mahak Posted October 18, 2001 Report Share Posted October 18, 2001 I believe your hocus-pocus comment, but you ruin your credibility entirely by your closing statement. First, you slam the faultless Axumite mother of Lord Jesus Christ, and then you slam Srila Prabhupada in the sense that you deny that appearance of the Supreme Lord, whether plenary incarnation or empowered avatara, happens transcendentally without the necessity of material biological consideration. In the Krsna Book, it is described that mundane sexual contact was not the influence of the appearance of Krsna in the womb of Mother Devaki, that this arrangement was completely arranged by inconceivable internal potency of the will of the Supreme Lord. No one cares if you "believe" in the virgin birth of Lord Jesus Christ, no one cares if you "believe" that Krsna danced on the head of Kaliya serpant and accepted the homages from his half-human, half snake Nagapatnis. What my issue here is is your utterly humanistic and materialistic approach to spiritual understanding, but considering the content of your posts, I dont particularly care about you, period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shvu Posted October 18, 2001 Report Share Posted October 18, 2001 I believe your hocus-pocus comment, but you ruin your credibility entirely by your closing statement. First, you slam the faultless Axumite mother of Lord Jesus Christ, and then you slam Srila Prabhupada in the sense that you deny that appearance of the Supreme Lord, whether plenary incarnation or empowered avatara, happens transcendentally without the necessity of material biological consideration. In the Krsna Book, it is described that mundane sexual contact was not the influence of the appearance of Krsna in the womb of Mother Devaki, that this arrangement was completely arranged by inconceivable internal potency of the will of the Supreme Lord. No one cares if you "believe" in the virgin birth of Lord Jesus Christ, no one cares if you "believe" that Krsna danced on the head of Kaliya serpant and accepted the homages from his half-human, half snake Nagapatnis. What my issue here is is your utterly humanistic and materialistic approach to spiritual understanding, but considering the content of your posts, I dont particularly care about you, period. Bless you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janus Posted October 18, 2001 Report Share Posted October 18, 2001 In many ancient cultures a womans virginity wasn't calculated from the time that her hymen was penetrated by the phallus of a male, but from the distance of her moon period. Thus a woman was considered to be a virgin after each menstrual flow had taken place. I detect a note of "sex is dirty" in some of the replies upon this thread, and a corresponding hatred of nature, of the natural, not to mention a "holier than thou attitude". Yes, most people who believe in the Virgin Mary will believe anything presented dogmatically within the faith that they have accepted, just as quite a few people will accept quite literally that there are elephants in Hell, etc., who have also accepted that the universe was created by a humanoid (appearing) life form with four heads who sprouted out of the belly button of a Supreme Being floating around on an ocean on back of a snake with a million heads. Mythos as we are conditioned to regard it is considered to be empty of content, this is far from the case however, not that we understand this, still going around trying to convince ourselves that we really do believe that it is literally true. A question that I always flumox Christians with is whether God is male. Falling into my trap they reply that he is, at which point I ask then whether God has a penis. Most fall over dead or cross themselves and walk backwards out of the room quickly. Those who however survive this great shock can be led around to the question as to whether or not, if God indeed did sire Jesus as to whether there might have been any intamacy involved, whether he and Mary both enjoyed the conceptual act or whether it was all quite surgical and devoid in its intirity of any conjugal love. Anyway Bhudha was "gat" upon his mother by a white elephant the story goes. Try introducing literality to that. Hare Krsna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shvu Posted October 19, 2001 Report Share Posted October 19, 2001 http://www.churchofindia.com/jesus_in_hindu_scriptures.htm Here is a web page with some quotes, which according to some people, point to Jesus! Some of the interesting (funny) ones are, ***** koumaro loko ajanishta' putrah nwarvhethan wai uttaravoth Translation - A son will be born to a virgin in this world, take ye hold that (son) is what is superior (than everyone) Atharnava Veda 13 - 3- 4 ' born in a cattle shed ' Rig Veda 355 -1 Asmaakam thu visishtaye Thaanni bodha dwijothama Bhagavat Gita 1:7 Translation - A perfect Brahmin is twice born. nobody can become a brahmin without being born a second time. Note: The meaning of the word Brahmin is ' brahma jnaanethi brahmana'- One who has attained the wisdom about God, who has found God. Hence nobody can find God unless he is born again a second time. The page ends with, and there is no other way of salvation. (Bible Reference - Romans 10:8-10) ***** I verified some of the translations and needless to say it is just a lot of hocus-pocus. But I wouldn't be surprised, if there are many out there, who will readily believe in such a list without verifiying/doubting a thing. People who believe in the virgin Mary, will believe in anything. - UG Cheers [This message has been edited by shvu (edited 10-18-2001).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2001 Report Share Posted October 19, 2001 I wouldn’t say that Jesus is the only way, but in fact he is a way. Muktas like him exist in a state of non-separation from the Lord (Vedanta-sutra 4.4.4) and they can create their own worlds into the samvyoma of their hearts to live there with their friends, relatives, and all the living entities that they love (Vedanta-sutra 4.4.8). A mukta like him is under the control of no one but the Lord, therefore he is the master of all and has no other master (Vedanta-sutra 4.4.9). As the Gospel says he is the owner of his Father’s realm. One may attain mukti by Hari’s free will and grace without following any other mukta (guru or master) simply by surpassing avidya by Hari’s Grace. This is possible and there are countless examples of that. Even immobile and insentient creatures had attained moksa by Hari’s grace without following any guru. Others may go to a world created by a mukta to relish with Hari in that same environment. Jesus has stated that at his Father abode there are many rooms... One may be a owner of one of these rooms or he may rent one of them, no matter. Personally I am leaned to accept that Jesus had a direct relationship with Hari feeling himself as His son. Just like Ramakrishna felt Hari as his mother Kali. If one loves Jesus like he may love him, for certain he will be placed in Jesus’ room at his samvyoma. Mukta’s satya-sankalpa is something perfectly established into Vedanta and by studding mukta’s affairs one easily may attain the conclusion that Jesus, Ramakrisha, Mirabai, San Juan de La Cruz, Caitanya and many others had manifested the symptoms described therein. If one is eager to enter into their worlds, Hari Himself will place him there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2001 Report Share Posted October 20, 2001 Even immobile and insentient creatures had attained moksa by Hari’s grace without following any guru. Others may go to a world created by a mukta to relish with Hari in that same environment. When Hari who is mukti’s moksa was sporting in this Earth as Rama He personally has transferred His beloved ones to Saketa by car. Death couldn’t touch anyone. Rama just has invited everybody to enter into Puspakara aircraft after sprinkling a few drops of Sarayu’s water over their heads. Human beings, monkeys, demons, bests, birds, trees, and even the fishes from Sarayu who were living at Ayodhya were transferred to Saketa without even changing their material bodies! That’s to say, they did not have to face death to attain mukti. Million, billions, actually eons of living entities were transported to Rama’s samvyoma by car at His side. Only Hanuman has been left behind, only to make people like me to always remember that green-bluish form of Hari who is always smiling mercifully and sporting unending lilas. Muktas cannot do a feat like that. This is Hari’s prerogative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.