Smiley

It is interesting that he says one can chant the name of Allah because it indicates the Supreme Lord but that Narayana is not completely perfect:

Dear all, Thank you so much for responding to my challenging posts and even taking the time to answer them. Special thanks to the moderator for not banning me! To all whose sentiments have been offended by my positions: please know that it was not my intent to offend but to speak the truth as best I know it. I regret any hurt feelings that I have caused. I have tried and will continue to try to live up to these wise words of a swami with which I have serious disagreements on many issues: Please, anyone who would like to stay in touch - contact me by private message. PEACE

I don't agree with your interpretation of Saktyavesa Avatar. Jesus is a jiva and a Saktyavesa Avatar is any jiva empowered by Krishna to preach God consciousness - including Mohammed! I have added bold text to the quote below:

Have you experimented with other forms of meditation?

Due to the kripa of the Supreme, we find little sattvic elements in even the most base nonsense. This is a way of planting seeds for the persons next life since these non Vedic religions inevitably lead to rebirth. Once you stop exaggerating the similarities and ignoring the glaring differences, things will become more clear.

I have never met Swami Prakashanand Saraswati, but I once attended a satsang given by one of his swamis at a Hindu Temple in Norwalk, CA.

Regarding that condition where urine leaks out - of course you should wear a paper or cotton barrier between your body and your underwear of sufficient thickness to get you through a temple visit. As said before, don't let anything keep you from the temple; the Supreme can only ask for our best.

Would you please translate into English? Thank you.

Allah is known by the Koran which comes courtesy of Mohammed, the founder of Islam. Notwithstanding your criticism of Swami Rama Krishna, Swami Prabhupada seems to agree with him:

Throughout history, compare the body count left behind by the followers of the teachings of Jesus and Mohammed vs. the teachings of the Buddha (Atheist), Mahavir (Jain) or Sri Shankara (Advaita). A tree is known by the fruit it bears.

Well you had to leave out my favorite - Shri Prahlad Maharaj! Between Shri Meerabai and Shri Hanumanji wasn't one more like bhava bhakti and the other action bhakti? I don't know if that makes any sense.

What are you talking about? I thought you wanted to worship Sri Shiva. Sri Shiva is not a "Demi-God". Perhaps you mean 'deva'? Sri Shiva is not a deva. Trimurti: Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva are the presiding deities. All devas like Indra, Vayu, etc. are under them. That is my understanding.

First of all let me say that I believe the Supreme dwells equally in everyone as paramatma. Since he is all-pervading he hears the prayers of everyone. That being said, I think the Bhagavad Gita is the highest and best revelation of that Supreme Being. Of course that is my shradda which is based upon my karma among other things. If I equate other scriptures with that which I believe was spoken directly by Sri Vishnu himself, then the Bhagavad Gita is no longer special. If I equate other names by which people choose to call their conception of a higher power with the 1,000 names of Vishnu, then the names Hari, Krishna and Rama are no longer special. In India they have this idea that a persons religion is like their mother. Everyone has the right to think that their mother is the best in the world. If they don't tell me that my mother is the same as theirs then we can live peacefully as brothers. If they don't tell me to disown my mother in order to embrace theirs, then we can live peacefully as brothers. OM SHANTI

Doesn't Exodus 20:4-5 in the original Hebrew clearly and unequivocably forbid the bowing before statues? What Biblical basis do you have for adding this idea of "when"? (For clarity, I've added the emphasis to your quote.): Long before Christianity, every prophet in Judaism seemed to think that the original Hebrew forbid using images or statues to worship Jehovah or YHWH. Notwithstanding that, Catholics choose the practice for their own reasons. If by "Christians" you mean Catholics. Obviously most Protestants do not agree with the Catholic practice of bowing before statues. Yes, I agree.

Dr. Frank Morales, Ph.D.

You have done a good job in pointing out similarities but you don't give equal weight to the serious differences. Then you take it one step further: All conclusions without supporting premises. You keep making leaps of logic: "Taking this one step further ..." as if simply pointing out similarities in two concepts of a higher power somehow means that people are talking about the same thing and entitles you to take it "one step further". What you are doing is like pointing out the similarities in two people and then saying that they are therefore the same. To establish equivalency you have to adequately explain the differences. You have not come close to accomplishing that. You have also ignored one of the consistent themes throughout the Bible - the character of 'God'. Clearly idol worshipping is unequivocably condemned all throughout the Bible. Both Jews and Christians have always taught that the law of God reveals his character. So what to make of the 2nd commandment? It is at the heart of the law of Jehovah and clearly reveals something about his character that is not consonant with Brahman or Sri Vishnu. The jealousy referenced in the 2nd commandment is further elucidated all throughout the Bible - a consistent theme: Yes, I agree that you are personally quite convinced and in fact believe what you have asserted. However I don't think we are going to get anywhere by discussing this philosophically. Instead, let's talk about Vedic authorities. I will say that there are some Acharyas (like Swami Prabhupada) who have taught that it is a great offense to equate a Jiva Tattva with Vishnu Tattva and he considers Jesus on the same level of Mohammed - an empowered preacher but still a Jiva Tattva. What do you think of that? Also, if there are some Vedic authorities which share you opinions about Jesus, please reference them and I will check them out. Thanks.

If you are talking about Dr. Morales I did not quote him because I am trying to help promote him as a spiritual authority, I just happened to agree with the gist of that one article. Regarding paying dues however, according to his bio http://www.dharmacentral.com/acharyaji.php he took formal Brahmana initiation in 1986 and has been practicing for over 30 years. May I ask if you have an objective way to determine if somebody has 'paid the price'? Personally, I try to judge people by a combination of what they say and how they comport themselves. How do you determine that somebody has 'paid the price'?

What do you mean by that?

What about Sri Krishna's contention in Bhagavad Gita that he can be worshiped 'in a wrong way'? www.dharmacentral.com/universalism.htm

I was not offended. Please tell me how you know what are "the actual teachings of Jesus Christ or Islam which point to the Truth."

I agree that there is one Absolute Truth and notwithstanding the fact that Swami Prabhupada said that no Vaishnava can reject Jesus, I absolutely reject any teacher who claims that no man gets to it except through him. Perhaps from this you may conclude that I am not a Vaishnava - who cares. I am still a Hindu who worships Sri Vishnu as my ishta-devata. One Absolute Truth yes. But you yourself said that there "may be a wrong path". I think your radical universalism is not valid. I don't think you successfully impeached Dr. Morales' arguments and I do not find yours cogent / valid since your conclusions do not follow from your premises. I agree that you are quite convinced of that. I will stipulate that for the sake of discussion. A non-sequitur. You have not established a connection between Brahman of the Vedas and the God of the Bible. The only connection I see is your opinion "I'm quite convinced ...". For instance, some people claim that all those attributes refer to Jesus whereas other Acharyas say that Jesus is a Jiva. Just because the nature of the Absolute Truth is as you described and people attribute that nature to their ishta-devata, doesn't mean that they are correct. Although he hears the prayers of everyone and accepts sincere 'wrong way' worship as worship of himself, Sri Krishna is careful to elucidate differences between himself and the devas or lesser beings. Without such differences, the word 'Supreme' would have no meaning. So one Absolute Truth - yes. But you yourself said: "A specific religion may be a wrong path ... "

Not only that but even if you say you don't believe in Jesus or that he was a Jewish Rabbi and not a Hindu - "Aah! You have offended a pure Vaishnava devotee!" Re: Swami Prabhupada - how can anyone offend an inhabitant of the Spiritual World? What is offended (when it really is offense and not just claimed offense for the purpose of manipulation) are the sentiments of his disciples.

Why do you consider it fault-finding to point out how Christian dogma differs from Vedic principles? It is not fault-finding to assume that the Bible and Koran say what most Christians and Muslims claim that they say. It is not fault-finding to agree with Christians and Muslims that their faiths are unique and distinct. Trying to view them through a Universalist lens is not logically valid. Please reference the excellent article by By Dr. Frank Morales, Ph.D. (Sri Dharma Pravartaka Acharya): www.dharmacentral.com/universalism.htm

I hope you use the disapproval ratings only as a tool to draw your attention to a post to see if it is intentionally offensive in your judgment instead of a trigger for automatic removal of the post. Otherwise people will participate in organized flagging to get content they disagree with removed. This has happened on YouTube among other places.

What Jesus said was clear - primate has made it seem unclear; "No one comes to the Father but through Me." That is what was said - primate then put his own spin on it to 'explain' it. Of course once he is through with his 'explanation' you are willing to accept exactly the opposite of what Jesus said! Why spin something that is clear? Do you know any Vaishnav guru in India who would dare say a thing like that? The statement is inconsistent with Sanatana Dharma. It is Christian dogma.