Does Hinduism acknowledge Jesus as an Avatar?

[atanu]

I notice there is some slight tension in me being here in the Hindu DIR because lately I have been studying a lot of Yogananda's teachings and his organization does view Jesus as a legitimate Avatar of God. ...

I am sorry that I am replying to an old post. However, I am curious to see what exactly Shri Yogananda himself said or wrote about Jesus. I do not think a Hindu teacher will take upon himself such declaration that is not supported by scripture. Everyone is an avatar of Brahman/Self, since there is nothing but the Brahman. Further, as per vedanta, the Self realised knowers of Brahman become Brahman.

But Vishnu avatar is that which Vishnu Himself manifests as. This distinction is important.

As far as I know, no Hindu Guru has ever declared Jesus as an incarnation of Vishnu.

 

[Vinayaka]

As far as I know, no Hindu Guru has ever declared Jesus as an incarnation of Vishnu.

I believe this. As far as I know, and I know little about SRF other than reading their website, the core teachings of Yogananda have been tampered with since his Mahasamadhi. But as it stands today, SRF certainly makes the above claim. It's right on one of their main pages to be found here:

Lineage and Leadership

Apparrently the great book "Autobiography of a Yogi' has also been tampered with and edited substantially over the years. It may be of interest to you if you could find an original and compare it to the one that is in print today. I'm sure there have been several editions.

But let's make it clear here: I have no hatred for SRF, for Christ, for anything really. We're just trying to clarify things in case newcomers get serious about seeking, and go searching different schools.

 

[atanu]

I believe this. As far as I know, and I know little about SRF other than reading their website, the core teachings of Yogananda have been tampered with since his Mahasamadhi. But as it stands today, SRF certainly makes the above claim. It's right on one of their main pages to be found here:

Lineage and Leadership

Apparrently the great book "Autobiography of a Yogi' has also been tampered with and edited substantially over the years. It may be of interest to you if you could find an original and compare it to the one that is in print today. I'm sure there have been several editions.

But let's make it clear here: I have no hatred for SRF, for Christ, for anything really. We're just trying to clarify things in case newcomers get serious about seeking, and go searching different schools.

No. First. It is not claimed that Jesus is an avatar of Vishnu.

I will ask: Has Shiva not chosen you as a bhakta in Canada? As per Yogananda, it was Babaji (a manifestation of Shiva), who sent Yogananda to west. It is also true that Sri Yoganada compared teachings of east and west and pointed to very fundamental similarities that are glossed over in mainstream christianity.

But what I fail to understand is why when most Indians consider Sri Yogananda Hindu, should you mark him out as non Hindu. He is a sakta fundamentally. He used Yoga and Kriya towards Self Realization (all of which are evidently of Sanatana dharma), why you find him non Hindu? Did he convert to christianity or did he bring knowledge of yoga to many non Hindus?

But let us stop this here. If you wish we may check what exactly is written in books authored by Shri Yogananda rather than commenting on such fundamental aspect, based only on a Internet information.

 

[Vinayaka]

But let us stop this here. If you wish we may check what exactly is written in books authored by Shri Yogananda rather than commenting on such fundamental aspect, based only on a Internet information.

I do suggest you do that.

As indeed I did some browsing just now, as I too am curious. Maybe its just in the term 'avatar' as you suggest. On the page I found ... can't remember the line, but I searched on 'Autobiography of ..." + online version. He had Patanjali listed as an avatar as well, which no one else (as far as I know) does.

So in reality I don't know.

It wasn't the internet information I was getting my information from, it was SRF's own website. Yes, that's still internet, but that's much different than the random anti - ______ sites that come up from time to time. Maybe it was here: http://yoganandafortheworld.com/original-autobiography-of-a-yogi/

 

[atanu]

I do suggest you do that.

As indeed I did some browsing just now, as I too am curious. Maybe its just in the term 'avatar' as you suggest. On the page I found ... can't remember the line, but I searched on 'Autobiography of ..." + online version. He had Patanjali listed as an avatar as well, which no one else (as far as I know) does.

So in reality I don't know.

It wasn't the internet information I was getting my information from, it was SRF's own website. Yes, that's still internet, but that's much different than the random anti - ______ sites that come up from time to time. Maybe it was here: Autobiography of a Yogi Original 1946 Edition by Yogananda

Patanjali, as far I remember, is listed in Bhagavata Purana, which has 22 names. The Garuda Purana has ten names. Further, there is a concept called Vibhuti avatara, which are exemplars in their fields. Such exemplars, usually from the Vedas, are listed in Gita.

To me, it is important that Sri Yogananda called himself a yogi and I have no reason to doubt that.

 

[Vinayaka]

To me, it is important that Sri Yogananda called himself a yogi and I have no reason to doubt that.

I've never read where he proclaimed himself an avatar, as some other Gurus (probably more correctly their followers) have in more recent times. But it's more like an honorific, in my view, and needs (for clarity of newcomers) to be somehow distinguished from the traditional meaning of the word as it applies in Vaishnavism.

Editted - I found the passage in 'Autobiography ....' http://www.crystalclarity.com/yogananda/chap33.php scroll down to paragraph 9.

 

[atanu]

I hope that people understand Christ is not Jesus. Christ is the anointed one, which christians consider only Jesus to be. It will take tremendous courage to call Babaji as Yogi Christ.

And, IMO, that is hardly a reason why Shri Yogananda stops being a Hindu, especially when he taught yoga and kriya towards Self realisation.

 

[Vinayaka]

I hope that people understand Christ is not Jesus. Christ is the anointed one, which christians consider only Jesus to be. It will take tremendous courage to call Babaji as Yogi Christ.

And, IMO, that is hardly a reason why Shri Yogananda stops being a Hindu, especially when he taught yoga and kriya towards Self realisation.

The following is just my personal speculation.

It was the 1920s, Atanu. That was a time when America was Christian, and far more people knew their bibles inside out than they do today. Like all good teachers, he taught to his audience. Of course he was a Hindu. But he was a Hindu teaching Christians, so the method of teaching changed. In order for the audience to understand anything at all, he had to find parallels, and he found those parallels in the Christian bible. That was the way they understood him. I'd be interested if there was a transcribed talk of his around the same time given in India. My bet is that if he was speaking to Hindus, it would be much more in the context of Hinduism, a language his audience at that time would understand.

Same goes for the book. It was written directed at a primarily Christian audience, and like all good writers, he knew his audience. Most writers are quite aware of audience.

Today, nearly 100 years later, I suspect, things would be different. Deepak Chopra knows his audience. He's addressing secularists primarily. People disillusioned with mass consciousness of the day, same as back then.

Yogananda passed before I was born. It was 1952, over 60 years ago. The famous book was published in 1946, nearly 70 years ago. Times have changed, and as with other institutions, I'm sure SRF has changed. How exactly, I have no idea. There are only a handful of direct disciples left. They too are passing on.

Also, these days far more people are willing to jump straight into Hinduism, because unlike back then, they have little or no Christian subconscious programming. Still their is other stuff to overcome (like atheism, drug-culture, and materialism).

But this is just my take. I hope I'm not making you angry again.

 

[atanu]

The following is just my personal speculation.

It was the 1920s, Atanu. That was a time when America was Christian, and far more people knew their bibles inside out than they do today. Like all good teachers, he taught to his audience. Of course he was a Hindu. But he was a Hindu teaching Christians, so the method of teaching changed. In order for the audience to understand anything at all, he had to find parallels, and he found those parallels in the Christian bible. That was the way they understood him. I'd be interested if there was a transcribed talk of his around the same time given in India. My bet is that if he was speaking to Hindus, it would be much more in the context of Hinduism, a language his audience at that time would understand.

Same goes for the book. It was written directed at a primarily Christian audience, and like all good writers, he knew his audience. Most writers are quite aware of audience.

Today, nearly 100 years later, I suspect, things would be different. Deepak Chopra knows his audience. He's addressing secularists primarily. People disillusioned with mass consciousness of the day, same as back then.

Yogananda passed before I was born. It was 1952, over 60 years ago. The famous book was published in 1946, nearly 70 years ago. Times have changed, and as with other institutions, I'm sure SRF has changed. How exactly, I have no idea. There are only a handful of direct disciples left. They too are passing on.

Also, these days far more people are willing to jump straight into Hinduism, because unlike back then, they have little or no Christian subconscious programming. Still their is other stuff to overcome (like atheism, drug-culture, and materialism).

But this is just my take. I hope I'm not making you angry again.

I agree fully with your note above and repeat that in what you have written I do not see any reason why Sri Yogananda be called a non Hindu.

I am not angry. It seems that quality of time is such. But Thanks.

 

[zenzero]

Friends,

Though as mentioned that scriptures or vedas are update able to the present and as we all know Jesus came into existence much later to those of the vedic period and so not included.
However since Sikhism is a sister path or an offshoot of 'Hinduism' here is what Sikhism mentions of what is an avatar:

In Sikhism, every soul that has taken form or has been born on earth is called avatar. Guru Granth Sahib believed in the existence of Dasavtara

Personal with the above understanding of the concept would state that all enlightened people who have merged with the Absolute cannot be termed any less than 'avatars' where others can be termed 'potential avatars'.

Love & rgds

 

[zenzero]

Friends,

Forgot to add that since as per Sikhism every soul is an avatar then obviously Swam Yogananda gets included.

Love & rgds

 

[Aupmanyav]

But Vishnu avatar is that which Vishnu Himself manifests as. This distinction is important.

Problem here. As per 'advaita', every one is Vishnu. There is no one other than Vishnu, and no thing other than Vishnu. The only distinction, IMHO, is that one can be under the influence of 'maya'. Probably Jesus and others were such.