Jesus and Krishna

[cbrahma]

 

Thank you for giving yourself away.

What serruptitious inference are we supposed to make from that statement? Make of it what you will. You will anyways. You have a gift for question-begging misrepresentation.

[tackleberry]

 

I believe in Krishna. I also believe in Jesus. I don't see why I have to give up belief in one to believe in the other. They can both be proven to the same extent (which is slim-to-none). That's all I was saying.

I don't claim Jesus to be a Vaishnava. I don't really care if he was or wasn't. I like his message. It's a good message.

 

Yeah, believe in everything, including Mickey Mouse, Popeye, and what else not. Anything goes! This is what Vaishnavism has come to, sadly.

[tackleberry]

 

What serruptitious inference are we supposed to make from that statement?

 

You know exactly what I am talking about. You call yourself Vaishnava, but have more faith in non-vedic stuff than you do in the veda, Upanishad and bhagavatam, which clearly mention Vishnu. Aren't you being hypocritical?

[cbrahma]

You know exactly what I am talking about. You call yourself Vaishnava, but have more faith in non-vedic stuff than you do in the veda, Upanishad and bhagavatam, which clearly mention Vishnu. Aren't you being hypocritical?

I know exactly how you make false assumptions and pass them off as provable fact. I never called myself a Vaisnava - that just one part of the stool you pass off as obvious truth.

[Dark Warrior]

 

I never called myself a Vaisnava

 

Then why do you try to link Christianity with Vaishnavism? What makes you an authority to judge who is and who isn't a Vaishnava, when you yourself aren't?

 

The Gnostic Gospels portray Jesus as a crypto-Buddhist. I suppose these Jesus fanboys totally ignore it?

 

Read the Gospel of Philip. Sounds like a mixture of advaita and buddhism. And even in the canonical Gospels, there are several instances where Lord Buddha's teachings from the Dhammapada appear to have been inserted.

 

I will tell you why surrender to Jesus is an impediment. Because surrender to Shiva, Brahma, Indra, etc. is not recommended by Krishna. What makes you think surrendering to a guy named Jesus is then acceptable, when this person either talked about a random 'God', or was simply a Buddhist at best?

 

What if by surrendering to Jesus, you are simply bowing down to a devotee of Indra or Shiva, or perhaps, to a Buddhist?

 

No sense in arguing with these nuts.

[cbrahma]

 

Then why do you try to link Christianity with Vaishnavism? What makes you an authority to judge who is and who isn't a Vaishnava, when you yourself aren't?

 

The Gnostic Gospels portray Jesus as a crypto-Buddhist. I suppose these Jesus fanboys totally ignore it?

 

Read the Gospel of Philip. Sounds like a mixture of advaita and buddhism. And even in the canonical Gospels, there are several instances where Lord Buddha's teachings from the Dhammapada appear to have been inserted.

 

I will tell you why surrender to Jesus is an impediment. Because surrender to Shiva, Brahma, Indra, etc. is not recommended by Krishna. What makes you think surrendering to a guy named Jesus is then acceptable, when this person either talked about a random 'God', or was simply a Buddhist at best?

 

What if by surrendering to Jesus, you are simply bowing down to a devotee of Indra or Shiva, or perhaps, to a Buddhist?

 

No sense in arguing with these nuts.

I don't have to justify myself to you. What's nuts is your unflinching sectarian bigotry which obviously stems from your Indian/HIndu roots.

All the presumptions about Christianity are fed by that knee-jerk hatred.

Nobody has to take them seriously.

[Dark Warrior]

 

I don't have to explain myself to you. What's nuts is your unflinching sectarian bigotry which obviously stems from your Indian/HIndu roots.

All the presumptions about Christianity are fed by that knee-jerk hatred.

Nobody has to take them seriously.

 

Huh, I have studied Eastern Orthodox, Catholicism, Gnostic Christianity and other sects. And basically, they all fail miserably.

 

You lost all credibility when you spouted that nonsense about Shaivism being Vaishnavism because 'Shiva is a Vaishnava'. So next time, do not be quick to judge who is a 'pure devotee' and who isn't, because you definitely aren't one. And you had the nerve to call Vaishnava temples as 'external symbols'.

 

Again, these Hare Christnas need to learn what 'sectarian' means.

 

Shiva Purana accurately describes creation, samsara, nature of Self, etc. Yet, it is a tamo guna Purana. So, why should any Vaishnava bother with the Bible which is totally erratic on all counts? Use your brains.

[cbrahma]

 

Huh, I have studied Eastern Orthodox, Catholicism, Gnostic Christianity and other sects. And basically, they all fail miserably.

 

You lost all credibility when you spouted that nonsense about Shaivism being Vaishnavism because 'Shiva is a Vaishnava'. So next time, do not be quick to judge who is a 'pure devotee' and who isn't, because you definitely aren't one. And you had the nerve to call Vaishnava temples as 'external symbols'.

 

Again, these Hare Christnas need to learn what 'sectarian' means.

 

Shiva Purana accurately describes creation, samsara, nature of Self, etc. Yet, it is a tamo guna Purana. So, why should any Vaishnava bother with the Bible which is totally erratic on all counts? Use your brains.

Yawn:sleep: . You boast too much to be a Vaisnava. You do not qualify as my guru so spare me your advice.

[RadheRade1657]

 

Yeah, believe in everything, including Mickey Mouse, Popeye, and what else not. Anything goes! This is what Vaishnavism has come to, sadly.

Oh yes, it's so sad that there are open-minded Vaishnavas who are willing to accept others and their beliefs and not constanty ridicule them by putting their religious figures on the same level as cartoon characters.

[RadheRade1657]

 

Read the Gospel of Philip. Sounds like a mixture of advaita and buddhism.

 

You do know that the Gospel of Phillip hardly includes any of Jesus' words, right? It's the writings of an early Gnostic.

 

 

And even in the canonical Gospels, there are several instances where Lord Buddha's teachings from the Dhammapada appear to have been inserted.

 

Maybe that's because both Jesus and Buddha received their wisdom from a common source.

[raghu]

 

Oh yes, it's so sad that there are open-minded Vaishnavas who are willing to accept others and their beliefs

 

That is indeed sad, since traditional Vaishnavas reject incorrect ideas in favor of correct ones.

 

The tradition of indiscriminate, politically-correct, acceptance of all and sundry religions is the characteristic of neo-Advaitic cults like Sai Baba, Vivekananda, Chinmayananda, etc whose respective audiences consist of those who are trained to avoid critical thinking or thinking of any kind. Apparently, iskcon people desperately want to be counted within this crowd. Well that's fine by me!

[AATHREYABALAKRISHNAMURTHY]

OM SESHAANJANEYA NAMHA OM

AATHREYA - DR. RAMARAJU , BALA KRISHNAMURTHY

27 MACKAY DRIVE , MARLBOROUGH , MASSACHUSETTS 01752-1935,

US ; Cell : 508 - 265 - 1124 ; LL : 508 - 229 - 2028

 

EM: dr.balakrishnamurthy.ramaraju@gmail.com

AATHREYA - THREE SACRED EVENTS IN VAISAAKHA MAASAM

Kali Yug 5109 - 02 - 03 ; 2008 - 05 - 07 , Wednesday

Sarvadhaari Parivatsara , Vaisaakha Maasam ,

Suddha Thrutheeya , RohiNi Nakshathram ,

I.PARASHU RAAMA JAYANTHI ; II.BALA RAAMA JAYANTHI ;

III.AKSHAYA THRUTHEEYA

I.Parashu Raama , Youngest Son of Maharshi Jamadagni

and ReNuka Devi , Sree Mahaa Vishnu Avathaar , of

the Lineage of Bhrugu Maharshi - Bhaargava Raama ,

the Only Avathaar staying back on Earth

asa Chiranjeevi, settled on Mahendra Parvatham in

KeraLa , God's Own Country.

II.Bala Raama , Eldest Son of Vasudeva and RohiNi Devi,

SankarshaNa , Aadisesha Avathaar , an ever loving

elder brother of Sree Krishna Vaasudev . Halaayuddha

( plough ) Dhaari ( bearer ) , Guru of Suyoddhana.

III . Akshaya Thrutheeya - Day of Dhana Lakshmi Devi who

Blesses Her disciples who love to buy Gold today.

TO DO : Offer Curd Rice To God And Enjoy & Share .

Present An Umbrella to Some One You Like.

Present Gold First To Goddess Lakshmi Devi.

aathreya - r b krishna murthy

[RadheRade1657]

 

That is indeed sad, since traditional Vaishnavas reject incorrect ideas in favor of correct ones.

 

The tradition of indiscriminate, politically-correct, acceptance of all and sundry religions is the characteristic of neo-Advaitic cults like Sai Baba, Vivekananda, Chinmayananda, etc whose respective audiences consist of those who are trained to avoid critical thinking or thinking of any kind. Apparently, iskcon people desperately want to be counted within this crowd. Well that's fine by me!

You know, I totally agree. I should definitely start mocking every religion I don't happen to agree with and put their religious figures on the same level as cartoon characters on a regular basis. That's the much more Vaishnava thing to do than to just state my opinion in an adult manner without purposely offending others.

[raghu]

 

You know, I totally agree. I should definitely start mocking every religion I don't happen to agree with

 

You might as well. You are already making a mockery of your own religion with your confused and sentimental reasoning.

[Dark Warrior]

 

You do know that the Gospel of Phillip hardly includes any of Jesus' words, right? It's the writings of an early Gnostic.

 

Yet, its linked to Jesus. That you can hardly deny.

 

The Gospel of Thomas is another one. Who really knows what this man Jesus was all about. Face it, many mordern scholars believe that Jesus was an essene. And it is well known that essenes were influenced by Buddhists.

 

Basically, the Gnostic Jesus is a buddhist. The Jesus of the canonical gospel could be a devotee of Yahweh, Allah, Shiva, Vayu, or Varuna.

 

 

Maybe that's because both Jesus and Buddha received their wisdom from a common source.

 

Standard morals and renunciation does not need to come from Vishnu. They are already known by everyone. Even an atheist has morals.

 

And if this Jesus character also talked about a 'Self', then again, Advaitins, Shaivas, Shaktas, and whatnot all have the concept of the 'Self' as distinct from the body.

 

So, unless the name of Lord Vishnu is mentioned, we have no reason to assume that Christianity is Vaishnavism.

 

And I have already proven how Jesus' story is ripped off from Buddha. Plus, I have refuted all your asinine questions in the other Jesus thread. Don't make me bring it up again.

[guliaditya]

tasmai namo bhagavate

vâsudevâya dhîmahi

yan-mâyayâ durjayayâ

mâm vddanti jagad-gurum(SB. 2.5.12)

 

TRANSLATION

I offer my obeisances and meditate upon Lord Krishna [Vâsudeva], the Personality of Godhead, whose invincible potency influences them [the less intelligent class of men] to call me the supreme controller.

 

nârâyana-parâ vedâ

devâ nârâyanângajâh

nârâyana-parâ lokâ

nârâyana-parâ makhâh(SB 2.5.15)

 

TRANSLATION

The Vedic literatures are made by and are meant for the Supreme Lord, the demigods are also meant for serving the Lord as parts of His body, the different planets are also meant for the sake of the Lord, and different sacrifices are performed just to please Him.

 

nârâyana-paro yogo

nârâyana-param tapah

nârâyana-param jn'ânam

nârâyana-parâ gatih(SB.2.5.16)

 

TRANSLATION

All different types of meditation or mysticism are means for realizing Nârâyana. All austerities are aimed at achieving Nârâyana. Culture of transcendental knowledge is for getting a glimpse of Nârâyana, and ultimately salvation is entering the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">kingdom</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Nârâyana</st1:PlaceName></st1:place>.

 

tasyâpi drashthur îs'aya

kûtha-sthasyâkhilâtmanah

srijyam srjâmi srishtho 'ham

îkshayaivâbhicoditah(SB.2.5.17)

 

TRANSLATION

Inspired by Him only, I discover what is already created by Him [Nârâyana] under His vision as the all-pervading Supersoul, and I also am created by Him only.

 

Whether Christians accept all these.Not only christians anyone who accept this is a vaishnava otherwise not.Very simple & clear.

I dont think there is anything further which needs to be clarified.

 

Pranaam

 

[tackleberry]

 

Oh yes, it's so sad that there are open-minded Vaishnavas who are willing to accept others and their beliefs and not constanty ridicule them by putting their religious figures on the same level as cartoon characters.

 

That's rich, coming from you. Weren't you making fun of some bhAgavatam stories the other day? Apparently, it's ok for you to make fun of vedic scriptures, despite calling yourself vaishnava. But it's blasphemy if we pass comments on 'other religious figures.' You can't even respect your own religion, but are upset if other religions are attacked! How silly!

[LoveroftheBhagavata]

 

The tradition of indiscriminate, politically-correct, acceptance of all and sundry religions is the characteristic of neo-Advaitic cults like Sai Baba, Vivekananda, Chinmayananda, etc whose respective audiences consist of those who are trained to avoid critical thinking or thinking of any kind.

 

That's pretty rich indeed, coming from a self-appointed Vaishnava apologist! You're one to talk, having quite adequately provided everyone with a glimpse of how rational, thoughtful and discerning you yourself were on the "Arranged Marriage" thread, with that outrageous display of backward, reactionary, apologetic pietism in which you indulged. Vaishnavism is no different from any of the paths the gratuitous decrying of which you seem to revel in, demanding as it does, almost unquestioning faith in a whole range of notions that do nothing except violate common sense and reason. I generally speak from a basically Advaitin viewpoint on these forums, but to be completely upfront, I am more of an agnostic than anything else, and in fact I relentlessly strive to make rationality prevail over doctrinal belief, whenever I happen to contemplate on the kind of theme being discussed on these spaces or any other topic for that matter. I personally have no opinion, whether positive or negative, on Christ, since he holds no specific interest for me, but for a geezer like yourself to accuse others of not thinking critically is the height of grotesquerie truly, as you have more than abundantly demonstrated the negligible role that rational thinking plays in your own particular instance.

 

And yes, I'm ready to bet that if you do respond to this post, you'll in effect be bringing grist for my mill, and furnish even further evidence in attestation of the narrowness and worthlessness of your cult.

[AATHREYABALAKRISHNAMURTHY]

AATHREYA aarbeekay - Dr.BalaKrishna Murthy Ramaraju

27 Mackay Dr. , Marlborough , MA 01752 - 1935, USA

E.M.:- dr.balakrishnamurthy.ramaraju@gmail.com

Cell : 508 - 265 -1124 ; L L : 508 - 229 - 2028

AATHREYA - FOUR SACRED EVENTS OF VAISAAKHAM -

Kali Yug 5109 - 02 - 07 ; 2008 - 05 - 11 , Sunday ( Bhaanu Vaaram )

Chaandra Maana , Sarvadhaari Parivatsara , Vaisaakha Maasam ,

Suddha Sapthami aka BHAANU SAPTHAMI , Pushyami Nakshathram ;

PUSHYA - ARKA VRUDDHI YOGAM .

I. BHAANU SAPTHAMI ; II.PUSHYA - ARKA YOGAM ;

III. GANGOTPATTHI ; IV . MOTHER ' S DAY .

I.Sapthami is The Day of Sun. Sapthami occuring on a Sunday as on

May 11 , 2008 is Bhaanu Sapthami , doubly beneficial.

" AADITHYAM , KAASHYAPEYAM , MAHODYUTHIM , THAMORIM ,

SARVA PAAPAGHNAM , PRANATHOSMI DIVAAKARAM ,

DINAKARAM , BHAANUM."

II.On 11 th May 2008 , Sunday ,Moon is in Pushya Nakshathram , hence

Pushya - Arka Yogam , which according to Vedic Jyothish Pandits is

Very Auspicious for One and All . It is VRUDDHI YOGAM .

III. Vaisaakha Suddha Sapthami is The Day that Bhageeratha , a descendent

of Sagara Chakravarthi brought Pavithra Paavana Ganga Maa to Earth.

IV. MOTHER'S DAY : - Ammala Kanna Amma , Muguru Ammala Moolapu Amma =

Aadi Paraa Shakthi - Mother Of All Mothers , Original Mother of Three Mothers -

Paarvathi , Lakshmi and Saraswathi.

Three Mothers Savithru Mandalam - Gaayathri , Saraswathi and Saavithri.

Kaushalya , Sumithra , Kaikeyi - Mothers of Raama and His brothers.- Sabari

 

VakuLa Devi - Foster Mother of Baalaaji.

Saptha Maathrukas - Seven Mothers of SubrahmaNya.

Devaki and Yashoda - Mothers of Lord Krishna

Our Mothers : Birth Mother ; Grandmother , Mother-in-law , Guru Pathni

ANTHROPOLOGICAL MOTHER : " LUCY " and her Seven Daughters -

Modern Scientific Mothers Of Humanity.

OM SARVA MAATHRUBHYO NAMAHA OM

aathreya - ramaraju , bala krishna murthy of guntur ( gartha puri )

[suchandra]

 

Whether Christians accept all these...

 

There're surely lots of people who have not studied religion and who also don't know very much about Christ, actually nowadays many people in the West, even those who claim to be Christians, don't know very much about comparative studies of religion. But still, when they hear about the behaviour of personalities like Jesus, they consider this as speaking for itself - no further explanations required.

 

"This is the position of sādhu. He is not disturbed. Titikṣavaḥ. In all circumstances, he is tolerant. That is sādhu. Sādhu does not become disturbed. Titikṣavaḥ. At the same time, kāruṇikāḥ. He is himself disturbed, but he is merciful to others. Just like Jesus Christ. He is being crucified, and still he is merciful:

 

 

“Father, these people do not know what they are doing. Please excuse them.” This is sādhu. He is personally being disturbed by the demons, but still, he is merciful to the general people. They are suffering for want of Krishna consciousness. So even up to the point of death, he is trying to preach Krishna consciousness. “Let the people be benefited. Eh, what is this material body? Even if I am killed, I am not killed. This body is killed, that’s all.” This is sādhu. Titikṣavaḥ kāruṇikāḥ. In one side he is tolerant, and other side, merciful.

In the material world, when one man is disturbed, he cannot do any beneficial work to any others. He is disturbed. “No, I am very much disturbed. Don’t talk with me.” No. But sādhu still goes on benefiting the people in general. Titikṣavaḥ kāruṇikāḥ. And what kind of benefit? The so-called rascals humanitarian work? No. Suhṛdaṁ sarva-bhūtānām. He is beneficial to all kinds of living entities."

 

 

 

Bhagavad-gītā 1.21-22

by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda

London, July 18, 1973

 

 

full lecture: http://causelessmercy.com/t/t/730718BG.LON.htm?i=1973

 

Sandro Botticelli (1445-1510) Pieta

[RadheRade1657]

 

You might as well. You are already making a mockery of your own religion with your confused and sentimental reasoning.

LOL... well at least I'm not ridiculously uptight about what teachers people can and can't admire.

[RadheRade1657]

 

Yet, its linked to Jesus. That you can hardly deny.

 

The Gospel of Thomas is another one. Who really knows what this man Jesus was all about. Face it, many mordern scholars believe that Jesus was an essene. And it is well known that essenes were influenced by Buddhists.

 

Basically, the Gnostic Jesus is a buddhist. The Jesus of the canonical gospel could be a devotee of Yahweh, Allah, Shiva, Vayu, or Varuna.

 

 

 

Standard morals and renunciation does not need to come from Vishnu. They are already known by everyone. Even an atheist has morals.

 

And if this Jesus character also talked about a 'Self', then again, Advaitins, Shaivas, Shaktas, and whatnot all have the concept of the 'Self' as distinct from the body.

 

So, unless the name of Lord Vishnu is mentioned, we have no reason to assume that Christianity is Vaishnavism.

 

And I have already proven how Jesus' story is ripped off from Buddha. Plus, I have refuted all your asinine questions in the other Jesus thread. Don't make me bring it up again.

What do you mean by 'that you can hardly deny'? We don't know who wrote it and when. It could've been written by anyone. We don't know if it was a direct disciple of Jesus or not.

Once again, I don't really care if he was Vaishnava or not. I like his teachings. They're interesting and teach good morals. I don't see any problem with me following his teachings and being a worshipper of Sri Sri Radha-Krishna.

[RadheRade1657]

 

That's rich, coming from you. Weren't you making fun of some bhAgavatam stories the other day? Apparently, it's ok for you to make fun of vedic scriptures, despite calling yourself vaishnava. But it's blasphemy if we pass comments on 'other religious figures.' You can't even respect your own religion, but are upset if other religions are attacked! How silly!

What are you even talking about?! I've never made fun of the Bhagavata Purana. I believe in it. It'd be pretty silly for me to make fun of it.

[raghu]

LOB launched into the following tirade

 

 

That's pretty rich indeed, coming from a self-appointed Vaishnava apologist!

You're one to talk, having quite adequately provided everyone with a glimpse of how rational, thoughtful and discerning you yourself were on the "Arranged Marriage" thread, with that outrageous display of backward, reactionary, apologetic pietism in which you indulged. Vaishnavism is no different from any of the paths the gratuitous decrying of which you seem to revel in, demanding as it does, almost unquestioning faith in a whole range of notions that do nothing except violate common sense and reason. I generally speak from a basically Advaitin viewpoint on these forums, but to be completely upfront, I am more of an agnostic than anything else, and in fact I relentlessly strive to make rationality prevail over doctrinal belief, whenever I happen to contemplate on the kind of theme being discussed on these spaces or any other topic for that matter. I personally have no opinion, whether positive or negative, on Christ, since he holds no specific interest for me, but for a geezer like yourself to accuse others of not thinking critically is the height of grotesquerie truly, as you have more than abundantly demonstrated the negligible role that rational thinking plays in your own particular instance.

 

And yes, I'm ready to bet that if you do respond to this post, you'll in effect be bringing grist for my mill, and furnish even further evidence in attestation of the narrowness and worthlessness of your cult.

 

in response to my comments about neo-advaita as seen below:

 

 

That is indeed sad, since traditional Vaishnavas reject incorrect ideas in favor of correct ones.

The tradition of indiscriminate, politically-correct, acceptance of all and sundry religions is the characteristic of neo-Advaitic cults like Sai Baba, Vivekananda, Chinmayananda, etc whose respective audiences consist of those who are trained to avoid critical thinking or thinking of any kind. Apparently, iskcon people desperately want to be counted within this crowd. Well that's fine by me!

 

I am not clear on what his response has to do with what I wrote. My position has alway been pretty consistently opposed to neo-advaita and neo-hinduism as well as blind and cultish thinking, and that is consistent with what I wrote in the arranged marriage thread. If LOB has a problem with my criticism of selective interpretations of Manu Dharma or on ethnocentric criticism of ancient Indian tradition, he is welcome to respond on the Arranged Marriage thread. Preferably it would be nice if he could trouble himself to read what I wrote and respond on a point by point basis.

 

It is true that I don't feel the need to apologize for my culture to people whose judgements are rooted in values based on a different culture. I will explain my culture to those who wish to listen and understand. I will not engage in mud-slinging with self-appointed "rationalists" who cannot even bring themselves to think outside the myopic little box in which they live.

[RadheRade1657]

 

I will not engage in mud-slinging with self-appointed "rationalists" who cannot even bring themselves to think outside the myopic little box in which they live.

That's amusing coming from you.