Is Jesus an avatar of Lord Vishnu?

[Gaura Priya]

On another note, while my sampradaya accepts Jesus and Muhammad as shaktyavesha avataras, or empowered messengers of Krishna, Sri Vaishnavas in general are silent about them. I was reading an essay from a pandita and Western convert to Sri Vaishnavism, and he wrote various papers regarding the rejection of the personage of Jesus Christ and Christianity in general for Hindus at large. I was shocked, and then not surprised, since the theology and characteristics and the very philosophy of Christ is somewhat foreign to dharmic concepts.

In Dayanand Saraswati's book, the Light of Truth, he dissects Judeo-Christian morals and beliefs and sees that the personage of Christ as but a lying impostor, and would be better off not watering down Sanatana Dharma.

 

[kaisersose]

On another note, while my sampradaya accepts Jesus and Muhammad as shaktyavesha avataras, or empowered messengers of Krishna, Sri Vaishnavas in general are silent about them.

It is not just the Sri Vaishnavas, but all groups besides Gaudiya Vaishnavas. The fact of the matter is, it is impossible to know if a certain individual is an avatar or not, unless he finds specific mention in scripture (that is the only possible way). From an Indian persepctive, there is no shortage of such teachers and they are usually avatars only to their followers - or in other words, the identification is based on sentiment.

For whatever reason, the Gaudiya Vaishnavas accord avatar status to Jesus and Mohammad, but not to Sai Baba, Swami Narayan, Vivekananda, etc. It is not known how they make the determination.

 

[Many Sages One Truth]

I think Sai Baba (Shirdi) and Guru Nanak should potentially be considered for avatar status, if I may throw that in there.

 

[Bob Dixon]

I think Sai Baba (Shirdi) and Guru Nanak should potentially be considered for avatar status, if I may throw that in there.

When I first read that I thought you were talking about Sathya Sai Baba. Naturally, I was going to pull out my arguing gun and load it with the silver bullet of debate, then shoot it into that target of nonsense. Then I saw the "Shirdi" and I was all like, "well, alright, I guess".

While we're on the topic of considering people for avatar status, why not also Zarathustra, Mahavira, and Plato?

 

[Riverwolf]

When I first read that I thought you were talking about Sathya Sai Baba. Naturally, I was going to pull out my arguing gun and load it with the silver bullet of debate, then shoot it into that target of nonsense. Then I saw the "Shirdi" and I was all like, "well, alright, I guess".

While we're on the topic of considering people for avatar status, why not also Zarathustra, Mahavira, and Plato?

And that's why the status of avatarhood is so difficult; it's usually only ascribed to Sages and Gurus by their followers and no one else.

 

[Bob Dixon]

And that's why the status of avatarhood is so difficult; it's usually only ascribed to Sages and Gurus by their followers and no one else.

It really does seem quite difficult. Every school/religion seems to have its own list of Avatars, too. From Islam's list of none, to Christianity's list of one, to the ten commonly accepted Avatars in Hinduism (which, themselves, are debated over as well)... it's a complex issue.

What would you say someone needs in order to be considered an Avatar? Ignore the lists in the scriptures for now (if you wish), what do you think?

 

[Riverwolf]

It really does seem quite difficult. Every school/religion seems to have its own list of Avatars, too. From Islam's list of none, to Christianity's list of one, to the ten commonly accepted Avatars in Hinduism (which, themselves, are debated over as well)... it's a complex issue.

What would you say someone needs in order to be considered an Avatar? Ignore the lists in the scriptures for now (if you wish), what do you think?

It's actually not too difficult for me to ignore the lists in Scriptures, because I can never remember them anyway.

Well, in my mind, there are two types of avatars: one who is basically a "ray" of God (like the rays of the sun), and one who is God made flesh. The vast majority are rays. A ray of God basically embodies an aspect of God, but may not be aware of their avatarhood. They may have one thing that's perfect about them, but in every other respect, are humans like us. A good modern example would be Amma, who basically embodies love.

Then there's the full avatars, when God, or one of the Gods, embodies as a human for a specific purpose. If the stories of him are true, Mahavatar Babaji would be a modern example.

 

[Gaura Priya]

It is not just the Sri Vaishnavas, but all groups besides Gaudiya Vaishnavas. The fact of the matter is, it is impossible to know if a certain individual is an avatar or not, unless he finds specific mention in scripture (that is the only possible way). From an Indian persepctive, there is no shortage of such teachers and they are usually avatars only to their followers - or in other words, the identification is based on sentiment.

For whatever reason, the Gaudiya Vaishnavas accord avatar status to Jesus and Mohammad, but not to Sai Baba, Swami Narayan, Vivekananda, etc. It is not known how they make the determination.

Alot of people, both Hindus and non-Hindus, will reference and quote Bhavishya Purana as making mention of both Lord Jesus and Lord Muhammad.

Specifically though, the acceptance of Jesus and Muhammad as teachers in our sampradaya of some theistic conception is to the 'blame' of Bhaktivinode Thakur in the late nineteenth century, our acharya and considered the Father of modern Gaudiya Vaishnava siddhanta. He makes mention of our rasa theology, and that Jesus taught a form of vatsalya rasa with God, while Muhammad taught sakhya rasa, and Moses taught dasya rasa.

"Much later, dasya rasa manifested in Hanuman, the servant of Sri 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 that 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."

 

[zenzero]

Friend EP,

Is Jesus an avatar of Lord Vishnu?

You too are an avatar which you are yet to recognize, rest are all labels of consciousness!

Love & rgds

 

[Vasiel]

While I do believe Jesus was an Avatar, I couldn't say of who. I'm not to comfortable calling him an Avatar of one of the Vedic Gods, since only a little of what he taught was Vedic in nature.

I would personally like to say that I believe that Jesus was the Avatar of YHWH/Jehovah. It makes the most logical sense, rather then trying to connect very vague dots to relate Christianity and Hinduism.

I'm not saying that Hinduism and Christianity don't have similarities. But their creation philosophy/stories are vastly different. In my personal opinion I find the Hindu Scriptures to be vastly more "mature" in their philosophies in comparison to the Abrahamic Faiths.

Not saying there is anything wrong with that. It's just my experience. To me the God of the Bible seems very rigid. Whereas the Hindu concept of Divinity is so vast, so grand and so mind-boggling insane it shatters human perceptions.

Far more befitting of a Creator, having both the Light and Dark aspects. A lot of Christians I have debated with blame Adam and Eve even for the snake... when God Himself (according to the Bible) created the snake in the first place.

Sorry if I've offended, it's just my way of looking at things.

 

[Akhilesh]

No he was not avtar of vishnu .his teaching is different from hindu dharma we arenot sinner we are divine in nature

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Folks like Vivekananda, Gandhi, Aurobindo, Anandamayi Ma and Ramana Maharshi are the one's also taught these types of ideals to the Westerners like Aldous Huxley. Don't blame us for them.

From What i Know Aurobindo was a fan of Maharishi Swami Dayanand, and i think he also prescribed to Dayanands teachings of No Avtars of the Supreme.

Oh and Jesus is no Avtar.

just a man (even this hasent been proved yet)

 

[Astravalon]

Is Jesus an avatar of Lord Vishnu?

If by "avatar" one means "a manifestation of a deity in bodily form on
earth", I figure why not?

As a believer that there's only one God anyway, to whom is given
many (many many) different names, I find the conclusion that Jesus
was sent by Vishnu/Krishna/Yahweh/Mazda/etc. as His avatar (or
even His son) an easy one at which to arrive.

But that's just me... your mileage may vary!


.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

From What i Know Aurobindo was a fan of Maharishi Swami Dayanand, and i think he also prescribed to Dayanands teachings of No Avtars of the Supreme.

Oh and Jesus is no Avtar.

just a man (even this hasent been proved yet)

No two men could be farther apart in their interpretation of the Vedas as Aurobindo and Dayanand.

It is not Dayanand rejection of the concept of Avatar (Thats a part of many sects in Hinduism) It's his superimposition of western Monotheism on the Monist parts of the Vedas. And his rejection of murti's that were clearly a part of Hinduism even in the time of the Vedas. Of any Hindu leader I can think of Dayanand seems like the most influenced by Modern Liberal Protestant Christian thought.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Wannabe Yogi;2828275]No two men could be farther apart in their interpretation of the Vedas as Aurobindo and Dayanand.

Sri Aurobindo, India's Rebirth page 164
This compilation was prepared from Sri Aurobindo's works published by Sri Aurobindo
Ashram, Pondicherry, India.
Distributed by:
- In Asia:
Mira Aditi Centre
62 ‘Sriranga’, 2nd Main, 1st Cross
T. K. Layout, Saraswatipuram
Mysore 570 009, India


1916
Either the Veda is what Sayana says it is, and then
we have to leave it behind for ever as the document of a
mythology and ritual which have no longer any living truth
or force for thinking minds, or it is what the European
scholars say it is, and then we have to put it away among
the relics of the past as an antique record of semibarbarous
worship; or else it is indeed Veda, a book of
divine knowledge, and then it becomes of supreme
importance to us to know and to hear its message.
...
Dayananda's view is quite clear, its foundation
inexpugnable. The Vedic hymns are chanted to the One
Deity under many names, names which are used and
even designed to express His qualities and powers. Was
this conception of Dayananda's an arbitrary conceit
fetched out of his own too ingenious imagination? Not at
all; it is the explicit statement of the Veda itself: “One
existent, sages”—not the ignorant, mind you, but the
seers, the men of knowledge,—“speak of in many ways,
as Indra, as Yama, as Matarishwan, as Agni” [Rig-Veda,
I.164.46]. The Vedic Rishis ought surely to have known
something about their own religion, more, let us hope,
than Roth or Max Müller, and this is what they knew........

 

[zenzero]

Friends,
We are all AVATARS but most may not REALIZE IT.
Humans have intelligence and imagination is part of that intellect and through those faculties used during meditation have created *iamges* [image is from imagination] depending on the qualities a segregation has been made and labelled and so BRAHMA, VISHNU and MAHESH are the first level standing for creation, preservation and destruction.
Differnciations were necesssary as it is not possible for every individual with different backgrounds [karmic] to comprehend that whatever we see or do not see are all GOD/BRAHMAN as it is beyond all qualities.
Since the qualities of Jesus tend more towards preservation one could say he was an avatar of Vishnu and so have been thousand of enlightened individuals whom none may be knowing anything about.
The point here is that we all are AVATARS and realizing that SELF is the only IMPORTANT thing and if the path of Jesus helps it is fine, if Vishnu helps it is fine. Whatever helps one on the path they are all fine as eventually on reaching the state all ladders/paths/ways/religions are redundant.
Love & rgds

 

[SageTree]

No he was not avtar of vishnu .his teaching is different from hindu dharma we arenot sinner we are divine in nature

How do you reconcile the belief that Sakyamuni Buddha was also an avatar of Vishnu, since Buddhism is a heterodox belief system according to what I believe to be a mainstream understanding on the topic?

(My personal feelings on the matter aside)

 

[zenzero]

Friends,

Responding to frined Akhilesh's post:

No he was not avtar of vishnu .his teaching is different from hindu dharma we arenot sinner we are divine in nature

Once a friend who is a Baptist priest had a Evangelist friend from US. He invited me to dinner to meet the gentleman. Like all evangalist he too tried to convinve me that I am a sinner and that my gods are pagan etc. The response was that am not a sinner and that my god and his is ONE. He finally gave up and we had dinner in meditative silence.
God is one, only labels are different depending on culture of the place one belongs to in a particlular life. Who knows which path or way or religion we practiced in our last life??
This much is certain that God is one and that everything in existence including us [humans] are PARTS of that entity labelled GOD.

Love & rgds

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Sri Aurobindo, India's Rebirth page 164
This compilation was prepared from Sri Aurobindo's works published by Sri Aurobindo
Ashram, Pondicherry, India.
Distributed by:
- In Asia:
Mira Aditi Centre
62 ‘Sriranga’, 2nd Main, 1st Cross
T. K. Layout, Saraswatipuram
Mysore 570 009, India


1916
Either the Veda is what Sayana says it is, and then
we have to leave it behind for ever as the document of a
mythology and ritual which have no longer any living truth
or force for thinking minds, or it is what the European
scholars say it is, and then we have to put it away among
the relics of the past as an antique record of semibarbarous
worship; or else it is indeed Veda, a book of
divine knowledge, and then it becomes of supreme
importance to us to know and to hear its message.
...
Dayananda's view is quite clear, its foundation
inexpugnable. The Vedic hymns are chanted to the One
Deity under many names, names which are used and
even designed to express His qualities and powers. Was
this conception of Dayananda's an arbitrary conceit
fetched out of his own too ingenious imagination? Not at
all; it is the explicit statement of the Veda itself: “One
existent, sages”—not the ignorant, mind you, but the
seers, the men of knowledge,—“speak of in many ways,
as Indra, as Yama, as Matarishwan, as Agni” [Rig-Veda,
I.164.46]. The Vedic Rishis ought surely to have known
something about their own religion, more, let us hope,
than Roth or Max Müller, and this is what they knew........

Yes, he likes Dayananda's translation better then Max Muller. Still Aurobindo views are much more like Swami Vivekananda or Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi.

 

[DeviChaaya]

Namaste

Coming in a little late but thought I'd offer my $0.05 (we don't have 2 cent pieces in Australia any more).

I, personally don't see Jesus as an avatar of Visnu. For me it smacks strongly of attempting to please the Christians. Jesus is not a dharmic figure and never has been. While he may have had some important things to teach they pale in comparison to what the great saints and sages of Sanantana Dharma have taught.

That some recent saints have decided to speak of Christ as a dharmic figure just baffles me. You would never see the Christians looking to RadhaKrsna and saying that they are most blessed angels of Jehovah so why should we say similar of Jesus?

He was just a man and if he was an avatar than, frankly, I am surprised that the entirety of his leelas are not known. There is an alarmingly large gap in the tale of Christ that one would never see in the tales of Rama or Krishna.