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:

"The activities of the Lord are always inconceivable to the tiny brain of the living entities. Nothing is impossible for the Supreme Lord, but all His actions are wonderful for us, and thus He is always beyond the range of our conceivable limits. The Lord is the all-powerful, all-perfect Personality of Godhead. The Lord is cent percent perfect, whereas others, namely Narayana, Brahma, Siva, the demigods and all other living beings, possess only different percentages of such perfection. No one is equal to or greater than Him. He is unrivaled." SB 1.8.16pp

"You can chant the name of Allah also. Not necessarily that you have to chant the Krsna name, but any name indicating the Supreme Lord can be chanted." Because in the Sastra it is said, harer nama, harer nama, [Cc. Ädi 17.21] the holy name of the Lord. But it must be the name of the Lord. Actually, Krsna has thousands of names, and His names are enumerated by His activities. Just like Kåñëa accepted to become the son of mother Yasoda; therefore He is called Yasoda-nandana. Krsna accepted Vasudeva as His father, or Nanda Maharaja; therefore He is called Nanda-nandana, Vasudeva, or Devaki-nandana. Krsna acted as the charioteer of Arjuna; He is called Partha-sarathi. So Krsna's name means attached with the activities along with His devotees. This is Krsna's name. So if the Muhammadans' aim the Supreme Lord, Allah akbar, "God the great..." Just like we say Parabrahma. Brahman means the biggest, brhatvat brhannatvat. On account of being very big, including everything, that God's another name is Parabrahma. Param brahma param dhama pavitram paramam bhavan [bg. 10.12]. Arjuna addressed Krsna as Parabrahma. So Allah akbar means Parabrahma.

So we do not make any distinction that this type of religion is better than that type of religion. Any religion which teaches how to love God, that is first-class religion. That is the injunction of the Srimad-Bhagavatam."

 

Srila Prabhupada - Arrival lecture Calcutta march 20 1975

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:

Bhagavad Gita

translated by Swami Prabhupada

Chapter 10: TEXT 4-5 PURPORT (excerpt)

 

Satyam, truthfulness, means that facts should be presented as they are for the benefit of others. Facts should not be misrepresented. According to social conventions, it is said that one can speak the truth only when it is palatable to others. But that is not truthfulness. The truth should be spoken in a straight and forward way, so that others will understand actually what the facts are. If a man is a thief and if people are warned that he is a thief, that is truth. Although sometimes the truth is unpalatable, one should not refrain from speaking it. Truthfulness demands that the facts be presented as they are for the benefit of others. That is the definition of truth. http://www.asitis.com/10/4-5.html

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:

Conversations : 1975 Conversations : March, 1975 : Morning Walk -- March 11, 1975, London : 750311mw.lon :

Prabhupāda: Yes. Śaktyāveṣa avatāra, somebody empowered by Him, not Kṛṣṇa Himself. Just like Christ. Christ is also

empowered incarnation. Śaktyāveṣa avatāra. Mohammed is also. Anyone who is preaching about God is empowered incarnation.

http://prabhupadabooks.com/d.php?g=161873&h=mohammed&f=397802#397802

What you are saying is happening, offending other faiths, but it isn't what Prabhupada instructed. He said you bow down for a mayavadi sannyasi. He also said Christianity and Islam are bona fide religions, and explained that any religion that teaches how to love God is a bona fide religion. He said Jesus is a manifestation of Krishna's Shakti, a saktyavesavatara.

 

Being a vaishnava means to be humble and to follow the country's laws. Ordinary politeness, being a gentleman, should be one of the vaishnava's weapons.

 

And yes, the golden age is happening. We can compare the standard of life, the average lifespan, and many things to just 500 to 1000 years ago, We can clearly see a drastic improvement over the last 500 years. Consciousness is being raised together with science. It is just a matter of time before the scientists, widely discover and accept the concept of God (or an intelligent being) as the creator as opposed to a cosmic soup - chaos.

 

We now all need to work together. Caitanya says God has unlimited names and we can chant them all togehter; muslims, hindus, christians, brahmavadis (more commonly known here as mayavadis), shaivas, vaishnas, shaktas, atheïsts, everyone can chant and dance together. There aren't any hard and fast rules for it.

 

About offences in Iskcon: Say sorry when you hurt someone, it is just common sense. Also don't critisize too much, Jesus says: For what you judge another, you shall be judged. This should be common vaishnava knowledge.

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.

That’s fully compatible with the Christian belief that God dwells in everyone as the Holy Spirit. "The kingdom of God is within you" (Luke 17:21). "Know you not that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?" (1 Corinthians 3:16). In Christianity God is the self-existent Creator of all things (Gen. 1:1; Isa. 44:24; Acts 14:15; Eph. 3:9). And God is the self-existent Sustainer and Governor of all things (Acts 14:16-17; 17:24-28). The eternal Son of God is described as the One who "upholds all things by the word of His power" (Heb. 1:3) and the One in whom "all things hold together" (Col. 1:17).

 

 

Bhagavad Gita may indeed be the highest and best revelation of Absolute Truth, although there are no objective methods to determine any Scripture as the highest or best. As you indicated, this is ultimately a very personal matter. But I must agree that Vedic scriptures describe the nature of Absolute Truth or God in much more detail, than the Christian Bible. However, as argued, both scriptures describe God and His relation to the Self in a remarkably similar fashion, using similar terms and concepts. Hence, Christianity appears to be much closer to Vaishnavism than it is to any other religion, even though other religions such as Islam or Judaism are partially based on the same scriptures (OT). I personally find this astonishing. Given that Christianity and Vaishnavism are completely separate traditions, how can they reach the same basic conclusions about the nature of God? Moreover, the New Testament might be the latest rendering of this Absolute Truth, whereas arguably the Vedas are the oldest religious scriptures known to man. Could it be that ultimately both scriptures have the same author, God himself?

 

 

Agreed.

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.

how do you know him ???

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.

This sounds like a good idea. I'll certainly have a look at silk Kurta Shalwar suits. What about underwear? They don't make silk underwear.

 

I have a condition where urine leaks out. Would this make me unclean and stop me from entering the temple?

 

 

 

 

So why are they followed then? Where do such rules come from?

 

 

 

I had a look in some Indian shops today in Leboh Ampang. One had some soap which said that it was made from vegetable oils. Does that mean that there is no animal fat at all? What about the glycerin? There was Malay writing on the packet so I'm assuming that it is made in Malaysia, not India.

Would you please translate into English? Thank you.

No problem...compare my friend. Mata sita says to Hanuman...

Ashish dinh rampriya jana. hohu tat bal seel nidhana.

Ajar amar gunnidhi sut hou . karahu bahut raghunayak chhou. Lord rama says..

Sun kapi tohi saman upkari . nahi koi muni koi nartanudhari.

prati upkar karo ka tora . sanmukh hoi na sakat man mora.

Sun kapi tohi urin mai nahi. dekheu kari vichar man mahi. All from ramcharitmanas...

PL. tell something about meerabai .

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:

Letters : 1976 Correspondence : April : Letter to: Mr. Dhawan -- Vrindaban 2 April, 1976 : 76-04-02 :

Answer: I have not sufficient information about the instruction of Hazur Mohammed Sahib, but if you mean Mohammed, the inaugurator of Islam religion, I accept him as empowered servant of God because he preached God consciousness in those parts of the world and induced them to accept the authority of God. He is accepted as the servant of God and we have all respect for him. Letter to: Mr. Dhawan -- Vrindaban 2 April, 1976 -- Prabhupada Letters

 

Lectures : Initiations : Initiation of Jayapataka Dasa -- Montreal, July 24, 1968 : 680724IN.MON :

So offenses are ten kinds of offenses. The first offense is to deride at the Vedic literature or scriptures. Satāṁ nindā. And those who are preaching God consciousness, never mind in any part of the world. Those who are preaching God consciousness. In your country, Christian... Not in your country. Of course, it was preached in Central Asia, but now Christianism is spread all over. So Lord Jesus Christ, he also preached God consciousness. And Mohammed, Hazrat Mohammed, he also preached God consciousness. Initiation of Jayapataka Dasa -- Montreal, July 24, 1968 Initiations -- Prabhupada Lectures

 

 

Conversations : 1975 Conversations : March, 1975 : Morning Walk -- March 11, 1975, London : 750311mw.lon :

Prabhupāda: Yes. Śaktyāveṣa avatāra, somebody empowered by Him, not Kṛṣṇa Himself. Just like Christ. Christ is also empowered incarnation. Śaktyāveṣa avatāra. Mohammed is also. Anyone who is preaching about God is empowered incarnation.

Morning Walk -- March 11, 1975, London -- Prabhupada Conversations

 

Maturity, yes.

 

The mature islamic god called Allah advocates killing christians and jews unless they pay Punitive tax(Jizya) unless OR worship Allah of Quran and accept Muhammad as the Final messenger.

 

09.029

Y: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor

acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

 

009.030

Y: The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!.

 

Very Mature indeed.

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.

And so the obvious point is the one Supreme God the Muslims and Christians and Indian Vaisnava's call out to by different names is the same God although the understanding of the nature of that God by the adherents of different religions may be on different levels of maturity.

 

Those that are outside of this understanding are the mayavadi's and polytheists whereever they may be found.

 

But yet as simple as this is to understand we see the Muslims and Christians condemning the Indian Vaisnavas as worshippers of some strange god called Visnu or Krishna thinking Him to be one of the Hindus many demi-gods.

 

We can understand their confusion because afterall the Hindus do seem to have a god for everything. Just this last week on this forum I learned they have a smallpox god they worship with weekly fasting etc.

 

But maybe the strangest thing of all is some of those involved in bone fide Vaisnava sampradaya's who can't seem to shake the small minded sectarian viewpoint that the God of all existence, all the innumerable universes, must come from India and have a sankrit name and that He is so limited that He cannot send His messengers elsewhere to spread God conscious and draw suffering living beings back to His shelter.

 

Personally I seek to distance myself from all such narrow mindness rather it comes in the form of a human form dressed nicely in dhoti, tilak and sikha or not.

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.

2 names come straight in my mind without any 2nd thought.

Shri Meerabai and Shri Hanumanji.Here I underline that there is NO intention that other Bhaktas were inferior(may God forgive me but the list will be too long if I name famous bhaktas we heard of till date) but honestly these 2 names will remain always on top.

Friends it will be an interesting debate to compare their way of worship,it was nirmal with no wish though their wish of finding and getting God got fullfilled so let's discuss some common and different things between these two mahan Bhaktas of hinduism.Very simple topic I have raised but mind you it may turn out to be a little difficult in words to explain the way they did their Bhakti,hard to describe atleast for me.

Thanks

5) If we worship a demi-God throught our life,can

we attain moksha. Can the soul reach that Demi-God?

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.

i believe that i am born in a

saivate family because of my past karma's

and i should follow Lord shiva to attain moksha.

 

My questions,

 

I know that, we have fallen down from the spiritual world

and our soul is been going through the process of conditioning here

in this world.

 

1)But how will we know our position in spiritual world?

 

2)Is our position in the spiritual world fixed?

 

3)Does my birth as a saivate mean something?

 

4)Is that true that if one worships Ram, can he attain moksha

and go back to Ayodhya in the spiritual world?

 

5) If we worship a demi-God throught our life,can

we attain moksha. Can the soul reach that Demi-God?

 

6) I am also curious to know more about Shiva purana.

I know It has 24000 verses.

 

 

OM NAMA SHIVAYA...

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

Then what is your concept of God..?

Original scriptures define a religion, not any ... misconceptions and/or mistranslations.

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.):

Clearly, idol worship is forbidden when it implies worshipping different gods than the God of Jesus Christ or the Absolute Truth. www.indiadivine.org/audarya/spiritual-discussions/454921-sita-ram-goel-jesus-2.html#post1152276

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.

By the way, my reading of Christian scripture actually is the mainstream interpretation among Christians ...

If by "Christians" you mean Catholics. Obviously most Protestants do not agree with the Catholic practice of bowing before statues.

Only a bigot would misrepresent Christianity for his own sentimental reasons..

Yes, I agree.

Original scriptures define a religion, not any pagan interpretation like eternal hell and other misconceptions and/or mistranslations. By the way, my reading of Christian scripture actually is the mainstream interpretation among Christians, just as my interpretation of Vaishnavism represents the mainstream interpretation. And this has nothing to do with sentimentality. It's just facts and information. Only a bigot would misrepresent Christianity for his own sentimental reasons..

Dr. Frank Morales, Ph.D.

Dr. Morales is currently recognized as one of the nation's leading authorities on Hindu philosophy and religion, as well as South Asian studies. In addition to directing his own institute, Dr. Morales works in conjunction with several educational institutes and think tanks globally. Dr. Morales maintains a very demanding schedule consisting of lecturing, consulting and writing. Dr. Morales has been a guest lecturer at over two dozen major universities throughout the USA, including Cornell, Rutgers, Northwestern, Illinois Institute of Technology, and University of Virginia. In addition, Dr. Morales has served as a South Asian affairs consultant for such corporations as Ford Motor Company, Lucent Technologies, Goodwin Procter Law Firm, and the Global Health Corporation. Topics that Dr. Morales has spoken on include:

 

Meditation, Philosophy, Religion, Hindu Studies, South Asian Affairs, Ethics, Asian Culture, Contemporary South Asian Politics, History of Religion, Foreign Affairs, Comparative Theology, Principles of Effective Leadership, Yoga as well as many other subjects. He has spoken throughout North America before diverse audiences ranging from 50 to 5000 people.

 

www.dharmacentral.com

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:

Taking this one step further, God the Father in Christianity is the all pervading Brahman in Hinduism and Christ is Krishna, and God incarnate Jesus Christ is at the same level as Krishna avatar. Furthermore, God the Father and Christ the Son are One in Christianity, which is equivalent to Brahman and Vishnu/Krishna being One panentheistic Godhead in Vaishnavism. Finally, this might leave Paramatma as the equivalent of Holy Spirit in Christianity.

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:

"Do not worship any other god, for the LORD,

whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God".

Exodus 34:14 (NIV)

 

"You shall not bow down to them or worship them;

for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God,

punishing the children for the sin of the fathers

to the third and fourth generation of those

who hate me" Exodus 20:5 (NIV)

 

"If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.

 

"If you hear it said about one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you to live in that wicked men have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods you have not known), then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. Destroy it completely, [a] both its people and its livestock.

 

"Gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the LORD your God. It is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt. None of those condemned things shall be found in your hands, so that the LORD will turn from his fierce anger; he will show you mercy, have compassion on you, and increase your numbers, as he promised on oath to your forefathers, because you obey the LORD your God, keeping all his commands that I am giving you today and doing what is right in his eyes". Deuteronomy 13:6-18 (NIV)

 

 

Footnotes:

 

[a] Deuteronomy 13:15

The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things

or persons to the LORD, often by totally destroying them.

 

Deuteronomy 13:17

The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things

or persons to the LORD, often by totally destroying them.

I am just saying that personally I am quite convinced and in fact believe that Christianity and Vaishnavism are compatible philosophies of the nature of Absolute Truth, and that (consequently) both are valid paths to knowledge or consciousness of God.

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.

Of course in as far as a religion may promote the worship of, e.g., tree spirits or extra terrestrials, it can be said that there are wrong paths. Even a self-contained and complete system of belief such as Buddhism, is obviously a wrong path to knowing God, because it denies the existence of God altogether, which is not to say that the practice of Buddhism doesn’t have spiritual value. It can be argued, however, that if Hinduism/Vaishnavism is the correct path, then it is not reasonable to reject Christianity as a wrong path. I agree that there are some problems (most notably the pagan myth of eternal hell in Christianity), but solely based on the similar concept of God and the similar method of attaining knowledge or consciousness of God through finding Him within the Self, I think it can be said that Vaishnavism and Christianity are compatible religious philosophies.

 

Most importantly, Vaishnavism and Christianity have the doctrine of monistic theism or panentheism in common. All Vaishnava schools are panentheistic and view the universe as part of Krishna or Narayana, but see a plurality of souls and substances within Brahman. Panentheism which includes the concept of a personal God as a universal, omnipotent Supreme Being who is both immanent and transcendent, is prevalent within many other schools of Hinduism as well. And contrary to the claims of Dr. Morales, this also is the Christian position.

 

The Christian position is that God is the self-existent Creator of all things (Gen. 1:1; Isa. 44:24; Acts 14:15; Eph. 3:9). On the basis of biblical witness Christians believe that God is also the self-existent Sustainer and Governor of all things (Acts 14:16-17; 17:24-28). The eternal Son of God, who became incarnate as the Lord Jesus Christ, is described as the One who “upholds all things by the word of His power” (Heb. 1:3) and the One in whom "all things hold together" (Col. 1:17).

 

Taking this one step further, God the Father in Christianity is the all pervading Brahman in Hinduism, and Christ is Krishna, and God incarnate Jesus Christ is at the same level as Krishna avatar. Furthermore, God the Father and Christ the Son are One in Christianity, which is equivalent to Brahman and Vishnu/Krishna being One panentheistic Godhead in Vaishnavism. Finally, this might leave Paramatma as the equivalent of Holy Spirit in Christianity.

 

Now, I’m not in the least suggesting that you should change your ishta-devata from Vishnu or Krishna to Christ. I am just saying that personally I am quite convinced and in fact believe that Christianity and Vaishnavism are compatible philosophies of the nature of Absolute Truth, and that (consequently) both are valid paths to knowledge or consciousness of God.

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'?

All these whiz-kid articles by docta this and swami that. I would read something by me or Mahak long before I'd read all that cheating nonsense, where words are compared to words on the synaptic scales of the mental platform.

 

There's a price that has to be paid before one can have an opinion here. These fellows haven't even paid the tuition yet. They know nothing. They don't even know they know nothing. How dumb is that?

What do you mean by that?

Kripalu Maharaj is a gone case

What about Sri Krishna's contention in Bhagavad Gita that he can be worshiped 'in a wrong way'?

www.dharmacentral.com/universalism.htm

Universal or equal vision is not just recognizing everyone is spirtual soul. It is also being able to recognize the same truth when it is taught by someone outside your own religious/ cultural circle.

 

Just as someone who cannot recognize the soul in another form different from his own can not truly recognize the soul within his own so someone who cannot recognize the truth when spoken by others from a different background than his own cannot truly understand the same truth within himself.

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."

That statement about others' scriptures was not directed at you personally, it was a very general statement. Just want to let you know. Sorry if i offended you.

 

What Indians are appearantly facing , is not the actual teachings of Jesus Christ or Islam which point to the Truth.

 

My only point was that as long as Hindus realize this, the younger generations can be protected thru' knowledge and discrimination.

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’m quite convinced that the concept of God or Absolute Truth in original Christianity (as rendered in the original Hebrew and Greek texts of the New Testament) also refers to the God or Absolute Truth of Hinduism/Vaishnavism (as rendered in the Vedas).

I agree that you are quite convinced of that.

This Absolute Truth is necessary reality. It is personal, eternal and fully independent. It is the one omniscient, omnipotent, panentheistic Godhead; the source and ground of everything.

I will stipulate that for the sake of discussion.

This is the concept of God portrayed in both the Vedas and the Bible. Thus, the Vedas and the Bible are ultimately compatible religious scriptures.

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 ... "

Dr. Frank Morales, Ph.D. (Sri Dharma Pravartaka Acharya), speaks here of the Absolute Truth. Since there can only be one Absolute Truth, his assertion that different religions aim for different Absolute Truths is absurd. A specific religion may be a wrong path, but there is only one Truth (or top of the mountain).

 

Most religions are in search of the one Absolute Truth or God. Jesus also referred to this one universal Truth when he states: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you know me, you will know my Father also." ( John 14:6-7).

 

I’m quite convinced that the concept of God or Absolute Truth in original Christianity (as rendered in the original Hebrew and Greek texts of the New Testament) also refers to the God or Absolute Truth of Hinduism/Vaishnavism (as rendered in the Vedas). This Absolute Truth is necessary reality. It is personal, eternal and fully independent. It is the one omniscient, omnipotent, panentheistic Godhead; the source and ground of everything. This is the concept of God portrayed in both the Vedas and the Bible. Thus, the Vedas and the Bible are ultimately compatible religious scriptures.

 

If you don’t agree, then just try to imagine what it would mean if it actually is true, i.e., if empirical science would find hard evidence of this universal Truth. Perhaps then you will approach any attempts at unifying Christian doctrine and Hindu doctrine slightly more open minded..

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.

I think their idea of 'offense' is rather arrogant.

 

They don't care in the slightest if you insult an Advaita Vedantist or a Shaiva , even to the point of mocking their faiths.

 

But say one negative thing about a Vaishnava - even if the statement has nothing to do with Vaishnavism - and you go straight to hell. How very self-serving.

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

Finding faults with others' scriptures will not help. It is the individuals who are in error.

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.

 

Originally Posted by primate:

Even when Jesus Christ stated "no one comes to the Father but through Me", He didn’t say that other religions are ultimately invalid. He just described the universal process of God-realisation through Self-realisation.

 

Precisely.

 

Jesus can bring Krshna.