Universality and transcendance

[cbrahma 0]

In The Path of Perfection, Srila Prabhupada describes the Vaishnava understanding of Christ and Christianity in greater detail: "Bhakti-yoga means connecting ourselves with Krishna, God, and becoming His eternal associates. Bhakti-yoga cannot be applied to any other objective; therefore, in Buddhism, for instance, there is no bhakti-yoga, because they do not recognize the Supreme Lord existing as the supreme objective. Christians, however, practice bhakti-yoga when they worship Jesus Christ, because they are accepting him as the son of God and are therefore accepting God. Unless one accepts God, there is no question of bhakti-yoga. Christianity, therefore, is also a form of Vaishnavaism, because God is recognized...However, where there is no recognition of a personal God...there is no question of bhakti-yoga."

[cbrahma 0]

 

Abs. no scholars who ever read the torah in aramaic or new testament in greek say or write jesus was a vaisnava. none.

 

even a jnana-yogi acknowledges a god (father) exists and much more. This knowledge does not make her/him a vaisnava.

Goodness. You need to read the Gita. All paths , including jnana-youga require some bhakti. In fact all yogas are subsumed under bhakti.

Of course, you are right..that doesn't make them vaisnava. That is a very special category, the essence of which is personal devotion to God.

Judao-Christians do exhibit that essential trait. Vaisnavism is not-sectarian and inclusive. This exclusivistic mentality is ironically the result of Judao-Christian influence.

[supercow 0]

 

Goodness. You need to read the Gita. All paths , including jnana-youga require some bhakti. In fact all yogas are subsumed under bhakti.

Of course, you are right..that doesn't make them vaisnava. That is a very special category, the essence of which is personal devotion to God.

Judao-Christians do exhibit that essential trait. Vaisnavism is not-sectarian and inclusive. This exclusivistic mentality is ironically the result of Judao-Christian influence.

 

 

Because jnana-yoga is described in BG DOES NOT MEAN IT REQUIRES some BHAKTI (devotional service to God). Jnana-yoga does not require bhakti. Although, jnana-yoga may be mixed with bhakti. And in that case it still does not require bhakti.

This seems to be a class-member logical fallacy. This is a very incorrect comprehension you have.

 

BTW, I have read BG i'd say a total of about 6 times, and i just read it last month highlighting many verses.

[cbrahma 0]

 

Because jnana-yoga is described in BG DOES NOT MEAN IT REQUIRES some BHAKTI (devotional service to God). Jnana-yoga does not require bhakti. Although, jnana-yoga may be mixed with bhakti. And in that case it still does not require bhakti.

This seems to be a class-member logical fallacy. This is a very incorrect comprehension you have.

 

BTW, I have read BG i'd say a total of about 6 times, and i just read it last month highlighting many verses.

Try this

 

“The topmost position, and the actual need for our supreme transcendental benefit, is only bhakti-yoga. Without bhakti-yoga, other kinds of spiritual practice such as good works [karma-yoga] or the quest for liberation [jnana-yoga] cannot give us the proper result. So if we try to practice the nine kinds of devotional service [bhakti-yoga] under the guidance of a proper guru then we will easily receive the greatest result.

Srila Govinda Maharaj

 

Since bhakti is culmination and includes all other yogas, it is the superclass, the type of all other yogas. They are mere counterfeits without it.

All sacrifices to the demigods must include Visnu to be effective.

So there is no class-member fallacy. Jnana becomes ajnana without some bhakti.

[shvu 1]

 

Try this

 

Since bhakti is culmination and includes all other yogas, it is the superclass, the type of all other yogas. They are mere counterfeits without it.

All sacrifices to the demigods must include Visnu to be effective.

So there is no class-member fallacy. Jnana becomes ajnana without some bhakti.

 

After all the ado, you are just another Hare Krishna with no knowledge of what Jnana Yoga is.

 

Cheers

[shvu 1]

 

I missed that one, or I would have responded. I did not make any assertions about the Vaisnava status of Jesus. I have only heard many times how Christianity and Vaisnavism are incompatible. THAT is the statement I challenge, and that is where the burden of proof lies.

 

As I and a number of others have said it before, those statements were in response to original statements made by your mates about the compatbility of C and V. So the burden of proof is on you and your friends.

 

Are you not reading posts or are you just avoiding the fact that this controversy was first raised by your camp?

 

Cheers

[cbrahma 0]

 

After all the ado, you are just another Hare Krishna with no knowledge of what Jnana Yoga is.

 

Cheers

a) I'm not a Hare Krsna

b) I know from the Gita what jnana is - it has been nicely explained by the acaryas and they concur that without some bhakti jnana is ineffective - in fact it is ajnana.

[cbrahma 0]

 

As I and a number of others have said it before, those statements were in response to original statements made by your mates about the compatbility of C and V. So the burden of proof is on you and your friends.

 

Are you not reading posts or are you just avoiding the fact that this controversy was first raised by your camp?

 

Cheers

I don't belong to a 'camp'. I work alone. That labelling serves only your need to commit 'ad hominem'.

I am not trying to prove Jesus is a Vaisnava. I don't need to. Prabhupada had already said as much. What I am saying, if you will reread the first post, is that Christianity is used as a disqualification for Vaisnavism.

The assertion I wish to prove is how Christianity is such a disqualification.

This is logically distinct from trying to prove that Jesus was a Vaisnava.

[bija 0]

Hi C,

 

Whether Jesus is a Vaisnava or not, is not essential to my devotion and growth spiritually (internally). Also I am not that well studied in comparitive religion.

 

Srila Prabhupada, Srila B.R. Sridhara Deva Maharaja, and Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura have expressed their sentiments about Jesus Christ. From what I gather there is concepts in their teachings that spiritual life is a kind of 'positive and progressive immortality', as also is religious thought and development over history.

 

Personally I dont hold these ideas about Jesus as total absolute substance, just as I don't hold reincarnation as an absolute truth necessary for bhakti. But I accept these concepts as beneficial for spiritual realization and development.

 

Srila B.R. Sridhara Maharja in his question and answer book, Search for Sri Krsna, was asked about Jesus by some christian students. He explained that the soul progressives in love unlimitedly for eternity. So his argument was, why should Jesus be stagnant? Why can't his love for the Father increase onward?

 

So I gather to hold Christ Jesus in such light. That all stages of religion, philosophy, human development, human actualization, awareness, love etc is an onward progression. Even human and histories evolving, and understanding of science and God, are onward if we choose, even if the age of Kali is degrading slowly, the movement of spirit in us souls and the love involved will progress. Such is the nature of light and love and spirit.

 

Ok....spirit is already complete and whole...but love is dynamic. That is the paradox of God and completeness. Should Jesus and his love be exempt from such dynamic.

 

This is the nature of a Vaisnava.

 

The below progression is not necessarily absolute truth for me, but at the same time truth (relative and useful). A nice perspective from the thought of a dynamic, progressive thinker of his time. And imbued with compassion to spread the gift of love offered by Sri Caitanya.

 

From Moses To Mahaprabhu

by Srila Bhakivinoda Thakura

If the reader carefully considers, it will be found that the spiritual science gradually evolved from ancient times and became more simple, more clear and more condensed. The more impurities arising from time and place are removed, the more the beauties of the spiritual science brightly shine before us. This spiritual science took birth in the land of kusha grass on the banks of the Sarasvati river in Brahmavarta. As it gradually gained strength, this spiritual science spent its childhood in the abode of Badarikashram, which is covered with snow. It spent its boyhood in Naimisharanya on the banks of the Gomati river and its youth on the beautiful banks of the Kaveri river in the province of Dravida. The spiritual science ayyained maturity in Navadvip, on the banks of the Ganges, which purifies the universe.

By studying the history of the world, it is found that the spiritual science reached its peak in Navadvip. The Supreme Absolute Truth is the only object of love for the living entities. Unless one worhips Him with attachment, however, the living entity can never attain Him. Even if a person gives up all affection for this world and thinks of the Supreme Lord, He is still not easily achieved. He is controlled and attained by transcendental mellows alone. These mellows are of five types - shanta, dasya, sakya, vatsalya and madhurya.

The first mellow, shanta, is the stage in which the living entity surpasses the pains of material existence and situates himself in transcendence. In that state there is a little happiness, but no feeling of independence. At that time the relationship between the practitioner and the Lord is not yet established.

Dasya rasa is the second mellow. It contains all the ingradients of shanta rasa as well as affection. "The Lord is my master, and I am His eternal servant". This type of relationship is found in dasya rasa. No one cares much for any of the best things of this world unless they are connected with affection. Therefore dasya rasa is superior to shanta rasa in many ways.

Sakya is superior to dasya. In dasya rasa there is a thorn in the form of awe and reverence, but the main ornament in sakya rasa is the feeling of friendship in equality. Among the servants, one who is a friend is superior. There is no doubt about it. In sakya rasa all the wealth of shanta and dasya is included.

It is easy to understand that vatsalya is superior to sakya. A son gives more affection and happiness than any friend. Therefore in vatsalya rasa we find the wealth of four rasas. Although vatsalya rasa is superior to these other rasas, it appears insgnificant before madhurya rasa. There may be many secrets unknown between father and son, but this not the case between husband and wife. Therefore, if we deeply consider, it will be seen that all the above-mentioned rasas attain perfection within madhurya rasa.

If we go through the histories of these five rasas, it is clearly understood that shanta rasa was seen in the beginning days of India. When the soul was not satisfied after performing sacrifices with material ingredients, then transcendentalists like Sanaka, Sanatana, Sanat-kumara, Sananda, Narada and Lord Shiva all became detached from the material world, situated in transcendence and realized shanta rasa.

Much later, dasya rasa manifested in Hanuman, the servant of Shri Ramachandra. That same dasya rasa gradually expanded in the northwest and manifested in a great personality named Moses.

In the age of Dvapara, Uddhava and Arjuna became the qualified authorities of sakhya rasa. They preached this rasa throughout the world. Gradually tha rasa expanded up to the Arabian countries and touched the heart of Mohammed, the knower of religious principles.

Vatsalya rasa manifested throughout India in different forms at different times. Among the different forms, vatsalya mixed with opulence crossed India and appeared in a great personality named Jesus Christ, who was a preacher of Jewish religious principles.

Madhurya rasa first shone brightly in Braj. It is extremely rare for this rasa to enter the hearts of conditioned souls, because this rasa tends to remain with qualified, pure living entities. This confidential rasa was preached by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, the moon of Navadvipa, along with His followers.

Till now, this rasa has not crossed beyond India. Recently a scholar from England named Newman realized something about this rasa and wrote a book about it. The people of Europe and America have not been satisfied with vatsalya rasa mixed with opulence as preached by Jesus Christ. I hope, by the grace of the Lord, in a very short time they will become attached to drinking the intoxicating nectar of madhurya rasa.

It has been seen tha any rasa that appears in India eventually spreads to the western countries, therefore madhurya rasa will soon be preached throughout the world. Just as the sun rises first in India and gradually spreads its lights to the West, the matchless splendor of spiritual truth appears first in India and gradually spreads to the Western countries.

[supercow 0]

Jnana-yoga has gotten a bad rap in certain popular GV groups due to Advaita Vedanta, modern science, and propaganda.

 

Jnana-yoga without bhakti is not ignorance! Perhaps, at the lower rungs it is. It is just a less wholistic viewpoint.

 

This topic seems to infer is true knowledge possible without God realization.

[supercow 0]

Vatsalya-rasa is way different from what is in the Bible. This is a bhakti-yoga parenting sentiment with a whole bunch of bhakti-rasas with it. Like I am father/mother to son. When I read the Bible, it has a more service-mood toward God. Also an awe and wonder emotional mental state toward God is in the Bible.

 

Just because the word Father is used in the Bible. . .

[bija 0]

Vatsalya rasa manifested throughout India in different forms at different times. Among the different forms, vatsalya mixed with opulence crossed India and appeared in a great personality named Jesus Christ, who was a preacher of Jewish religious principles. BVT

When I read the Bible, it has a more service-mood toward God. Also an awe and wonder emotional mental state toward God is in the Bible. by super

Yes this awe and wonder is the nature of opulence. Also supercow some Gaudiya teachers have expressed that Jesus had dasya mood as well, Thakura Bhaktivinoda has ommitted that in the above writing for whatever reason.

 

You have touched on the point I wished to open. Because a devotional entity may be mixed in moods, rasa, jnana etc does not disqualify him as a vaisnava. Infact most of us on this forum would not be suddha bhakti yogins but mixed.

 

Also vatsyala can be expressed several ways. As child to parent, or parent to child, so it seems by some writers.

[theist 1]

 

Vatsalya rasa manifested throughout India in different forms at different times. Among the different forms, vatsalya mixed with opulence crossed India and appeared in a great personality named Jesus Christ, who was a preacher of Jewish religious principles. BVT

When I read the Bible, it has a more service-mood toward God. Also an awe and wonder emotional mental state toward God is in the Bible. by super

Yes this awe and wonder is the nature of opulence. Also supercow some Gaudiya teachers have expressed that Jesus had dasya mood as well, Thakura Bhaktivinoda has ommitted that in the above writing for whatever reason.

 

You have touched on the point I wished to open. Because a devotional entity may be mixed in moods, rasa, jnana etc does not disqualify him as a vaisnava. Infact most of us on this forum would not be suddha bhakti yogins but mixed.

 

Also vatsyala can be expressed several ways. As child to parent, or parent to child, so it seems by some writers.

 

Dasya rasa in Christ in crystal clear, "Not my will but Thy will be done.." Fraternity is also palpable to those with a little sensity sense of touch.

[bija 0]

Fraternity is also palpable to those with a little sense of touch. theist

Have sensed that too....dasya can be mixed with feelings like friendship.

 

For example Gurudeva may be seen as a dear friend, and he may see his disciple as a dear friend. Actually such intimacy is desirable in service.

[raghu 2]

The original points under contention were whether or not Jesus was a covered Vaishnava, and whether Christianity was not in some sense simplified Vaishnavism. These were discussed to death in other threads, with the rationalists presenting clear and precise points while the iskconites could do nothing other than hurl insults one after another.

 

The iskconites couldn't win those arguments. So now they (specifically cbrahma) have changed it to one of objecting to "christianity as a disqualification from understanding Vaishnavism"

 

I don't think being a Christian is a disqualification from understanding Vaishnavism any more that Mayavada is. After all, learning about what is incorrect leads you to to seek with conviction a philosophy that is correct. of course, mayavadis have the advantage of at least being within the scope of Vedic culture, whereas Christians do not... sort of a headstart, I would say?

[raghu 2]

 

I'm expecting an authoritative quote from sadhu sastra or guru that proves that Christianity is incompatible with Vaisnavism. If there is then it would certainly contradict the quote I gave from Bhaktivinode Thakur

 

grhitaivisnudiksako visnu-pujaparo narah

vaisnavo 'bhihito 'bhijnairitaro 'smadavaisnavah

 

<CENTER></CENTER>

"One who is initiated into the Vaishnava mantra and who is devoted to worshipping Lord Vishnu/Krishna is a Vaishnava. One who is devoid of these practices is not a Vaishnava." (quote from Hari-bhakti-vilas,11, quoted from Padma Purana)

[bija 0]

....of course, mayavadis have the advantage of at least being within the scope of Vedic culture, whereas Christians do not... sort of a headstart, I would say? raghu

 

I dont know about that raghu, depends what you see as a headstart I guess. If my mind had been saturated with voidist or impersonalist ideas of god as a child, steeped in vedic tradition or buddhist mindset, it may have been difficult to accept form of complete knowledge eternity bliss (Sri Krsna). At least the foundation of catholicism, even though very basic, that I grew up with, taught me very early that God is a person. Devotional sentiment was there for a Person as far as my memory recalls. For some reason salvation was not in the forefront of my mind, until dogmatized by evengelicals in my mid twenties. That one was a hurdle to Sri Krsna, and any thing else divergent to their dogma. Catholicism when I grew up was universal and it was acceptable to look to the east, post Vatican 2, 1970' mid 80's. Thomas Merton, Bede Griffiths etc may have influenced that.

Well maybe the grey beard bit led me to further questioning, and easy transition to more sweet, deep philosophy of love. Sri Krsna.

[theist 1]

 

..of course, mayavadis have the advantage of at least being within the scope of Vedic culture, whereas Christians do not... sort of a headstart, I would say? raghu

 

More ignorance. Some people who advertise themselves as very learned in Veda apparently think Veda is a set of books that have an origin in a certain place at a certain time in human history.

 

At least you are consistent. Veda to you is nothing but a material designation just as Vaisnavism is to you a material designation.

 

The meaning of universiality and transcendence are unfortunately lost on you Raghu.

[Amlesh 1]

The basic principle of Vaishnavism is not to find the incompatibility between religions but instead to find the missing links. It's the only philosophy who has the answer for it...but you'll need the eye for it and also most importantly the Grace of Sriman Narayan.

[cbrahma 0]

Sanatana dharma is not a culture, Vedic or otherwise. The Vedas give instructions for advancing to a satvic position. But satva is a material guna.

GV is a means of transcending all dharmas and gunas. Listening to Lord Caitanyas dancing and chanting liberated all living entities, what to speak of human in different cultures. Prabhupada's mission, and Lord Caitanya's, was to spread that Yuga dharma, not vedic culture to the WEST - the land of Christianity.

[shvu 1]

 

grhitaivisnudiksako visnu-pujaparo narah

vaisnavo 'bhihito 'bhijnairitaro 'smadavaisnavah

 

 

<CENTER></CENTER>

"One who is initiated into the Vaishnava mantra and who is devoted to worshipping Lord Vishnu/Krishna is a Vaishnava. One who is devoid of these practices is not a Vaishnava." (quote from Hari-bhakti-vilas,http://www.gosai.com/chaitanya/saranagati/html/nmj_articles/dot_clear.gif11, quoted from Padma Purana)

 

As usual CBrahma and co will conveniently ignore this post. Talk about honesty...

 

Cheers

[cbrahma 0]

 

As usual CBrahma and co will conveniently ignore this post. Talk about honesty...

 

Cheers

Have you seen Visnu? You think Bhaktivinode Thakur and Prabhupada have?

Yet they understand the essence of sanatana dharma and respect Christianity's position as being at least compatible with Vaisnavism.

[shvu 1]

Still did not respond to Raghu's quote from the PP.

 

 

Have you seen Visnu? You think Bhaktivinode Thakur and Prabhupada have?

Yet they understand the essence of sanatana dharma and respect Christianity's position as being at least compatible with Vaisnavism.

 

Aren't we changing direction here? Weren't you the one who [mistakenly] demanded Shastric quotes to prove a negative on this thread a short time ago?

 

Now you do a 180 and expect peple to accept a positive claim without corroboration from scripture solely on the basis of "Prabhupada said so".

 

Cheers

[cbrahma 0]

 

Still did not respond to Raghu's quote from the PP.

 

 

 

Aren't we changing direction here? Weren't you the one who [mistakenly] demanded Shastric quotes to prove a negative on this thread a short time ago?

 

Now you do a 180 and expect peple to accept a positive claim without corroboration from scripture solely on the basis of "Prabhupada said so".

 

Cheers

Raguh is on my ignore list.

For the umpteenth time, I have asked to prove how Christianity is incompatible with Vaisnavism. You are trying to finesse your way out of it by claiming it is a negative?

So you can assert a negative (Christianity disqualifies one from being a Vaisnava) without proof and nobody can contradict it simply because that would be proving a negative. What drivel.

Simply on the basis of 'Prabhpada said so'? I have quoted Prabhupada on the subject a number of times.

[matarisvan 0]

 

Raguh is on my ignore list.

For the umpteenth time, I have asked to prove how Christianity is incompatible with Vaisnavism. You are trying to finesse your way out of it by claiming it is a negative?

No two religions are compatible with one another. Try being a Shaiva and a Vaishnava at the same time or a christian and muslim at the same time. The same logic applies here.

Many people have explained how the two are incompatbile in previous posts and yet you are just repeating the same question again and again. Do this a few more times and you will be on everyones ignore list for making senseless posts.

 

So you can assert a negative (Christianity disqualifies one from being a Vaisnava) without proof and nobody can contradict it simply because that would be proving a negative. What drivel.

Any drivel on this thread appears only in your posts. You are perfectly fine with saying Vaishnavism is compatible with Christianity because Prabhhupada said so. But anyone who rejects that claim for lack of evidence you is required to provide shastric evidence? Which planet are you from?

 

Simply on the basis of 'Prabhpada said so'? I have quoted Prabhupada on the subject a number of times.

Quoting Prabhupada is the same as Prabhupada said so. Prabhupada saying something does not equate to shastric evidence. Get off your high horse and talk some sense if you want a meaningful discussion.