Prabhupada is 2nd coming as Jesus said He would?

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

Hare Krishna,

 

 

Prabhupada the 2nd coming of Lord Jesus Christ, many devotees,esp. BR Sridhara Maharaja said that Prabhupada was empowered Saktavesa Avatara, maybe something to think about.

 

What do devotees think?

 

How could anybody deny it.

 

[Avinash]

Prabhupada the 2nd coming of Lord Jesus Christ, many devotees,esp. BR Sridhara Maharaja said that Prabhupada was empowered Saktavesa Avatara, maybe something to think about.

 

There have been many saktavesa avataras. So, Jesus and Prabhupada could easily have been two different souls.

[Kulapavana]

if you want to talk in christian terms, the 2nd coming of Christ is also associated with the end of the material world.

 

has the world ended? if so, I have not noticed /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

What about prema? Everything ends with this.

 

Whos going to wait for end of world?!

[Kulapavana]

sometimes devotees read too much into things and try to make artificial extrapolations of other traditions... I'm not sure if there is any benefit to such speculations

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

Lord Kalki comes end of the World.

 

!

[theist]

Revealed knowledge should be taken seriously. IF it is authentic from Supersoul or His representative only and not the mind's curiousity. It is natural to wonder about such things as they arise in the mind it is just that we can't allow some conclusion to form based on such thinking.

 

As was said there are an unlimited amount of saktyavesa avatars and they are not all the same jiva. They must be allowed their individuality also.

 

I have heard and tend to believe that Christ came again as Haridas Thakur. But in the end it doesn't matter. If such knowledge was essential for us it would have been stressed. It wasn't. The point is to follow the instructions and life examples of Lord Jesus Christ and/or Haridas Thakur.

 

We know that Srila Prabhupada revealed himself to us in a particular way as Srila Prabhupada. We have only the tinest of glimpses into his being. If we become more intimate followers more will be revealed as we go.

 

His life stands on his own bhakti-sakti. Jesus Christ stands on his. It does not confer some legitimacy on either if we try to merge them.

 

And someone could then ask why not Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati? Or Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur?

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

But what Jesus Christ started...

 

Also you mentioned-

Why not other acharyas?

 

Jesus Christ doesn't belong in our sampradaya in that but all Gaudiya Acharyas accept Jesus Christ as devotee. But like you said He stands on His own. Still just like Lord Brahma, Jesus Christ taught then. Didn't Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja say Unity?

[gHari]

I think this is a Christian misinterpretation of the prophesies. I believe they actually describe darshan, when indeed the heavens and the earth fall away.

 

Mundane people can only see the lessons in mundane terms. The mundane didn't realize that Jesus had set them free, relieved their burden. They were too dull to see. They wanted relief from the tyranny of Rome, and could not even see the tyranny of ahankara. Still can't.

 

[Kulapavana]

"I think this is a Christian misinterpretation of the prophesies. I believe they actually describe darshan, when indeed the heavens and the earth fall away."

 

Christian references to the second coming of Christ mainly come from The Revelation of St. John the Divine, popularly known as the Book of Revelation or The Apocalypse. If you think that source merely talks about darshan I suggest you read it again.

 

If I was to speculate on this subject I would say that The Apocalypse describes the end of Kali-yuga and the coming of Kalki avatar.

 

[Guest guest]

that the 1st is Caitanya & the 2nd is Prabhupada.

 

-- You humble disciple that is noth.

[Guest guest]

don't worry about the world ending today or any day for it will be already the next day in Australia.

VdK

[Guest guest]

there are many things that point to him being so.

1. Jesus said that when he came back he would come like a thief in the night. SP came like that to the USA

2. he said that he would come on the clouds. SP travelled the world by plane - on the clouds.

3. he said his followers would have a sign on the forehead - tilak.

4. he said he would speak in tongues - bengali, sanskrit, hindi.

5. he said he was going to give us the rest of the message - love of Krsna.

VdK.

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

Yeah, also prabhu about weeks ago I had this dream about Christians letters, and Bhagavad-gita. The translation of this Gita was little different. Anyway its been bothereing me for a long while, its good to tie things up. Gets rid of all the doubts.!

[Guest guest]

 

Prabhupada the 2nd coming of Lord Jesus Christ, many devotees,esp. BR Sridhara Maharaja said that Prabhupada was empowered Saktavesa Avatara, maybe something to think about.

 

What do devotees think?

 

How could anybody deny it.

 

 

Obviously, any intelligent individual can object to the proposed theory, because there is simply no evidence.

 

One wonders why there is so much interest in speculating on such things. Why does a saadhu have to be avataara of someone in order to be taken seriously? And why must one draw one-sided parallels between historical figures from different cultures, time periods, and religious traditions in order to impress the masses with some unverifiable concept of universalism? Surely there are better things to do than diluting siddhaanta with new-age, cult theories.

 

Among other Vaishnavas (not ISKCON), I rarely see these kinds of questions come up. Nobody feels they need the Christian affirmation of their tradition in order to practice it. This is something I repeatedly see only in ISKCON and its sister societies. I wonder if this represents dissatisfaction of ISKCON's primarily Western converts with the Vaishnava tradition, or some other unfulfilled desire.

 

If ISKCON's founder-aachaarya is merely an incarnation of Jesus, then consider the ramifications, especially as lay folk would interpret them. They might feel that there is no need to follow Prabhupada, whose tradition is relatively austere, since Jesus is also a bona fide chap and his tradition is a lot easier to follow. Well, Gaudiiya Vaishnavas do not agree with many things about the Christian tradition, such as its emphasis on personal salvation as the goal, its reliance on karma as the means, its lack of recognizable regulations in areas of diet and so on. This is not intended to be an attack, but simply a sober statement of reality. In fact, the more people try to relate Christianity to Vaishnavism, the more it seems to me that they misunderstand both.

 

We should understand (& respect) differences, not simply gloss over them for the sake of sentiment. And we should not make up theories that one guru is the same as another simply to encourage uncritical acceptance of a tradition.

 

 

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

hare krishna,

 

Thankyou for nice post.

 

I tend to agree what you said. You put it very nicly in consice way. Hare Krishna

[muralidhar_das]

Pankaj Prabhu, please understand that it is not correct to suggest that Srila Sridhar Maharaj ever considered that Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada is the "2nd coming" of Jesus Christ. And of course, Srila Prabhupada didn't give his hungry disciples fishes and loaves to eat, he gave them prashadam.

 

Also, there is one Sannyasi devotee called Bhakti Madhurya Bon Maharaj who used to be a priest in Rome, and who later became a Vaishnava and disciple of Srila Sridhar Maharaj. After he became a Vaishnava, Srila Sridhar Maharaj told this Bon Maharaj to forget Jesus. That was Srila Sridhar Maharaj's opinion about Jesus and Christianity. Forget it.

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaj was quite direct and determined on this point. He told Bon Maharaj, "Forget Jesus, and just worship Mahaprabhu". I was there when this happened.

[theist]

I for one would never accept such a statement. Forget Christianity as a religion but to forget Lord Jesus Christ? Forget 'bout it!

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

Ok.

 

Wow Forums sure get heated. I have more problems in forums, that I have with life in general [i'm not even joking].

 

Anyway I didn't mean to quote, I was saying what Maharaja said. To ask and make my point, I have to quote somebody. I don't exactly know what point your making Prabhuji with what you said. But that was for personal what Maharaja said. I doubt a Christian who happened to come by this forum would understand. Though what you said is essential for us, because we don't want Vaithuntaloka we want Goloka. So its utmost importance for us to remember gaura more than even Jesus Christ.

[theist]

As high as such a thing is Mahaprabhu taught "My only desire birth after birth is..." You know the rest.

 

And where in Prabhupada's teachings is it taught that one should forget Prahlada Maharaja, or Arjuna etc. who never explictedly taught manjari-bhava or exclusive madhurya-rasa?

 

Maybe they did but I am not aware.

 

Of course I am not sure of the exact words or context of HG B.R. Sridhar Maharaja's words so...

[muralidhar_das]

Theist,

I didn't mean to annoy you.

 

In Srila Sridhar Maharaj's book "search for sri krishna" there is a chapter, "beyond christianity", which starts out with this:

<hr>

Christian: Can you explain the Vaisnava viewpoint of Christianity?

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: Christianity is incomplete Vaisnavism; not fullfledged,

but the basis of devotional theism. We find the principle of "Die to live"

there to a certain extent, at least physically. The Christians say that the ideal

shown by Jesus is self-sacrifice. In our consideration, however, that is not fullfledged

theism, but only the basis.It is an unclear, vague conception of Godhead:

"We are for Him." But how much? And in what shape, in what attitude? All

these things are unexplained and unclear in Christianity. Everything is hazy, as

if seen from far off. It does not take any proper shape. The cover is not fully

removed, allowing us to come face to face with the object of our service. The

conception of service to God is there, and a strong impetus to attain that, so the

foundation is good, but the structure over the foundation is unclear, vague, and

imperfect.

 

<hr>

As Guru Maharaj said, "Christianity is incomplete Vaisnavism; not fullfledged, but the basis of devotional theism."

 

And in regard to Guru Maharaj saying "forget it" to Bon Maharaj, that really was his instruction. I was there at the time. Also, in Tattva Viveka, Thakur Bhaktivinode quite clearly expressed that he didn't believe in the idea of the "messiah" or "satan" or several other ideas that are taught as "truth" in the bible. Plainly, he didn't believe in the words of the bible.

 

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

Well many people think Jesus is Supreme Lord. And still have this mentality [maybe its the meat eating offences]. They are falling to impersonal realization. I am not sure what the cause is. There could be so many reasons.

 

What about when we forget about Krishna? Who do we blame? I don't see any point in what you said. If somebody says remember Mahaprabhu is basic things. After all He is Yuga-avatara [500 Years ago]. Its more important remember Him than almost anybody else.

 

[theist]

Muralidhar, you did not in anyway offend me. The idea of forgeting Jesus does offend me however. But then I am just expressing my outlook and I don't expect all others will have the same.

 

I have also kept a personal animosity for one purport in the CC where Srila Prabhupada is quoting Bhaktisiddhanta that Vasudeva Datta is millions of times greater than Jesus Christ because he was willing to suffer perpetually in hell for the universe, whereas Jesus only suffered for his followers. Sorry everyone, as I don't mean to offend anyone either but that seems like faulty logic to me. How can it be said Jesus was only willing to suffer for his followers and not evryone else? On what basis has Bhaktisiddhanta determined this? It gives the impression that Jesus gave Krsna a limit that he wouldn't exceed or something.

 

I simply cannot accept that.

 

Now I will finish reading your post. I just had to clear up any idea that I thought you offended me. Not so prabhu.

[theist]

"unclear etc." I can agree with without hesitation. It is motivated service but then so is all I see in the various matha and sects in Gaudiya Vaisnavism although the conception of the highest state is there and I believe realized in some of the acarya's.

 

But Jesus Christ is a saktyavesa avatar and not a certain religious designation called Christianity. I think that differentiation is a very import one.

 

Notice the question was "can you explain the vaisnava view of Christianity" and not of Jesus Christ.

 

The Christians say that the ideal

shown by Jesus is self-sacrifice. In our consideration, however, that is not fullfledged

theism, but only the basis.It is an unclear, vague conception of Godhead:

"We are for Him."

 

 

I must respectfully disagree or at least seek clarification of this statement that Jesus did not give an example of full fledged theism. Now if he is referring to Christianity as we see it today then certainly I accept but if he is referring to Jesus Christ then I reject.

Jesus Christ gave the example of pure unmotivated service when before the crucifixtion he prayed "not my will but Thy will be done".

 

Also Bhaktivinodes comment on satan I accept but his statement if indeed the translator got it correctly that he doesn't accept the idea of messiah is puzzling. Prabhupada said messiahs descend from where was it Satyloka? Siddhaloka? out of compassion for this inhabitants of the Earth.

 

So what he means by messiah if that was his word is unclear. He beliefs in empowered avatars obviouisly so what this point is needs more explanation for me to understand.

 

Anyway I am concerned that you may perceive some friction here where there isn't any. I have read your posts for years and have much respect for you and also your guru.

[Pankaja_Dasa]

How can it be said Jesus was only willing to suffer for his followers and not evryone else?

 

 

Why would a Guru suffer the sins of somebody else. Say when you take Dikya from a devotee. That's silly. Thats what that Purport is saying /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

Ps. I hope this doesn't start a Sikya/Dikya debate. But when Guru gives you think that is meant to take your Karma. But every Guru doesn't say or do what Vasudeva Datta said. Thats what special about Him [Plus he really meant it, not just saying for sake of it]