Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Jesus about vedas according to buddhist scripture

Rate this topic


Raguraman

Recommended Posts

Hare Krishna,

 

According to some Tibetan scripture (http://www.essene.com/Issa.htm) if you read you will know that ths Jesus denounced the "vedas as FALSE" and this happened at Jagannath, Orissa. Please read through.

 

Also from the following website(http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/mark_mason/ch4ex1.htm) it is clear that even the archives of Jagannath temple confirms this.

 

"Finally, there is a confirmation of the accuracy of the Hemis Scriptures about Issa from another part of India al-together, and from a Hindu rather than a Buddhist source. It will be recalled that these scriptures said Issa spent six years in Jagannath (now Puri) and other holy cities of the Hindus, before going to live for a further six years in the Himalayas. Sri Daya Mata, president of Self-Realization Fellowship, went to India in 1959, and in an interview with one of India's great spiritual leaders, His Holiness Sri Bharati Krishna Tirtha, the Shankaracharya of Puri, she mentioned that she had been told that Jesus "spent some of his life in India, in association with her illumined sages. His Holiness replied, 'That is true. I have studied ancient records in the Puri Jagannath Temple archives confirming those facts. He was known as "Isha," and during part of his time in India he stayed in the Jagannath Temple. When he returned to his part of the world, he expounded the teachings that are known today as Christianity'"[20]"

 

My questions is

 

1. Is it possible for anyone to confirm whether anyone by the name of ISSA arrive at Jagnnath to learn from the Brahmanas. If so what was his opinion on Vedas.

 

2. Is the translation of tibetan manuscript accurate.

 

3. If the translation is right what about the claims of HKs and even Srila Prabhpada that he was a servant of GOD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Srial Prabhupada quoted several times from the Aquarian Gospel Of Jesus the Christ, by Levi.It was supposedly transcribed by Levi from the Akashic Records.Prabhupada used it for his preaching, not exactly saying it was fully true and bonafide.

 

According to this book Jesus traveled extensively.He lived for four years inside the Jagannatha Temple.He had a disagreemnet with the priests over the nature of the caste system and they became very angry at Him.He also is said to have lived with Buddhists and showed them some limitations in their path.Those priest also became angry.

 

Here is a bit that Prabhupada refered to about Jesus at the Ratha yatra of Lord Jagganatha.

 

At first glance it appears like a contradiction to what we have been taught.On closer examination I believe it lines up with Gaudiya siddhanta.But you be the judge for yourself.

 

CHAPTER 26

 

Jesus at Katak. The car of Jagannath.

Jesus reveals to the people the emptiness of Brahmic rites,

and how to see God in man. Teaches them the divine law of sacrifice.

 

IN all the cities of Orissa Jesus taught. At Katak, by the river side, he taught, and thousands of the people followed him.

2) One day a car of Jagannath was hauled along by scores of frenzied men, and Jesus said,

3) Behold, a form without a spirit passes by; a body with no soul; a temple with no altar fires.

4) This car of Krishna is an empty thing, for Krishna is not there.

5) This car is but an idol of a people drunk on wine of carnal things.

6) God lives not in the noise of tongues; there is no way to him from any idol shrine.

7) God’s meeting place with man is in the heart, and in a still small voice he speaks; and he who hears is still.

8) And all the people said,

Teach us to know the Holy One who speaks within the heart, God of the still small voice.

9) And Jesus said,

The Holy Breath cannot be seen with mortal eyes; nor can men see the Spirits of the Holy;

10) But in their image man was made, and he who looks into the face of man, looks at the image of the God who speaks within.

11) And when man honors man he honors God, and what man does for man, he does for God.

12) And you must bear in mind that when man harms in thought, or word or deed another man, he does a wrong to God.

13) If you would serve the God who speaks within the heart, just serve your near of kin, and those that are no kin, the stranger at your gates, the foe who seeks to do you harm;

14) Assist the poor, and help the weak; do harm to none, and covet not what is not yours;

15) Then, with your tongue the Holy One will speak; and he will smile behind your tears, will light your countenance with joy, and fill your hearts with peace.

16) And then the people asked.

To whom shall we bring gifts? Where shall we offer sacrifice?

17) And Jesus said,

Our Father-God asks not for needless waste of plant, of grain, of dove, of lamb.

18) That which you burn on any shrine you throw away. No blessings can attend the one who takes the food from hungry mouths to be destroyed by fire.

19) When you would offer sacrifice unto our God, just take your gift of grain, or meat and lay it on the table of the poor.

20) From it an incense will arise to heaven, which will return to you with blessedness.

21) Tear down your idols; they can hear you not; turn all your sacrificial altars into fuel for the flames.

22) Make human hearts your altars, and burn your sacrifices with the fire of love.

23) And all the people were entranced, and would have worshiped Jesus as a God; but Jesus said,

24) I am your brother man just come to show the way to God; you shall not worship man; praise God, the Holy One.

 

 

Jaya Yeshua!Jaya Jagannatha!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I understand the story re: Jesus visiting Jagannatha Puri, is that he was being his usual troublemaking self /ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif Basically he saw the priests using the temple as a business, treating the disenfranchised poorly etc… So he spoke out against it basically saying that if this was their religion, then it was useless. I don’t remember where I read or heard this, its just a recollection. Eventually they ran him out of town.

 

As for the Buddhist connection, I believe there is some story that a Russian explorer was traveling through the Himalayas and took refuge at a monastery. While recuperating the head lama told him the story of Isa etc… Again, I have no sources, I’ve just read things over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest:"Doesn't that particular portion quoted of Jesus deny deity worship as we know it in Vaisnavism?? "

 

Not at all.Please read the the article in newsletters and journals,Krishna Talk,More On Prasadam.

 

I provided a link in my post above.

 

Although God is everywhere, still He can choose to appear or be absent from any one place.Just because we carve a form doesn't obligate the Supreme Person to reside there in the mood of the form represents.Nor does He have to stay.He is attracted only by devotional love and appears at the request of His beloved devotees.

 

Same with the Name incarnation.There are differences between shadow chanting of the name and suddha nama.

 

Others here can address this more specifically.

 

Notice the words quoted where Jesus says"... for Krishna is not there."

 

Also the Aquarian Gospel says that Jesus lived in temple Jagannatha for four years.Why would He stay there for so long?

 

I should say that I personally don't know what really is the truth of this book.It does contain many very wonderful truths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hare Krishna,

 

http://pw1.netcom.com/~mokeeffe/AquarianGospelSinglePage.htm

 

After reading the aquarian gospel I get the feeling that Jesus did reject completely(atleast according to this gospel) the "Deity worship" as also the "Varna system" and not the nature or how these things were practised. From Bhagavad Gita as well as Purusha Sukta we can see that Varna system is a major part of Vedic system. If he is really a servant of Lord Krishna, he should have known better what Vedas say. Vedas are not man made. Instead we see Jesus believes these are man made laws.

 

The following statement clearly shows the basic Jewish thought(generally semitic thought) on idolatory. I mean he washes of his hand completely.

 

"21) Tear down your idols; they can hear you not; turn all your sacrificial altars into fuel for the flames.

"

 

As for the time he spent on the Jagannath temple, he might have wanted to learn something there. He also spent much time in other places to learn.

 

"4) This car of Krishna is an empty thing, for Krishna is not there.

"

 

I do not know what to make of this statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ram:"If he is really a servant of Lord Krishna, he should have known better what Vedas say. Vedas are not man made. Instead we see Jesus believes these are man made laws."

 

"If Jesus is really a servant of Krishna..."

 

Bhaktisiddhanta said Christ was shatyavesa avatar.Our Prabhupada said the same thing.Turn it around and around in your mind if you like but you will never really know that way.

 

The conditioned souls putting forth their ideas on the nature of liberated souls is like an ant trying to analyize the Himalaya mountains.

 

If you really want to know the answer ask Krsna Who is even now right next to you.

 

Anyway based on your above I wonder how you view Lord Buddha who is also a shaktya-vesa avatar.Servant or not?

But anyway ram

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bengal has produced some of the finest intellectuals and spiritual leaders. At the same time, it was the centre of the British rule in India. In the last 2 centuries, many Bengali spiritual leaders have indeed imbibed some western thoughts and mixed the same with our religion. For example, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa once claimed to have met Jesus and Prophet Mohammad in his yoga and to have had discussions with them. Indirectly, he lent some credibility to those religions.

 

The same with Gaudiya Vaishnavism also. When it got rejuvenated, the Macaulayan education was set in place. Everything that was Hindu was derided. Bengal, especially, had quite a few tantric sects and they were looked down upon. Naturally, the GV acaryas distanced themselves from those and at the same time tried to create some parallels between GV and Christianity. For example, BVT depended entirely on western writers' translations when he wrote initially about the date of the vedas etc..

 

I consider even the greatest human being such as Srila Prabhupad to have some material flaws. Only Krishna is perfect. So, I won't take any such glorification of Jesus or Mohammad too seriously. Getting a bit objective, 16 years in the life of Jesus, from the age of 13 to 29 are unaccounted for. Qumran scrolls tend to shed some information, but even they don't suggest that Jesus came to India. He might have, but there is no evidence.

 

I would also take the utterances of the Sankaracarya of Puri with a bit of skepticism. He is known to be political. In the humid climate of India, no manuscript could have survived beyond 200 years. So, any claims of going through 2000 year old manuscripts is outlandish. I am also very skeptcal that a temple of Lord Jagannath existed in Puri 2000 years ago. It might have, but there is hardly any mention of a Rath yatra in any other work from that period. Nor do the Buddhist suttas make any such mention.

 

One can be a perfect Vaishnava or an Advaitin without having to justify his practice w.r.t. Jesus or without making any parallels. Jesus was a conservative Jew and practised and preached a sect of Judaism, with all its merits and ills. What we know of as Christianity today, evolved over 1200 years and Jesus himself has had little role in it - either in its philosophy or its outcome.

 

Srila Prabhupad had to glorify Jesus, because he was preaching in the west. The same with Ramakrishna, as his mission was also evangelical. There is no need for us to do that. Even SP or RKPH might not have mentioned a word about Jesus, if they had to preach only to Indians. Or if India had never been colonised by the Europeans.

 

 

MOD: A reminder in advance that attacks on Krishna's servants,from any religion will not be tolerated here.

 

Please keep the mood audarya.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hare Krishna,

 

Dear Theist,

My intention was not to hurt you. Anyway that does not diminish my reverence of any of the Gaudiya acharyas(especially Srila Prabhupada). My question was simply is there any scriptural evidence for the claims of Srila Prabhupada. I am trying to get information and critcally analyse it(the subject of Jesus). It has nothing to do with the belief taught by GV acharyas which is also mine.

 

Peace be with you friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raguraman,

 

I'm not sure why you think that you caused me some pain.I assure you, you certainly have not.

 

I think you have raised an interesting topic, and I would like to see it continue on.

 

ram had questioned if Jesus was really Krsna's servant based on his perceived denounciation of Deity worship.A valid question.

 

My understanding is that Saktyavesa avatars come, empowered by Krsna, with a specific mission.One example is Lord Buddha who,as such an avatar,seemly taught in opposition to the Vedas.Yet we accept him as an empowered incarnation.

 

Thank you for wishing me peace, I wish the same in abundance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, did not Chaitanya Mahaprabhu decry Ramananda raya as far as deity worship being the goal of life.

 

Temple worship and deity worship may certainly be decried by the devotee if God is not there, and if Jesus was prevented from seeing his father, Lord Jagganatha, then the whole place should have been destroyed.

 

Its not the temple, it is the fools who try to control God in the temples that is the problem.

 

hare krsna, mahaksadasa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hare Krishna,

 

 

Dear guest,

Deity or image of God is god himself. Just because a devotee of Lord is offended does not mean the Deity itself should be destroyed. I have no knowledge of any devotees of Lord (Madhva, Ramanuja, Vallabha etc.) ordering tearing down of Deities just because some devotee was offended. The deity of Lord Jagannath is not just an inert material. By HIS mercy he resides in the deity and blesses all devotees and also non-devotees.

 

The following link gives the words of Lord Krishna himself on Deity worship.

 

http://www.salagram.net/sstp-processDW.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Gauracandra prabhuji,

 

Basically he saw the priests using the temple as a business, treating the disenfranchised poorly etc… So he spoke out against it basically saying that if this was their religion, then it was useless. I don’t remember where I read or heard this, its just a recollection. Eventually they ran him out of town.

 

I think this portrayal of the evil Brahmin is an entirely missionary creation of the past few centuries. Historically, Brahmins had neither been rich nor oppressive. If we see the oldest extant Tamil literature and the undoctored Sanskrit works, we don't see any hint of the animosity between brahmins and others. The entire concept of untouchability took roots only after the Muslim and European invasion and more specifically due to the Zamindari system. Economics was at the root of it. Old literature tell us that the brahmins and the so-called disenfranchised poorly people worshipped and bathed together.

 

Traditionally, priests of the temples have never even debated with anyone on theology. That was done only by the acaryas. The priests only performed puja. They were dependent on the king and the temple mudalis for their survival. So, the argument that the arrogant priests disallowed someone in the olden days is just a myth. And the question of Jesus debating with them is equally out of question.

 

Buddha is not considered an avatar by Sri Vaishnavas. Balarama is. Buddhism had a very limited presence in the south. Not that it had any mass appeal in the north either, but atleast there a few kings patronised it. I have also read that Jiva Goswami discounted Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu. I wouldn't know the authenticity of that source. I can share if anyone is interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Guest,

 

if Jesus was prevented from seeing his father, Lord Jagganatha, then the whole place should have been destroyed.

 

Wow! Caitanya Mahaprabhu does seem to have thought so. Was his beloved and great saint Haridasa Thakur, a Muslim by birth, ever allowed into Puri temple? Did Mahaprabhu order that the temple be razed? I think we are having a great difficulty projecting Jesus as compatible with Vaishnavism /ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hare Krishna,

 

 

"My understanding is that Saktyavesa avatars come, empowered by Krsna, with a specific mission.One example is Lord Buddha who,as such an avatar,seemly taught in opposition to the Vedas.Yet we accept him as an empowered incarnation."

 

Madhvacharya also says that Buddha is an avatar of Lord. So this may be a valid point. But Buddha is mentioned in Bhagavatham unlike Jesus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Buddha is not considered an avatar by Sri Vaishnavas.

 

 

I think this is incorrect. The Bhagavatam and perhaps the Vishnu Purana (don't have my copy here to get any details right now) state Buddha to be an avatara, both texts being accepted by Sri Vaishnavas.

 

Some may count Balarama in the dashavatara in the place of Buddha, but there are thousands of other incarnations besides these 10, so that is not very relevant.

 

Traditional Sri Vaishnava acharya's such as Viraraghava Acharya have also commented on the Bhagavatam and accepted the Buddha to be an avatara of Vishnu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks jndas.

 

We shouldn't think that the Lord appears only in our current homeland.It's a big universe,which is but a mustard seed in sack full of other universes.

 

Mahaksadas is well read on the subject of Christ and His life.Perhaps Mahak will speak a little more on this subject.What say ye mahak?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I think this is incorrect. The Bhagavatam and perhaps the Vishnu Purana (don't have my copy here to get any details right now) state Buddha to be an avatara, both texts being accepted by Sri Vaishnavas.

 

 

That is correct.

 

From what I remember, VP does not exactly refer to the Buddha as an avatar, but since the SB is very clear about this, anyone who accepts the authorty of the SB has to accept the avatara status of the Buddha. Unless, the Buddha of the SB is taken to be different from THE Buddha.

 

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...