Christianity and Vaisnavism

[bija]

welcome dark:)...hows things

[Dark Warrior]

In the Vishnu Purana, Sri Parasara Muni clearly says that bharatavarsha is alone the punya bhumi for this epoch. Karmas can be cleansed only here, and nowhere else. What this means is that, the Supreme Being for some reason has taken avatars ONLY in Bharatavarsha, and nowhere else.

 

Check the Purana for the sanskrit sloka if you wish. I heard this in a discourse.

 

Now, why would Brahman be so partial? Who knows? Maybe next yuga He will choose America or Africa. But if you are a Vaishnava, you need to accept what Sri Parasara Muni says. And that means, Jesus, Mohammed, Little Red Riding Hood and Black Mask are not Vaishnavas.

 

ISKCON is simplified Vaishnavism. However, ISKCON by no means represent the core tradition of Vaishnavism. Come to Sri Vaishnavism, and we have over 108 temples, festivals every day of the year (each having a deep significance), worship of many avatars of Vishnu, divining deep meanings from Sastra like Ramayana, Mahabharata, Vedas, Puranas and Prabandham, and difference in worship of each Archa Vigraha.

 

No ISKCON member, or very few, have actually cared about the meanings of Ramayana or Vishnu Sahasranama. Without touching the deep aspects of Vaishnavism, people like Theist make these stupid threads.

 

Hence, I don't feel I need to argue over this. If Theist insists on this nonsense, let him. I have already said everything I need to say.

[bija]

 

We may have a more explict understanding of the need to pray without motivation but how many of us are there that offer pure prayers to Krishna? by theist

That is so true. Often we can tend to point out discrepancy in other sects as being materially based religion. But yes, in our own private practice these anarthas still exist.

 

 

'...And when asuddha-nama is chanted with desires for liberation and enjoyment, due to the influence of mayavada (impersonalism) and so on, it is called nama-aparadha...' from bhajana-rahasya vritti - sraddha BVNM

We are fortunate that unalloyed bhakti is explained as a main principle in our tradition Theist. I feel that principle would greatly bless the Christian churches and its congregation, if it was taught from the pulpit clearly.

 

So how do we become free of that offence. We need that to be taught on our vyasasana also. We have this in common dont we with the christian. Universal truth.

[bija]

 

In the Vishnu Purana, Sri Parasara Muni clearly says that bharatavarsha is alone the punya bhumi for this epoch. Karmas can be cleansed only here, and nowhere else. What this means is that, the Supreme Being for some reason has taken avatars ONLY in Bharatavarsha, and nowhere else. by dark

 

Fair enough Dark. Some could argue though that this is proof that the Purana contains things of time and place. And that such verses could be used for sectarian purpose.

 

There is one verse in Srimad Bhagavatam which sings the praises of a certain river in South India. Do you know the verse? (I will try and find it). Some say that the Vyasa who penned the Bhagavatam was partial to this river and may have lived near it.

[Dark Warrior]

Notice the immediate response, 'Sectarian', as usual. The question is not about whether Vaishnavism is sectarian or not. The question is, whether you really accept Vaishnavism or not? Vishnu Purana is authentic and authoritative.

 

It appears as though people tend to question our scripture if they find their sentiments opposed. Like it or not, Matsya, Kurma....Kalki, etc. all take avatara in India. You accept this, you are a Vaishnava. You do not, then you are not a Vaishnava, Simple as that.

 

No Vaishnava considers the Lord's avatars as allegories. Avatara Rahasya is an important part of our tradition, ie, the Lord descends to mingle with us. Why He chose this little strip of land is a reason known only to Him.

 

It cannot be denied that the greatest knowledge, the Veda, is found in India. It also cannot be denied that philosophy had reached a peak in India more than any other country.

 

I am aware of people claiming that Bhagavatam was authored in the 8th century. Its rubbish. The fact is, South India has been the birthplace of the Alvars, Sri Sankara, Sri Ramanuja, Sri Madhva, Sri Nimbarka. So, tell me, does the Bhagavatam place importance to South India because it predicted these great philosophers, or was the Bhagavatam written after they were born?

 

I tend to take the former view.

 

The Bhagavatam says that great Narayana Devotees will be born near the rivers Tamra Parni, Palar, Vaikai, etc. Sri Vaishnavas believe it to be a prediction of the Alvars. Sri Nammalvar was born near Tamra Parni. Andal and Perialvar were born near vaikai. Kulasekhara Alvar was born near Palar, etc.

 

The Divya Prabandham is not just a Bhakti text. It contains intricate details on philosophy. It is a common chant among Sri Vaishnavas, that in order to fully understand the first 17 lines of Sri Nammalvar's Thiruvaimozhi, one needs to have a basic knowledge of over 6 Indian Philosophical Systems at first.

[bija]

 

Avatara Rahasya is an important part of our tradition...by dark

 

Yes. I would choose your understanding for one reason Dark...I have seen the fruit of faith in what you say. Even if my encounter is of a mystical bent. My faith says presently, Vyasa penned these literatures to open us to reality. So in that sense I would accept the tradition and aspire to be Vaisnava.

 

Here is a definition of Rahasya for those who may not know:

"a profound subject that is instructed by the guru and that is required to be known by those with great faith"

[Dark Warrior]

 

Yes. I would choose your understanding for one reason Dark...I have seen the fruit of faith in what you say. Even if my encounter is of a mystical bent. My faith says presently, Vyasa penned these literatures to open us to reality. So in that sense I would accept the tradition and aspire to be Vaisnava.

 

Mine is not just hinged on 'faith'. I have a knowledge of the major belief systems in the world, and noticed that Vedanta is the most intellectual and freedom allowing belief system to follow. I also noticed that Vaishnavism is the clearest exposition of Vedanta.

 

Having accepted this system as the best, it follows logically that one should accept everything that this faith offers. Hence, it is no blind faith, but rather, rational to accept the Avatars of the Lord as historical.

 

 

Here is a definition of Rahasya for those who may not know:

"a profound subject that is instructed by the guru and that is required to be known by those with great faith"

 

That is not what I meant by 'Avatara Rahasya'. It refers to the inner meanings of the Lord's pastimes.

 

For instance, few know the real purpose of Trivikrama's avatara. It was not to scale the world and defeat Mahabali. The Lord measured the Earth for the sole purpose of ensuring that each and every jivatma gets contact with His divine feet in the process. He blessed every single Jiva that day with His feet. This is the reason why He rose as Trivikrama and conquered the material vibhuti. Defeating Bali was just an excuse, a lila.

 

We would definitely have been present even at that time in some form or other, as a microbe, plant or animal. Certainly, we received the touch of Trivikrama's lotus feet then.

 

This is Avatara Rahasya.

 

And you wonder why people like cBrahma are saying that they feel as though their spiritual process is lacking (the thread on 'chanting')? Its because they have not let go of their attachments yet. And with this, I end further participation in this thread.

[bija]

Good for you. But ofcourse your input would be appreciated for one with fledgling faith...who is not here just to find fault (even if there was disagreement on some things)...

 

...it is nice to touch base and hear your knowledge. As an Indian born man you have a gift to share in this regard. Please consider posting more, its very good reading for a man down-under. The only Indian people I meet here are ones who come to the door selling energy or gas.

 

Tonight I was cooking vegetables and singing out very loud...Krsna Krsna and there was a knock on the door. It was an Indian lady with a big smile. I wonder if she liked my singing:). Good saleswoman....but no sale here tonight. If she was selling Sri Vaisnava literature...she would have walked away with my cash;).

 

Hari Hari!

[bija]

 

...are saying that they feel as though their spiritual process is lacking (the thread on 'chanting')? Its because they have not let go of their attachments yet. by dark

I dont know if christianity is an attachment and the cause of such things. But definately mixing and matching spiritual paths can slow progress...and in some cases can be a sign of immaturity. But not always...depends on the depth of the person.

 

It is good to be one-pointed in this regard. When I mix and match I suffer - and lose faith. Theist is good for keeping us on the ball. And in the game!

[Amlesh]

Dark seems to be a patriotic Vaishnava.

[Dark Warrior]

Rest assured, I have no love for country or land. Its the Lord's lilas that I care about. Scripture says Bharatavarsha, and that's the way it is. I could care less about India's state of affairs, but I do care about Srirangam, Tirupati, etc.

 

Bija, much of your post is simply gibberish. Sorry to be rude, or plain. You are no different from the Neovedantins who claim, 'every path is same'. Vaishnavism clearly says, 'ONLY devotion to Hari will lead to moksha'. Of course, Lord may give moksha sometimes to Christians or muslims for no reason at all, but that is just due to His grace. The right path is Vaishnavism.

 

Now, you are free to accept it or reject it. Just don't say, you are a vaishnava and claim other 'spiritual paths' are not a burden. These so-called secularists may find this indigestible, but what I say is not based on sectarianism. The very reason Vaishnavas have furiously debated with other schools is because we believe only the right knowledge liberates. Destruction of Ajnana is essential. Brahma Sutras advise inquiry, not secularism.

 

Do I sound dogmatic? maybe. But this is the basic tenet of Vaishnavism. The Upanishads clearly condemn the 'all paths lead to Rome' nonsense. Only knowledge of Brahman as He really is, is true knowledge.

 

Sure, We don't condemn christians to hell. We simply say, they, along with ajnanis, need more births. That's all.

 

If christians say theirs is the only way, then the obvious solution would be to find out which systems have all the answers. Its Vedanta that's rational.

 

And Christianity is a burden to true realisation, just like Shaivism, Buddhism, etc. are. Vishnu forbids worship of devas. Let alone Christianity. Vaishnavas claim to have defeated a dozen religions in debate. How long do you think it would take to disprove silly faiths like Christianity (Gnostic or Traditional)?

 

Bija and co., you are free to follow your beliefs. Just, for goodness sake, refrain from misinterpreting true Vaishnavism, or our scripture. The usual knee jerk responses of 'lookee here, Dark Warrior is sectarian' doesn't hold soap, when even Sri Ramanuja has condemned Shaivites as Tamo Gunis.

 

Now, I really will leave this thread.

[bija]

In case you come back for a look-see.

 

Firstly I do not think you are sectarianist. Just as much I do not think a simple hearted christian experiencing love of God is sectarian. Unfortunately many christians are. I was raised in christianity that was reasonably universal and non-evangelical. And there are things in that tradition Dark that you may not know, that may be beneficial - if you were not so closed.

 

I am ok if you think I am not Vaisnava (I am aspiring to be). Now that said and done....

 

We each experience God tangibly in various ways. For some, devotion has awakened them to a spiritually vibrant world, and as human birth is rare, they utilize that experiential encounter in application to find the truth. That experience, which is centered on bhakti to the Divine Person, is not limited in anyway. It is universal. By God's mercy that encounter can awaken even without scripture (even if rare). Contact with a sadhu can make that occur.

 

Saying that, I feel a tradition like yours is one of the most advanced means to open that door, to full human potential, self realization...culminating in love of God. And in that sense you are holding a treasure, mate.

 

If that is gibberish I'll eat my hat! And by no means have you been rude.

 

Cheers;).

[Amlesh]

But I'm really attached to Bharatvarsh, though born in Mauritius.

[guliaditya]

 

Mine is not just hinged on 'faith'. I have a knowledge of the major belief systems in the world, and noticed that Vedanta is the most intellectual and freedom allowing belief system to follow. I also noticed that Vaishnavism is the clearest exposition of Vedanta.

 

Having accepted this system as the best, it follows logically that one should accept everything that this faith offers. Hence, it is no blind faith, but rather, rational to accept the Avatars of the Lord as historical.

 

 

 

That is not what I meant by 'Avatara Rahasya'. It refers to the inner meanings of the Lord's pastimes.

 

For instance, few know the real purpose of Trivikrama's avatara. It was not to scale the world and defeat Mahabali. The Lord measured the Earth for the sole purpose of ensuring that each and every jivatma gets contact with His divine feet in the process. He blessed every single Jiva that day with His feet. This is the reason why He rose as Trivikrama and conquered the material vibhuti. Defeating Bali was just an excuse, a lila.

 

We would definitely have been present even at that time in some form or other, as a microbe, plant or animal. Certainly, we received the touch of Trivikrama's lotus feet then.

 

This is Avatara Rahasya.

 

And you wonder why people like cBrahma are saying that they feel as though their spiritual process is lacking (the thread on 'chanting')? Its because they have not let go of their attachments yet. And with this, I end further participation in this thread.

 

Very nicley presented.

 

You are very fortunate to have born in South India.You can read the Divya Prabhandham written in tamil.I am also very much attached but not able to find any source from where i can get all these either in English or Hindi.

 

Any way your posts are worth reading.

 

pranaam

[bija]

 

'ONLY devotion to Hari will lead to moksha'. by dark

 

God is one my friend. Your tradition has elaborated deeply on who God is. The bible sheds little light on that...and the christian would say Jesus is the image of God made man.

 

I can appreciate to enter deep bhajan, and experience lila, we will need to know who God is. If you have that treasure....teach us ignorant ones who need many births.

[bija]

 

Any way your posts are worth reading. by guliaditya

 

For sure!

[Dark Warrior]

Yes, I did come back for a 'look-see'.

 

 

We each experience God tangibly in various ways. For some, devotion has awakened them to a spiritually vibrant world, and as human birth is rare, they utilize that experiential encounter in application to find the truth. That experience, which is centered on bhakti to the Divine Person, is not limited in anyway. It is universal. By God's mercy that encounter can awaken even without scripture (even if rare). Contact with a sadhu can make that occur.

 

That is sadly, again off the mark, Bija. By experience, an Advaitin can claim the world is false. By experience, a Shaivite can claim Shiva is Supreme, etc. Vedanta is opposed to this sort of 'relying on experience'. The Veda is authority. What it says, goes.

 

Bhakti can occur to Shiva, Durga, Jesus, Popeye, Mickey Mouse, etc. Lord Krishna does not say that a person without Jnana cannot feel Bhakti. He says, that Bhakti without Jnana is useless.

 

There are Shaivite bhaktas who have tortured themselves in agony for Shiva. Yes, it is the same Lord Vishnu in their hearts, who causes them to be that devoted to Shiva. But their bhakti will not lead to moksha, according to Vaishnavite theology.

 

Similarly, a person may believe Jesus is god and exhibit 'bhakti'. The Lord will accept the bhakti, but he will not give the christian moksha. You may ask, why then does the Christian experience Bhakti? because, the Lord does not want anybody to be a nastika. A little devotion will lead to a birth where you know the truth.

 

If you are a Vaishnava, then that 'divine person' is Narayana. A person who has bhakti to a 'divine person' without understanding it to be Narayana is said to be in ajnana.

 

Sometimes, the Lord reveals Himself for no reason at all, as He did to the Alvars. The Alvars did not read scripture, yet the Prabandham is considered to hold all truths of the Veda.

 

Therefore, Bhakti in Christianity is useless. It will never lead to Moksha, although a good Christian will get a better birth.

 

 

God is one my friend. Your tradition has elaborated deeply on who God is. The bible sheds little light on that...and the christian would say Jesus is the image of God made man.

 

Correct. God is One. Narayana. Paths to know Him? One again, according to Vaishnavism. Just because He loves all jivas does not mean he accepts all the manufactured religions they throw at Him.

 

 

 

Very nicley presented.

 

You are very fortunate to have born in South India.You can read the Divya Prabhandham written in tamil.I am also very much attached but not able to find any source from where i can get all these either in English or Hindi.

 

Any way your posts are worth reading.

 

pranaam

 

Thank you, Guliaditya. I wish more people understood what I am saying. It appears as though Kali Yuga makes truth appear to be undesirable, after all.

[bija]

 

But I'm really attached to Bharatvarsh, though born in Mauritius. by Amlesh

Down this way you would be like a Tasmanian...but definately no devil:P.

 

Hang on...New Zealander...sorry.

[bija]

 

The Lord will accept the bhakti, but he will not give the christian moksha. by dark

 

Ok...I am open to that comment. Can you give your reasoning please?

[bija]

[Dark Warrior]

 

Ok...I am open to that comment. Can you give your reasoning please?

 

After that lengthy explanation, you still don't get it, do you? Proper Jnana leads to Moksha.

 

The Bhagavad Gita says that deva worshipping does not lead to moksha. Similarly, a Christian or Muslim who does not know who Vishnu is or what His lilas are, will not get moksha despite his devotion. He may 'experience' something, but that is simply because of the Lord's grace. That 'experience' is nothing compared to true jnana.

 

Same goes for all cults, from Paganism to Rastafarianism to Taoism to Buddhism. Heck, a person meditating on the Flying Spaghetti Monster may claim to be a devotee, but he won't get moksha.

 

Bija, I do not care about your personal beliefs. Elaborate posts on pseudo-intellectual stuff about experience and flowery diagrams is not Vedanta. I am merely trying to tell you what is Vedanta. If you are opposed to this, or hold an alternate opinion, it means you do not belong to the Vedantic (or Vaishnavite) tradition, and hence, have no right to assert your beliefs.

 

I am not asking you to change your belief. Just avoid associating the tradition of Vedanta with this stuff. You can believe that Jesus and Mohammed will lead you to Moksha, if you want, because that's your independence.

[cbrahma]

Wow. Somebody actually called on Dark Warrior?

 

'There is no difference between a pure Christian and a sincere devotee of Krsna.' Room Conversation, Bombay, 5, April 1977.

ACB Prabhupada

 

Now maybe Prabhupada doesn't know what Vaisnavism is really.

 

"Vedas means the books of transcendental knowledge. Not only the Bhagavad Gita, even the Bible or the Quran, they are also."? (lecture 29-7-68) 4. Srila Prabhupada:No, no. Christianity is Vaisnavism.

 

Dr. Patel: Vaisnavism? Absolutely Vaisnavism.

 

Srila Prabhupada:Islam is also Vaisnavism.

 

Dr. Patel: Mohammedanism is not Vaisnavism.

 

Srila Prabhupada:No, no. Caitanya Mahaprabhu had talked with the Pathanas.

 

He proved that "Your religion is Vaisnavism."? (February 17, 1974, Bombay) 5. "Chaitanya Mahaprabhu proved devotional service from the Quran.

 

So, it requires a devotee who can explain God from any Godly literature"? ( Morning Walk, June 6, 1974, Geneva)

 

It seems that Vaisnavism is far more universal than Dark would like to hold on to. Yes there are traditions, especially religious traditions. But Vaisnavism is not a religion and not specific to India.

[bija]

 

Bija, I do not care about your personal beliefs. Elaborate posts on pseudo-intellectual stuff about experience and flowery diagrams is not Vedanta. I am merely trying to tell you what is Vedanta. If you are opposed to this, or hold an alternate opinion, it means you do not belong to the Vedantic (or Vaishnavite) tradition, and hence, have no right to assert your beliefs. by dark

I can appreciate your reasoning for saying these things (and I do not consider myself a vedantist/qualified). You are correct on many points such as:

 

 

The Bhagavad Gita says that deva worshipping does not lead to moksha. Similarly, a Christian or Muslim who does not know who Vishnu is or what His lilas are, will not get moksha despite his devotion. by dark

 

Such people will not attain Goloka Vrindavan except by Sri Nityananda Gauranga's mercy. Even if after several births.

 

But cbrahma's post in the above thread confirms I am of the fold. Do you disagree with Srila Prabhupada's quotes above? I place my faith in Srila Prabhupada.

 

And I doubt you have any realization of the greatness of Srila Bhaktivinoda's bhajan. Sri Bhajana-rahasya by Srila Bhaktivinoda - click here

 

Please do not demean this great saint.

[Amlesh]

Dark is very compassionate, he wants each and everyone on this earth to attain Moksha at one go, which is my wish also, but we are not in Alice in wonderland. What you've said is true Dark, but the other routes if properly followed will lead some day or the other to Vishnu. It's a matter of the level of consiousness of every individual.

[bija]

 

What you've said is true Dark, but the other routes if properly followed will lead some day or the other to Vishnu. It's a matter of the level of consiousness of every individual. by amlesh

 

Yes exactly.