvaranam vacah satyam tathaivacaritam kvacit

tesham yat sva-vaco yuktam buddhimams tat samacaret

"One should simply follow the instructions of the Lord and His empowered servants. Their instructions are all good for us, and any intelligent person will perform them as instructed. However, one should guard against trying to imitate their actions. One should not try to drink the ocean of poison in imitation of Lord Siva." (Bhag. 10.33.30)

We should always consider the position of the isvaras, or those who can actually control the movements of the sun and moon, as superior. Without such power, one cannot imitate the isvaras, who are superpowerful. Lord Siva drank poison to the extent of swallowing an ocean, but if any common man tries to drink even a fragment of such poison, he will be killed. There are many psuedo-devotees of Lord Siva who want to indulge in smoking ganja (marijuana) and similar intoxicating drugs, forgetting that by so imitating the acts of Lord Siva they are calling death very near. Similarly, there are some psuedo-devotees of Lord Krishna who prefer to imitate the Lord in His rasa-lila, or dance of love, forgetting their inability to lift Govardhana Hill. It is best, therefore, that one not try to imitate the powerful, but simply follow their instructions; nor should one try to occupy their posts without qualification. There are so many "incarnations" of God without the power of the Supreme Godhead.

 

 

[HerServant]

 

Srila Prabhupada used the term, the Supreme Personality of Servitor Godhead to describe the pure devotee. I love this expression because it so perfectly reveals the actual position of the perfected jiva.

 

Right. So let's talk about the trinity for a moment. We will agree that the only Absolute is God Himself.

 

So we have Krsna Baladeva and Paramatma as Trinity. Since Baladeva is servitor, His form (and association) must be Perfect Jiva, i,e Jiva Tattva. But He is not limited As Jiva.

 

The perfect soul who receives His Mercy then too becomes perfect jiva. This I believe is Jesus' teaching in John 15:1 (I am the Vine, you are the branch, ny Father the vine dresser)

 

The Jiva relationship to Visnu is subordinate. It is dependent on, it rests on Visnu.

 

If Jesus is Jiva Tattva, it a makes no difference if He is branch or vine. The essence is the same.

 

This is why salvation can come directly from Baladeva or a saint. They are one.

 

Guru is one. Therefore it is the correct conception, even from the christian perspective to think of Jesus as perfect godbrother.

 

But any jiva soul that becomes pure must be Jiva Tattva and one with the Shelter of All Jivas. That is Baladeva, a divine person. He is simultaneously the same identity as those that obtain the fullness of His mercy, yet He is also beyond jiva tattva.

 

The desert fathers and christian saints have the realization that Jesus is that. A perfect person (expressed as "True Man" in the Christian creed) AND simultaneously the manifestation of the Father Visnu. This is why He is called True God and True Man.

 

No Jiva Tattva can be Jiva Tattva without being One with the Body of the Shelter of All jivas. That Shelter of All Jivas is known as Sankarsana, God Himself.

 

Yet HE does not reveal Himself that way but rather as a servant.

 

This is what I beleive is meant by Shakti Avesya .. partial revelation of the Godhead, because He does not choose to reveal Himself in fullness and opulence.

 

The varying degrees of Shakti Avesya all must still be one with jiva tattva.

 

This is why Paul calls Jesus the "image of the invisible God" and the Church fathers call Him "True Man" and "Only Begotten"

 

I concede, as the above thoughts indicate, now we are talking about the theological views and differences of the Trinity.

 

I am comfortable with the eastern view that Jesus is perfect godbrother. That is how He wishes to be thought of anyway.

 

"Our Father, who art in heaven ..."

 

But I am reasonably certain that if Baladeva makes an appearance, He would be the same "personality"

 

Whether you view that personality as the Vine that shelters all the branches, or just branch of the One True Vine, will be a matter of personal realization or logical conviction.

 

Devotees on either side are one, particularly if they keep it simple.

[mahak]

Haribol, theist and her servant. Glad to see real discussions taking place.

 

Theist, there is no disagreement between us. The point I was trying to make is a simple one. There are many who try to claim that Prabhupadas position is so exhalted that it can never be attained. This has been the problem with christianity as well, If jesus is the father, then his desire that we achieve his level of spirituality is an impossibility. If Srila Prabhupada does not want us to achieve his level of Krsna Consciousness or KNOWS THIS IDEA IS IMPOSSIBLE, this is my concern.

 

Krsnas statement in Bhagavad Gita is clear as well. When Krsna appears among the jiva tattwas, he does set the example of spiritual life to follow. He defines the parameters, and he clearly tells us what is his pleasure. However, there is no doubt about who the speaker is, there is no fuzzy area about whether he is expecting us to be like him in all respects. In fact, the story of Paundraka clears this up. He doesnt kill him before he laughs at him. Which is worse, eh?

 

Sometimes it is said that the acarya has more compassion than the Lord Himself, and this is why. The acarya is one who is with God. Even the acarya has to get rid of some of his spirituality in order to retrieve the lost sheep. Srila Prabhupada tells us that the uttama adhikari has to put somewhat of a governor on his spirituality, become a madhyama adhikari in order to do his work as acarya. If Srila Prabhupada were to hold his position as uttama adhikari, then he would have no disciples, because he would see all in their swarupa, all in their krsna conscious state. The madhyama adhikari sees distinction between devotee and demon, and thus can do the work to rid the demon of his vices in order to make him into a devotee.

 

Her servant, you are way correct in the fact that Lord Sesa Balarama is the spiritual master of us all, residing always in the heart of all who have symptoms of life. When one has had enough and sincerely wants to end misery, poverty, wants to find the true, and one truely wise, Lord Balarama is the Supreme Lord who inspires the acarya to appear before the sincere devotee. That He would appear as Lord Jesus Christ is not at all provocative to me, (who adamantly has said the Lord Jesus Christ is not Visnu Tattwa), because the glory of guru tattwa, how chaita guru (lord Balarama) empowers a devotee to fully represent the interests of the Supreme Lord, is steeped in the Acintya (inconceivable) bheda bheda (same and different) Tattwa (reality).

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[mahak]

This is Lord Brahma as well, who has taken his form from the lotus springing from the form of Maha Visnu. If this is not another term for "only begotton", what else is. Christian theology is not about God being able to only have one offspring, for Lord Jesus Taught our ultimate brotherhood. And, the chapter theist has nicely presented tells us how Krsna is also the Father of all who live, deswpite how some hate the idea that fatherhood is not a position of giving food and shelter, but the full rasa of servitude and reciprocal relationship between father and children.

 

Mary, too, dont forget. She is stated as having the Lord with her. This is not her father, this is her husband, because in the same sentence she is honored for that which is placed in her womb, Lord Jesus Christ.

 

Haribol, ys, mahak

[theist]

 

So we have Krsna Baladeva and Paramatma as Trinity. Since Baladeva is servitor, His form (and association) must be Perfect Jiva, i,e Jiva Tattva. But He is not limited As Jiva.

I disagree. His form is Vishnu tattva according to Srila Prabhupada. Can't the Supreme Lord also enjoy serving Himself? Why can the jivas have the pleasure and not also the Lord Himself.

 

When I mentioned the Supreme Personaity of Servitor Godhead I was not speaking of Balarama but of the perfected jiva. The perfected jiva does not become Balarama.Balarama is the Supreme Personality of Godhead who likes serve Krsna.

 

I can see where it could be a confusing phrase but I used it to emphasis the oneness in the one and difference doctrine.

[theist]

 

Theist, there is no disagreement between us. The point I was trying to make is a simple one. There are many who try to claim that Prabhupadas position is so exhalted that it can never be attained. This has been the problem with christianity as well, If jesus is the father, then his desire that we achieve his level of spirituality is an impossibility. If Srila Prabhupada does not want us to achieve his level of Krsna Consciousness or KNOWS THIS IDEA IS IMPOSSIBLE, this is my concern.

 

Oh yeah this idea of the unattainable goal is really the trick of the devil if there ever was one. It is diametrically opposed to teachings of Srila Prabhupada and Lord Jesus as well.

 

The flag wavers of both traditions want them to remain on the throne so they can keep to their own nonsensense and feel good about waving a flag a support before them, whereas the devotee wants everyone else to become even a greater devotee then they themselves.

 

Yes we should bow down to such souls, offer them incense and flowers and praises but we must also fulfill the ardent wish for us and that is to become purified devotees ourselves by loving Krsna without restriction or calculation.

 

The perfect example is the Christian who preaches Jesus went to the cross for everyone and ignores the instruction Jesus gave His disciples on the way to the cross, "Pick up your cross and follow me."

 

It is just so much easier to wave flags than to crucify the fleshly desires and do the will of Lord instead.

 

This is why I do not consider myself a real follower of Jesus or Srila Prabhupada. I can't bear the price to be paid....yet. Someday:pray: I've seen through the flag waving charade but the real work lies unfinished.

 

As to the Trinity Srila Prabhupada taught vaisnavas take this as refering to Krsna (Father) Paramatma (Holy Spirit, internal teacher and guide, and Perfected Jiva like Christ (Son).

 

This goes to mahaksas point. We are meant to be living as a member of this Triune God and not merely worshipping from a distance. That is the beginning but not the end. Jesus said "Be perfect even as the Father in heaven is perfect." He never instructed that we just wave flags and behave like cheerleaders

[Guest guest]

Yeah, to be a christian or a vaisnava. Despite this obvious flaw in our character molded in the unfortunate era of Kali yuga, the idea of salvation is there nonetheless. But we say we are fallen, not because we are humble, like bhaktivinode who says the same thing, but because we recognize the indisputable fact of our condition. This is and of itself is a small step, and we cry, like the baby wanting mama, haribol.

 

Awhile back, I wrote a thesis, not a dogma, about trinity. Sorry for those who have read often, but since trinity has come up, here is my perspective. Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

...

 

A TRINITY PERSPECTIVE by mahaksadasa

Haribol, all glories to Sri Sri Guru and Gauranga!

 

Often the Christian World uses the concept of "Trinity" to describe their accepted faith. However, when this is put to submissive inquiry, such theology is simply described as a mystery. Though the three aspects of the Absolute Truth are valid, attempts to merge these ideas into One Supreme Being pose a dilemna.

 

In the Vaisnava School, the word "trinity" can be used to explain the process of verification of Absolute Truth which has elaborate explanation, that is Guru-Sadhu-Shastra.

 

Guru is none other than God the Father, the worshippable Lord in the Heart, referred to by the jnanis as Paramatma, yet further understood by the Vaisnava as Sri Sesa Balarama, Sri Nityananda Prabhu, Who, when sincerely and submissively approached by the means He creates, Guru Tattwa, one can be led to swarupa siddhi, the true constitutional, eternal position of the self. The process of Guru- Tattwa is that this Lord in the Heart, also called Chaitaguru, arranges for a sincere person to approach His representative, one entirely in unison with His Divine Will empowered by the loving exchange between the Two. Though also called Guru, such a person always appears as servant and is always cognizant of such service. Such service rendered to Lord Nityananda is so pleasing to Him that He is pleased to act through such that the person actually attains a certain divinity. This invested divinity is never misused or misadvertized, rather it is humbly exhibited in such a way as to attract others to the process shown by the servant of the Lord. This unified acting by the Lord and His representative, Sri Sri Guru and Gauranga, is called Bhakti Yoga.

 

An empowered representative is divine by delegated authority invested by the Supreme Lord. Such a person is called "Sadhu". He is also recognized by the terms "Son of God" or "Gurudeva". Often, teachings of Lord Jesus Christ are used to convey deeper meanings toward helping establish (rekindle) relationship between the self and the Supreme Being. Purists may object, but the author questions the purity of such decisions. Lord Jesus Christ is universally recognized as Sadhu, so all His teachings are pertinant to discussion of the Vaisnava criteria of guru-sadhu-shastra.

 

Some may imagine that the sadhu is the lawgiver for humanity, but this is never the case. Lord Jesus Christ rejects this idea, warning, "Do not lay down rules other than I have appointed for you, for if you make law as the lawgivers, you will become restrained by it." Some say "blasphemy", but it is a fact that the sadhu exhibits Love of the Supreme Person to attract the sleeping souls, and such attraction minimizes the negative attributes. Sinful activity naturally gives way to proper behavior by the grace of Sadhu, and the regulative principles simply become the classic "always remember the Lord and Never forget Him". Srila Rupa Goswami confirms that these two things are the all-in-all purpose of the strictures of sadhana bhakti. The above quotation from the Gospel of Mary of Magdalia (Nag Hamadi Library) rather confirms that the Sadhu is pleased that His message is presented in full, without overstepping His glory.

 

Some may spend lifetimes comparing the sadhus, some even think that the material change called death somehow detracts from His message, thus concoct the need to take away His example of servitude and install Him as the One Who has empowered Him. Such ideas are quite independant from the teachings of Sadhu and only serve as a means to lose all attraction to He Who sent Him. If one tells a son that his father's will is not considered, how can the son accept the proposal? The Sadhu exhibits Loving Service by his free will, any desire to replace the master is absent from such a purified person.

 

Shastra is none other than the teachings of the Father through the Son, the Holy Spirit distributed freely to those who have ears to hear. Shastra is the written Word as well as that which is aurally received. Written Word is an additional blessing to the sleepers of the last 5000 years. Prior to this time, all shastra was sung by the Sadhu and understood by those with ears to hear. But, by His Causeless Mercy, Sri Govinda comissions some of His Empowered Representatives to compose literature to help the human beings rekindle their forgotton relationship with the Supreme Lord.

 

How does one decide which literature is a product of authorized Empowerment?

 

This is a proper question, and is easily answered by one dovetailing his will, imbued with service attitude, to the Will of the Supreme Person. In Srimad Bhagawatam, the answer is available to all:

 

 

"That literature which is full of descriptions of the transcendental glories, names, forms, pastimes, associates, etc. of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a different creation (Than the regulative Veda), full of transcendental words directed toward bringing a revolution in the impious lives of the world's misdirected civilization. Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified souls who are thoroughly honest." (SB 1:5:11)

The author of the Vedas, Srila Vyasadeva, is faced with this very question. He created shastra, yet without the sanction of Guru and Gauranga, it was incomplete. Sri Gurudeva, Narada Muni, exhibits His relationship with the Supreme Lord to Vyasadeva, and the result is the total commentary of the Veda in accordance with the definition cited above. The Goswamis of Vrndavana and their loving servants continue to compose such perfect shastra.

 

Many who claim to be of the Christian faith will automatically reject any answer to their theological mystery, but Lord Jesus Christ teaches only to those with ears to hear. The Vaisnava Sadhu humbly canvasses for the One Who has sent Him, He does not hide the Lord in the Heart from the assembly (Ps 40). Some may reject Paramatma thinking they are beyond His effect, that this is a lower truth. They, too, face the lonliness of forgetfulness. Paramatma, Lord Nityananda, Sri Chaitagurudeva, is the only One Who has full memory, and rememberance of swarupa siddhi comes from Him only. The trinity of guru-sadhu-shastra is the Supreme Absolute Truth, in combination, these three aspects form an exhibition of the actual personal relationship between the self and the Supreme Lord.

 

All glories to the assembled devotees, ys, mahaksadasa

[HerServant]

 

Yeah, to be a christian or a vaisnava. Despite this obvious flaw in our character molded in the unfortunate era of Kali yuga, the idea of salvation is there nonetheless. But we say we are fallen, not because we are humble, like bhaktivinode who says the same thing, but because we recognize the indisputable fact of our condition. ...

 

"That literature which is full of descriptions of the transcendental glories, names, forms, pastimes, associates, etc. of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a different creation (Than the regulative Veda), full of transcendental words directed toward bringing a revolution in the impious lives of the world's misdirected civilization. Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified souls who are thoroughly honest." (SB 1:5:11)

The author of the Vedas, Srila Vyasadeva, is faced with this very question. He created shastra, yet without the sanction of Guru and Gauranga, it was incomplete. Sri Gurudeva, Narada Muni, exhibits His relationship with the Supreme Lord to Vyasadeva, and the result is the total commentary of the Veda in accordance with the definition cited above. The Goswamis of Vrndavana and their loving servants continue to compose such perfect shastra.

 

Many who claim to be of the Christian faith will automatically reject any answer to their theological mystery, but Lord Jesus Christ teaches only to those with ears to hear. The Vaisnava Sadhu humbly canvasses for the One Who has sent Him, He does not hide the Lord in the Heart from the assembly (Ps 40). Some may reject Paramatma thinking they are beyond His effect, that this is a lower truth. They, too, face the lonliness of forgetfulness. Paramatma, Lord Nityananda, Sri Chaitagurudeva, is the only One Who has full memory, and rememberance of swarupa siddhi comes from Him only. The trinity of guru-sadhu-shastra is the Supreme Absolute Truth, in combination, these three aspects form an exhibition of the actual personal relationship between the self and the Supreme Lord.

 

All glories to the assembled devotees, ys, mahaksadasa

 

Interesting posts once again (provide of course we ignore the devil )

 

So I personally believe that we are all saying the same thing yet having different perspectives.

 

I did not mean to say that Baladeva is ONLY Jiva Tattva, but that His manifestation IS ALSO the Shelter of All Jivas.

 

This means that the perfected Jiva rests within His Jiva body. He is not only Jiva body though. He offers Himself for the salvation of the jivas, but He is not only this perfect Jiva Tattva.

 

The absolute highest state that the living entity can attain is oneness (yet simultaneous difference) with the Perfect jiva body of Baladeva. This concept is expressed on the christian tradition as the body of Christ. I am not talking about brahmavadi merging into Jesus consciousness either. I am saying that our true identity is in relationship to Baladeva and Baladeva's relationship with Krsna.

 

I can see and understand more clearly from your posts the reasons why there are legitamate theological differences in the Trinity. I think these are more nuances that are admittedly far above me.

 

My Christian experience seems to be very vaisnava. I am not relying 1st on the doctrine and theology of either religion. Rather, I am saying I look at both in context of my personal experience.

 

So I am really enlivened (again) by this discussion because it feels like a genuine discussion among godbrothers having unique experiences.

 

It would be fantastic to someday have a kirtan with such wonderful and sincere and knowledgable godbrothers.

 

HS and yours.

[theist]

I notice the thread has received an exorcism.

 

Thank You Mods!!!!