Jesus and Krishna

[Dark Warrior]

 

A simple fact. Because you say so? You offer nothing in the way of proof. You speak like your own authority, whereas I in my moronic way keep quoting the acaryas, which you reinterpret to your own purpose.

I will accept the possibility that Jesus has connection with Vedanta and even Shaivism, but Christianity is not demigod worship. Jesus in no way suggests worshipping in the temple is the highest thing. He stresses worshipping in Spirit and in Truth.

 

Shaivism is not demigod worship?

 

Good Lord.

 

And isn't Shiva a deva, a demigod?

 

Loser, Shaivites are demigod worshippers. Krishna clearly says in the Gita that men of small intelligence worship demigods. THIS INCLUDES SHIVA.

 

Jesus could have been a demigod worshipper. This makes Christians demigod worshippers.

 

And who cares what Jesus says?

 

Alvars and Vaishnava acharyas have stressed on archa form at temples. Your lousy christian bias is clearly revealed.

[Dark Warrior]

I have had enough.

 

Anyone viewing this thread can see how cBrahma is stretching it. Now its a new tack. Shaivas worship a Vaishnava (Shiva), so if Jesus was a Shaiva, he is also a Vaishnava.

 

This makes sense?

 

Incredible. Absolutely incredible. I must say, his devotion to Jesus is indeed extraordinary. And I don't mean it as a compliment.

 

No. Thus, I will say, both Christians and Shaivites have one thing in common - they both lack jnana.

[cbrahma]

 

Shaivism is not demigod worship?

 

Good Lord.

 

And isn't Shiva a deva, a demigod?

 

Loser, Shaivites are demigod worshippers. Krishna clearly says in the Gita that men of small intelligence worship demigods. THIS INCLUDES SHIVA.

 

Jesus could have been a demigod worshipper. This makes Christians demigod worshippers.

 

And who cares what Jesus says?

 

Alvars and Vaishnava acharyas have stressed on archa form at temples. Your lousy christian bias is clearly revealed.

Shaivism is a comparison you instigated, so you are as they say 'hoist by your own petard'.

How did you reason that I thought Shaivism was not demigod worship?

Yes Jesus is not a Shaivite, and I never said he was, because he is not into temple worship but he may have a connection with Lord Siva who is a Vaisnava. His philosophy and characteristics are similar to Lord Siva in that he ministered to the most fallen and he was a maha-bhagavata, who preached surrender to the 'will of the Father'.

Jesus teaching is the path of Love and surrender to the Most High - the Supreme Person - if this isn't Vaisnavism I don't know what is.

[Malati dasi]

Dark warrior: A Vaishnava is one who worships Vishnu. PERIOD.

 

<FONT color=blue>In Gaudiya Vaishnavas case, Krishna.

 

.

Bija said:.

.

As a small child (between 5 and 8) I used to feel bliss in church and swoon and feel much love for God. My brother used to hit me in church, 'stop swooning, you are embarrassing', he would say.

.

As that young innocence was lost I also took on board the sectarian thinking of my family, until about the age of 16 to 20. Then I left and travelled looking for God due to great disatisfaction with my culture, materialism, its ideals etc.

.

I found Hare Krsna's over seas and they made me dance one morning in front of Tulasi Devi. As we chanted the names of God and walked around tulasi I entered a trance, and the room filled with golden light. The saffron monks all turned glowing white in pristine robes. And I saw myself and how sinful I had been. Tears flowed from my eyes. I was too young to know what all this meant.

.

That was 16 years ago. Now I long for love and long for Krsna, to feel the hairs stand on end and tears flow, when I see his form or hear his name, or think of his great love for all.

.

I am a mleccha. At one point my government made me work in an abattoirs, killing 3000 animals including cows per day. I have not worked since.

.

But Bhakti devi does not discriminate her lavish gifts, even a christian can feel bhava, or at least a glimpse.

.

<!-- / message --><!-- sig --><FONT]

Bija

Like you, I was a catholic. I was born into a catholic family. I went to a catholic school. Later was encouraged by my friends to check out the christain protestant faith.

After venturing into other paths I found Gaudiya Vaishnavism. As someone who once had a deep involvement in Christianity, I found Chritianity a very shallow religion and as pointed out somewhere on this thread lacks even the basic knowledge about God. I specifically found annoying how “ give us our daily bread” turns into a materialistic preoccupation among Christian followers. Of course that can’t be helped. There is no knowledge in that faith of a potential sweet relationship with <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/ /><st1:place><font color=" /><st1:place>Krishna</st1:place>. I also don’t agree with their concept of redemption through the blood of Jesus Christ. Like one sins and gets absolved through the crucifixion of Jesus. I find that abbhorent. And this became part of its tradition. Like, they partake of the body of Christ in the form of piece of bread during communion.<FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT size=3>

<FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT size=3>At present, what I am praying for is the mercy by which I can develop nistha.<FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT size=3>

<FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT size=3>

</st1:place>

[bija]

I also encountered evangelical protestanism for a few years in my twenties.

At some stage I was critical of my roots and its shortcoming. But to be honest Malati Mataji such feelings are not conducive to my internal spiritual aspiration these days. I find 'gratitude' for the early foundation in a path to God, is the key now for peace in my soul. Gratitude is a miracle word. And being a fallen soul with virtually no love within is a cross enough to carry.

 

Thx for sharing about your aspiartion for nistha, I would love that too:pray:

 

y.s.

[Malati dasi]

I respect your opinion.

 

But to me sometimes truth hurts but I have to speak what I think truth is.

[bija]

Jaya!

[Dark Warrior]

 

Yes Jesus is not a Shaivite, and I never said he was,

 

I say he might have been. What makes you think he wasn't. There is no proof that he was a Vaishnava, certainly.

 

Do't you get it? There is no way one can say that Jesus is a Vaishnava simply because he said 'worship the most high'. Shaivites consider the 'most high' to be Shiva. Shaktas consider the most high to be Devi. So tell me, What makes you think 'most high' was understood by Jesus to be Krishna?

 

 

His philosophy and characteristics are similar to Lord Siva in that he ministered to the most fallen and he was a maha-bhagavata, who preached surrender to the 'will of the Father'.

 

Shiva advocated worship of Vishnu. Shaivites advocate worship of a demigod.

 

Jesus could have been a shaivite or a ganapatya. He certainly could have advocated worship of Shiva or Ganesha as supreme. In which case, he lacked jnana.

 

Are you thick?

 

 

Jesus teaching is the path of Love and surrender to the Most High - the Supreme Person - if this isn't Vaisnavism I don't know what is.

 

Vaishnavism is surrender to Krishna.

 

Shaivites say that the 'most high' is Shiva. Are they Vaishnavas?

 

EDIT: Just to clear things up, let me say that every devotional sect other than Vaishnavism such as Saiva, Sakta, Ganapatya, Surya, etc. have this whole Bhakti Yoga and Surrender thing. Yet, all of these were emphatically dismissed as unvedic.

 

My point is, a mere philosophy of devotion is not Vaishnavism. Devotion directed to Vishnu is Vaishnavism.

 

Jesus did not specify which God he was talking about. Hence, he could fall into any of the cults I mentioned. Heck, he could have even been talking about Yahweh.

[cbrahma]

 

I say he might have been. What makes you think he wasn't. There is no proof that he was a Vaishnava, certainly.

 

Do't you get it? There is no way one can say that Jesus is a Vaishnava simply because he said 'worship the most high'. Shaivites consider the 'most high' to be Shiva. Shaktas consider the most high to be Devi. So tell me, What makes you think 'most high' was understood by Jesus to be Krishna?

 

 

 

Shiva advocated worship of Vishnu. Shaivites advocate worship of a demigod.

 

Jesus could have been a shaivite or a ganapatya. He certainly could have advocated worship of Shiva or Ganesha as supreme. In which case, he lacked jnana.

 

Are you thick?

 

 

 

Vaishnavism is surrender to Krishna.

 

Shaivites say that the 'most high' is Shiva. Are they Vaishnavas?

This is so pointless. Jesus speaks of the 'most high' as the creator Father, the source of everything, the Abramic God. That can hardly be Siva unless you think Siva led the Jews out of the desert. Now try selling that one to the Jews.

[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 - SACRED EVENTS - MATSYA AVATHAAR JAYANTHI

Sarvadhaari Parivatsaram , Chaithra Maasam , BahuLa Panchami ,

Moola Nakshathram ( Foundation Root Star )

Kali Yug 5109 th year ; 2008 - 04 - 25 , Friday ( Bhrigu Vaasaram )

Beginning of Creation . Whole Universe is Jala Mayam ( Jala Kalpam )

Aadya Brahma is Studying Veda , Knowledge & Wisdom imparted by

Aadi NaaraayaNa , without which Brahma would be helpless.

Brahma is experimenting and by mischance a demon came into

existence , stole The Veda and disappeared into the endless waters.

Brahma prayed to His Father , Mahaa Vishnu ( Aadi NaaraayaN ) , Who

Incarnated as MATHSYA AVATHAAR aka Meena Roopa ( A Fish )

and as HE is of Aapaha ( Primordial Water Element ) killed the demon

hiding in water easily , restored Veda to Brahma and Blessed Brahma .

MATSYA AVATHAAR also rescued Emperor Sathyavratha of Jamboo

Dweep ( Gondswaana ), his wife along with a male & a female of all species

on a big ship during Jala PraLayam ( Primordial Water Deluge.)

Jalau Rakshathu Meena Roopa Matsyaavathaara Mahaa Vishnu.

Praying To Matsyaavathaar will save all from Jala gandam ( water danger )

" OM MEENA ROOPA MATSYAAVATHAAR NAMO NAARAAYANA "

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

[AATHREYABALAKRISHNAMURTHY]

AATHREYA - Dr.Balakrishna Murthy Ramaraju of Guntur

27 Mackay Drive, Marlborough , Massachusetts 01752-1935

USA . Cell : 508 - 265 -1124 ; LL : (508) 229 - 2028

E.Mail : dr.balakrishnamurthy.ramaraju@gmail.com

AATHREYA - SACRED EVENTS - YAJNA VARAAHA JAYANTHI

Sarvadhaari , Chaithra BahuLa Thrayodasi , Uttaraabhaadra / Revathi

Kali Yug 5109 - 01 - 28 ; 2008 - 05 - 03 , Saturday ( Manda Vaaram )

When , in The Beginning , The Earth was completley submerged in

Primordial Waters , Mahaa Vishnu appeared as an Angushtta Pramaan

( size of a thumb ) Wild Boar with Tusks , SRI YAJNA VARAAHA

AVATHAAR from the tip of Meditating Brahma's Nose Yajna Varaaha

grw to an enormous proportion and brought forth Mother Earth for

Swaayambhoo Manu to rule over and for the benefit of all .

But, HiraNyaaksha , the younger son of Kashyapa Brahma and Dithi ,

confiscated the entire Earth , for his own and for his people's use only .

Bhoo Maatha cried out to Brahma for help and Brahma in turn asked

SRI YAJNA VARAAHA for help .

Sri Yajna Varaaha Swaamy killed HiraNyaaksha and restored Earth

back to all Humans and others to dwell on.

Later Sri Yajna Varaaha Bhagawaan Retired To Thirumala Hills and

Assumed the Role of Kshethra Paala ( Safe Keeper Of The Sacred Hills.)

Yajna Varaaha Saves All From Any Calamity On Earth -

OM STHALAU RAKSHATHU YAJNA VARAAHA SWAAMINE

NAMASTHUBHYAM NAMAHA OM. OM SHAANTHIHI.

aathreya - aarbeekay

[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 - HANUMA

Saturday / Sunday , 2008 April 19 / 20 ( US / India )

Sarvadhaari , Chaithra , PoorNima , Chithra Nakshathram

( hence Chaithra Maasam )

To Do : Present New Clothes to Elders and / or Gurus .

HANUMATH JAYANTHI cum HANUMATH VIJAYOTSAVAM

Celebrated both on Chaithra PoorNima as well as on

Friday , 30 May 2008 , Vaisaakha BahuLa Dasami / Ekaadasi

Anjaana Devi Son - AANJANEYA

Kesari Son - KESARI THANAYA

AnjanaaDevi ( Punjakasthali ) and Kesari were Celestials.

AnjanaaDevi is the adopted Daughter of Gauthama Maharshi.

Anjaneyas Upper Jaws were deformed by Indra's

Vajraayuddha - hence HANUMA.

Shivaamsa Sambhootha - transported by Primordial Air -

VAAYU PUTHRA.

Counselor to Sugreeva , and Disciple of Soorya Bhagawaan.

SREE RAAMA BHAKTHA . LakshmaNa PraaNa Daatha.

AANJANEYA IS THE HERO OF SUNDARAA KAANDA , IMMORTAL.

' Manojavam , Maarutha Thulya Vegam , Jithendriyam ,

Buddhi Mathaam Varishttam , Vaathaathmajam ,

Vaanara Yooddha Mukhyam , SREE RAAMA DOOTHAM

SIRASAAN NAMAMI '

aathreya - r b krishna murthy

[guliaditya]

 

Jesus teaching is the path of Love and surrender to the Most High - the Supreme Person - if this isn't Vaisnavism I don't know what is.

 

Who is that Supreme person? Whether that supreme person is Shreeman Narayana.If that supreme person is Shreeman Narayana then it is Vaishnavism otherwise not.

 

Pranaam

[Dark Warrior]

 

This is so pointless. Jesus speaks of the 'most high' as the creator Father, the source of everything, the Abramic God. That can hardly be Siva unless you think Siva led the Jews out of the desert. Now try selling that one to the Jews.

 

More incoherent rambling.

 

Shaivites believe that Shiva is the source of everything, the creator, etc. They believe Shiva to be above Brahma and Vishnu.

 

According to Shaivites, Krishna is also an emissary of Shiva. Some Shaivite sects consider Krishna to be an avatar of Shiva.

 

Devi worshippers believe that Devi created Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.

 

So why is it illogical to assume that Jesus could have read the Vedas and interpreted it as Shaivism? Oh wait, because of your sloppy sentiments, it is unacceptable.

 

Tell me, where is the proof that Jesus was talking about Krishna?

 

I will tell you what seems to be the most logical conclusion - Jesus was not even a Vedantin. He was most likely a Jew who came across Buddhist ideals of morals and renunciation.

 

 

Who is that Supreme person? Whether that supreme person is Shreeman Narayana.If that supreme person is Shreeman Narayana then it is Vaishnavism otherwise not.

 

Pranaam

 

Thank You.

 

Its highly erratic to simply assume that Jesus was talking about Krishna, when his religion is not even dependent on Vedas as the source. It can be assumed that he was talking about ANY god, and that isn't enough criterion for Christianity to be considered Vaishnavism.

 

DOUBLE EDIT: What does cBrahma mean, 'try selling it to the Jews'. I see, so are Jews gonna accept Krishna, and not Shiva? They don't even accept the Vedas.

 

He gets weirder with every post.

[AATHREYABALAKRISHNAMURTHY]

AATHREYA - Dr.Balakrishna Murthy Ramaraju of Guntur

27 Mackay Drive, Marlborough , Massachusetts 01752-1935

USA . Cell : 508 - 265 -1124 ; LL : (508) 229 - 2028

E.Mail : dr.balakrishnamurthy.ramaraju@gmail.com

AATHREYA -

Sacred Events Of Vasantha Ruthu - I

Mind boggling billions of years back , Lord Shiva and Devi Paarvathi were

married in Himalayas. Lord Brahma was the Chief priest. Mahaa Vishnu

played the role of Brother-in-Law and requested Shiva to accept PaarvathI.

Paarvathi's parents Himavaan and Menaka gave away the Bride . Thirty

million Celestials were the Guests of Honor.

Shiva took His young Bride Paarvathi on Sacred Bull , Nandi to His Abode

Kailaash accompanied by Srungi , Bhrungi , Veerabhadra , Parvath , etc.

After reaching kailaash , Shiva went into Thapas and Devi Paarvathi was

attending on Him waiting for Shiva to open His Eyes and look at Her.

Manmattha accomapnied by His consort Rathi Devi , and friends Vasanth,

Madhu and Maadhavi, at the behest of the Celestials, approached Shiva

with all due Respect and Reverence and beseeched Shiva in a tempting

way to open His Eyes and look at Paarvathi .

Shiva opened not His Soorya Sashaanka Eyes but His Third Vahni Eye

and Manmattha was turned into ashes - RUTHU SAMHAARAM .

Shiva felt sorry for what happened and ordained that Manmattha shall live for

ever , not in a physical form, but as a thought , an idea , an emotion , love and

affection in the minds and hearts of all humans . Manmattha will be seen in a

physical form only by Rathi devi and will be born as Pradyumna to SriKrishna

and RukmiNi Devi in 28 th Dwaapara Yugam - PRADYUMNAM .

In course of Time Shiva and Paarvathi became Proud parents of Kumaara

Swami SubrahmaNya Shanmukha - KUMAARA SAMBHAVAM .

aathreya - aarbeekay

 

--

balakrishna

[AATHREYABALAKRISHNAMURTHY]

AATHREYA - Dr.Balakrishna Murthy Ramaraju of Guntur

27 Mackay Drive, Marlborough , Massachusetts 01752-1935

USA . Cell : 508 - 265 -1124 ; LL : (508) 229 - 2028

<dr.balakrishnamurthy.ramaraju@gmail.com>

AATHREYA -

SREE RAAMA - Ancestry

Sunday , 13 March 2008 , Sree Raama Navami ( USA )

Sarvadhaari (year) , Chaithra maasam ( month ) -

Suddha ( Shukla Paksham) Navami ( thitthi )

Punarvasu (star) , Ninth Day of Vasantha Nava Raathri.

Jayanthi = Birth Day of Sree Raama and also Marriage Day-

Sri Seethaa Raama KaLyaaNa Mahotsavam.

Sree Raama was born on This Day at 12 Noon or exactly

midway between Sunrise and Sunset - Abhijith Lagna.

Raama was born on the last day of Vasantha Navaraathri,

during the first month of Vasantha Ruthu ( Spring ).

Chaithra ( Madhu ) and Vaisaakha ( Maadhava )

maasams comprise Vasantha Ruthu - season of Spring

Margosa Tree ( Vepa Chettu ) and Mango Tree

( Maamidi Chettu ) blooming and sprouting tender leaves

and Koils are singing . Earth is verdant.

13 April 2008 also happens to be Mesha SankramaNam and

Night of Neela Saraswathi Shakthi and Sri Thaara Devi.

Mahaa Vidyas Bless All.

A telugu poet asked -

" Koila Paata Vinagaane Maami Chiguru Thodigena "

( whether Mango blooms after hearing Koila singing )

or " Maami Chiguru Thinagaane Koila Paata Paadena "

( whether Koila starts singing after eating tender mango leaves )

In USA de jure Spring arrived , but de facto spring is yet to come.

However " April Showers and May Flowers "

Raama's Father is Dasaratha Mahaaraj - DASARATTHA RAAM.

His Mother is Kausalya , Princess of Kosala Desha - KAUSALYARAAM

He was born in and ruled Ayoddhya - AYODDHYA RAAM.

Sarayu Nadi Thata SAAKETHA RAAMA

He married Videha Princess of Mitthila , d/o Janaka Mahaaraj,

Seethamma Thalli and earned the much deserved title -

SEETHA RAAM , JAANAKI RAAM , MAITTHILI RAAM , VAIDEHI RAAM

Raama is Lord Vishnu incarnation as an Ideal Human and a Just

Emperor of Soorya Vamsa Royal Dynasty and His Reign is

adoringly refered to as " Raama Raajyam ".

Let us recollect and remember Raama's Origins and His Ancestry : -

1. Lord Mahaa VIAHNU - Mahaa Vishnu PoorNa Avathaar Sri Raama

2. HiraNya Garbha Pithaamaha Aadya BRAHMA -

3. Brahma Maanasa Puthra MAREECHI + KaLa ( d/o Kardama Muni

& Devahoothi , and eldest sister of Kapila mahaa Muni ) -

4. KASHYAPA Prajaapathi + Adithi (d/o Daksha Prajaapathi & Prasoothi)-

5. SOORYA ( Aadithya , Kaashyapeya ) -

6. Seventh Manu VAIVASWATHA - Vaivaswatha Sree Raama

7. IKSHVAAKU , the founder of Ikshvaaku Royal Dynasty - --

Iksh = Sugar cane ; Vaak = Voice ; Ikshvaak = one with sweet voice

Ikshvaaku Kula Deepa - Ikshvaaku Raama

8 .KAKUTHSA --- Kaakutsa Kula Deepa - Kaakuttsa Raama

9. MAANDHAATHA ----

10 PRITTHU ---- Pritthu Vamsa BhooshaNa Sri Paartthiva Raama

11. DILEEPA -

12. RAGHU ----- Raghu Vamsa BhooshaNa Sree Raghu Raama

13 AJA ( grand father of Raama ) -

14. DASARATTHA - Daasaratthi KaruNaapayonidhi Dasarattha Raama.

15. RAAMA. , Bharatha , LakshmaNa and Shathrugghna , Saantha

RAAMA is also known as Sree Kodanda Raama

( Kodandam is Vishnu Dhanus handed over by Sri Parashu Raama ).

Sagara , Anshuman , Bhagheerattha , Ambareesha ,

Sathya Harischandra are also among the Ancestors of Sri Raama.

Sahasra Naama Thath Thulyam Raama Naama Varaananam =

One Name of Ram equals 1000 Names of one's Ishtta Daivam.

Seetha Sakham Sri Raamam Bhaje , Loka KaLyaaNaarttham.

For The Welfare Of World , let us Pay our Obeisance To Seetha Raama.

OM SEETHA RAAMAABHYAAM NAMAHA OM.

Sree SeethaRaama Bless All. Om Shaanthi.

P.S. 08 April 2008 MangaLa Gowri , Swarna Gowri Bless All.

09 April 2008 Puthra , Vijaya gaNapathi Bless All.

10 April 2008 Sri Lakshmi , SubrahmaNya Bless All.

12 April 2008 Rudra Deva Bless All.

aathreya - aarbeekay

 

--

balakrishna

[shvu]

 

Jesus teaching is the path of Love and surrender to the Most High - the Supreme Person - if this isn't Vaisnavism I don't know what is.

 

That statement is generic enough to be identified with Shaivism, Vaishnavism and probably a dozen other religions around the world.

 

On what basis will you argue that it means only one of these dozen different religions?

 

Cheers

[cbrahma]

 

That statement is generic enough to be identified with Shaivism, Vaishnavism and probably a dozen other religions around the world.

 

On what basis will you argue that it means only one of these dozen different religions?

 

Cheers

Hardly. The Judao-Christian God is first of all transcendental and second of all, One, which narrows it down considerably to non-panthesitic, monotheistic religions. Furthermore God is considered to have a convenant, a personal contract, a people. Jesus professes to be his Son and the Messiah. It gets less and less generic as you read it. Love and surrender to that God is not every religion by a long shot, but it certainly approximates bhakti.

[cbrahma]

 

More incoherent rambling.

 

Shaivites believe that Shiva is the source of everything, the creator, etc. They believe Shiva to be above Brahma and Vishnu.

 

According to Shaivites, Krishna is also an emissary of Shiva. Some Shaivite sects consider Krishna to be an avatar of Shiva.

 

Devi worshippers believe that Devi created Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.

 

So why is it illogical to assume that Jesus could have read the Vedas and interpreted it as Shaivism? Oh wait, because of your sloppy sentiments, it is unacceptable.

 

Tell me, where is the proof that Jesus was talking about Krishna?

 

I will tell you what seems to be the most logical conclusion - Jesus was not even a Vedantin. He was most likely a Jew who came across Buddhist ideals of morals and renunciation.

 

 

 

Thank You.

 

Its highly erratic to simply assume that Jesus was talking about Krishna, when his religion is not even dependent on Vedas as the source. It can be assumed that he was talking about ANY god, and that isn't enough criterion for Christianity to be considered Vaishnavism.

 

DOUBLE EDIT: What does cBrahma mean, 'try selling it to the Jews'. I see, so are Jews gonna accept Krishna, and not Shiva? They don't even accept the Vedas.

 

He gets weirder with every post.

 

This topic of Shaivism is your weirdness not mine. But I'm giving it a hearing. If it gets weirder, it's because of your identificiation of the Judao-Christian god with Siva. You have the Jews to contend with on that one, because it is the God that Jesus prays to.

It is a perfectly logical consequence of your comparing Christianity to Shaivism that Jesus would be Siva-like. It is not logic that he would be a Saivite because His teaching is not about ritual worship.

[shvu]

 

Hardly. The Judao-Christian God is first of all transcendental and second of al, One, which narrows it down considerably to non-panthesitic, monotheistic religions. Furthermore God is considered to have a convenant, a personal contract, a people. Jesus professes to be his Son and the Messiah. It gets less and less generic as you read it. Love and surrender to that God is not every religion by a long shot, but it certainly approximates bhakti.

 

I will say then Jesus was a Shaiva in line with the Shaivas from India who worship Shiva as the ultimate Supreme person and consider total surrender and unconditional Bhakti to him as the ultimate goal for mankind.

 

How do I know this? Jesus's God has no name, so this unnamed God becomes a candidate who can be mapped to any other God with a name. Since Jesus's teachings of love, etc are compatible with the Shaiva system, it stands to reason that Jesus was talking about Shiva without naming him and was therefore a Shaiva.

 

And in case, you are not familiar with Shaivism, please educate yourself on the subject and avoid pontificating on topics you do not know. Some of your dropout/Hare Krishna colleagues on this fourm have been known to do that in the past - talk big about topics they know nothing about [Advaita, Kundalini, Shiva, India, Hinduism, Science, Astronomy, Archaeology, British conspiracies...the list is endless].

 

Cheers

[Dark Warrior]

 

Hardly. The Judao-Christian God is first of all transcendental and second of al, One, which narrows it down considerably to non-panthesitic, monotheistic religions. Furthermore God is considered to have a convenant, a personal contract, a people. Jesus professes to be his Son and the Messiah. It gets less and less generic as you read it. Love and surrender to that God is not every religion by a long shot, but it certainly approximates bhakti.

 

Um, the God of Shaivites is Transcendental and One, which makes Shaivism a monotheistic religion. In any case, by calling the Judeo-Christian God 'Transcendental', you are clearly showing your blind faith. No Vaishnava considers this God or his scripture (Bible) as 'Transcendental'.

 

Shiva has reciprocated with his devotees, the Nayanmars.

 

Jesus professes to be the messiah of which god? The Judaic God is definitely not Krishna. I repeat, there is no proof that Jesus's God is Krishna. It could have been any deity.

 

Christianity approximates bhakti? Shaivism is replete with Bhakti Yoga and Saranagati to Shiva. It makes Christianity look weak and immature.

 

Dude, just give up. Its your belief, that's all. No Vaishnava or any unbiased person endorses this nonsense.

[cbrahma]

 

Um, the God of Shaivites is Transcendental and One, which makes Shaivism a monotheistic religion. In any case, by calling the Judeo-Christian God 'Transcendental', you are clearly showing your blind faith. No Vaishnava considers this God or his scripture (Bible) as 'Transcendental'.

 

Shiva has reciprocated with his devotees, the Nayanmars.

 

Jesus professes to be the messiah of which god? The Judaic God is definitely not Krishna. I repeat, there is no proof that Jesus's God is Krishna. It could have been any deity.

 

Christianity approximates bhakti? Shaivism is replete with Bhakti Yoga and Saranagati to Shiva. It makes Christianity look weak and immature.

 

Dude, just give up. Its your belief, that's all. No Vaishnava or any unbiased person endorses this nonsense.

You're responding to what I said to svu, on a different statement.

Blind faith? I've done nothing but quote scripture to you and am conversant in Judao-Christian theology. Gimme a break. You argue in circles. You begin with the assumption that the JC God is Siva and then say no Vaisnava considers Siva to be transcendental.

But Vaisnavas consider their god Visnu to be transcendental...etc...

In fact everything you have said about Shaivism can be said about Vaisnavism.

Your logic is - again the fallacy of composition.

Goldfish breath like humans therefore humans are goldfish.

I on the other hand am following your analogy between Christianity and Shaivism to its logical conclusion which is that Christians worship Jesus, like Saivites worship Siva. That logically makes Jesus analogous to Siva and I'm ok with that, since Siva is a Vaisnava.

[AATHREYABALAKRISHNAMURTHY]

AATHREYA - Om SeshaAnjaneyam -

 

PLANETS and Good Wishes

 

May Astrological Vedic Jyothish Divinities Bless All :

 

SOORYA (Sun) – Sauryam , Aarogyam – Valour and Health.

BHOOMI (Earth) – Sahanam – Forbearance

CHANDRA (Moon) – Aindram ,Amrutham– Power , Status., Immortality

KUJA (Mars) – Mangalam , NaruNam – Goodness Freedom from Debts

BUDDHA (Mercury) – Buddhi – Wisdom

GURU (Jupiter) – Gauravam – Respect and Honour

SUKRA (Venus) – Sukham , Saundaryam – Happiness , Beauty

SHANI (Saturn) – Aiswaryam – Riches

RAAHU – Baahubalam – Physical prowess

KETHU – Kulagauravam – Exaltation of one's own society.

YAMA – PLUTO – PuNya praapthi – exemption from Narakam (Hades).

NEPTUNE – POSEIDON – VARUNA DEV – Freedom from Thirst

URANUS – INDRA – HERSCHEL - Unsurpassed Power.

 

Om Thath Sath.. Om Shanthi.

 

aathreya - dr. ramaraju , bala krishna murthy.

--

balakrishna

[theist]

 

That logically makes Jesus analogous to Siva and I'm ok with that, since Siva is a Vaisnava.

 

 

This was also Srila Prabhupada's conclusion as well. That is by gaining the mercy of the Vaisnava one is sure to receive more information on the nature of the Supreme Person,

[raghu]

 

Whatever Theist said is True and it was confirmed by Krishna himself in the Bhagvad Gita. Very very rarely, after many many births one becomes My Devotee.

There is a large difference between an aspirant Vaishnava and a Vaishnava, i.e., trying to be perfect and being perfect and whatever that has come from the pen of the real Vaishnava confirms that also.

It is more like to be or not to be and that's why Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said, "a real devotee thinks that he does not possess a single drop of love for Krishna"

 

Amlesh,

 

That quote again:

 

 

<CENTER>grhitaivisnudiksako visnu-pujaparo narah</CENTER><CENTER></CENTER><CENTER>vaisnavo 'bhihito 'bhijnairitaro 'smadavaisnavah </CENTER><CENTER></CENTER><CENTER></CENTER><CENTER></CENTER><CENTER></CENTER>

"One who is initiated into the Vaishnava mantra and who is devoted to worshipping Lord Vishnu/Krishna is a Vaishnava. One who is devoid of these practices is not a Vaishnava." (quote from Hari-bhakti-vilas,11, quoted from Padma Purana)

 

 

There is no need to change the subject or obfuscate the issue with tangential reasoning. Theist does not know what he is talking about, and neither does anyone else who tries to claim that Vaishnavism somehow refers to anyone who worships a single supreme God. There is no need to deify him or any other so-called Vaishnava who are not even initiated Vaishnavas (by their own admission). If you want to understand the beliefs of a sampradaya you must go to that sampradaya's acharyas.

 

The purpose of language is to communicate clearly. There is no point in saying something if its meaning is not clear or does not tell us something we do not already know.

 

"Vaishnava" has a specific meaning. As per Sanskrit rules it means one who follows/worships Vishnu. And yes, it is a Sanskrit word. When Sanatana Gosvami (an authority on Gaudiya Vaishnavism, which Theist is not) says that a Vaishnava is one who is initiated into Vaishnava mantra and who worships Vishnu, that is a very clear and concise definition.

 

If "Vaishnava" and "Vishnu" are more all-encompassing (as Theist, cbrahma, et.al. hold), then Sanatana Gosvami's statement's would be ambiguous and unnecessary. As per Theist's "interpretation" of the above, Sanatana Gosvami's statement should read:

 

"A devotee of God is one who is initiated into the mantra of God's names and is devoted to the worship of God. One who is devoid of these practices is not a devotee of God."

 

As you can see, the above statement does not really tell us anything we do not already know. This is because Sanatana Gosvami was not providing a definition of a generic God-worshipper. If he was, he could have used any number of generic Sanskrit terms like "Brahmavadi" etc but he did not do so. During medieval India there was much debate on the identity of the Supreme Brahman and so Sanatana used a very specific set of terms to delineate his God-concept from the God-concepts of others with whom he disagreed. It is only in that context that his writing makes sense. It doesn't make any sense as per the "interpretation" given by Theist.

 

By the way, don't you think it odd that Theist, who has never even read Hari-Bhakti Vilas, is nevertheless offering an interpretation on something found therein? Don't you think a person should know the context of a statement before presuming to know what it means? Whereas when the Gaudiya Vaishnava sannyasi who has read it quotes it, Theist regards him as a fool.

 

I think it is very strange among Gaudiya Vaishnavas that when one knows what he is talking about, he is condemned if he does not offer praise towards Christianity. But when he is completely clueless about Gaudiya Vaishnava writings, he is treated as an authority akin to Bhagavad-gita just because he likes Christianity.

 

I guess the point is that knowing what you are talking about is not as important as worshipping Christianity when it comes to determining authority figures in G Vaishnavism.