Jesus , Krishna- which of the two is the supreme-god?

[Vinayaka]

For the record, I believe that Krishna/Vishnu and Siva are the same God, as is the God of the Abrahamics. It is the names that are different, as well our understandings of it. Of course not all people believe as I believe. Some people believe it is all different Gods, some don't. The planet is a diverse and wonderful array of beliefs.

 

[Kirran]

For the record, I believe that Krishna/Vishnu and Siva are the same God, as is the God of the Abrahamics. It is the names that are different, as well our understandings of it. Of course not all people believe as I believe. Some people believe it is all different Gods, some don't. The planet is a diverse and wonderful array of beliefs.

I love it when you admit this <3

 

[Vinayaka]

I love it when you admit this <3

It's hard some days, because when you ask people, the descriptions are so very different that you almost HAVE to believe that what they are describing are two different things. But one has to stick to His guns (pardon the himsa reference) some days too. I have a very limited understanding of other peoples views as well, as with most people. (Although some make the arrogant claim they understand other POVs, from their words it is clear they don't.) We can only see it through our own eyes, not another's. But what worked for me was the tree analogy mentioned elsewhere. The forest landowner sees dollars, the woodsman sees firewood, the bug sees food, the bird sees a nesting place, the woodworker sees a bowl, etc. etc. Still it remains a tree and only a tree.

As for ideas like Jesus, I really have no opinion. Without knowledge, best to have no opinion. My only knowledge on that is that I have no knowledge.

 

[Jainarayan]

and from you who accepted Harihara , ...?

No, I don't feel the way you think. I pray to all the gods, even to those I don't know... om sarvebhyo devebhyo namah... "I bow to all devas". I visit all the devas at temple. I would like to read the Agamas and other Shaiva and Shakta scriptures one day.

if this is what hinduism has become , then I am No Hindu I am Vaisnava Sanatana Dharmi , .....I am sorely agreaved that the the dissbeleif and ignorance of the minority of cultural hindu is sited with any seriousness simply to justify an argument ???

What I mean is that Hinduism isn't a single, monolithic, centralized dogma or doctrine. For example, a Shaiva is not criticized for not knowing the Bhagavad Gita; a Shakta is not criticized for not knowing the Srimad Bhagavatam; a Vaishnava is not criticized for not knowing the Devi Mahatmyam or Agamas.

However, Christians, Muslims, and to a much lesser extent Jews, fight among themselves as to which of their denominations is right. Hindus don't experience that, as a rule.

​

 

[Jainarayan]

If I may mention an example of what kind of thing Jainaryan is talking about - I hope @Vinayaka won't mind me mentioning that he has never read the Bhagavad Gita, as he is solely associated with a Shaiva tradition - but I don't think you'd label him as adharmic!

Exactly.

 

[ratikala]

If I may mention an example of what kind of thing Jainaryan is talking about - I hope @Vinayaka won't mind me mentioning that he has never read the Bhagavad Gita, as he is solely associated with a Shaiva tradition - but I don't think you'd label him as adharmic!

Namaskaram Ji

if we are to hold to a universal hinduism then we must accept eachothers texts , we canot have a brotherhood who refutes his brothers texts or even doubts their validity it simply makes a complete noncence of Hindu unity , ....

@Vinayaka ji has nothing to do with it save that it is a poor excuse to say that one does not accept the authorty on anothers scriptures simply because one has not red them , ....

my address was general not aimed at any one person in particular , ..none the less it never ceases to ammaze me that people who profess never to have read someting feel qualified to pass judgement on those who practice that other tradition , ....

I label all adharmic who commit adarmic actions be that the torture of animals for their flesh or active dissrespect of anothers tradition , ...but sometimes these actions are not pure adharma merely ignorance , .....

 

[Jainarayan]

For the record, I believe that Krishna/Vishnu and Siva are the same God

Booyah!!! It's simply the form of God one is most drawn to. Works for me!

as is the God of the Abrahamics.

All right, let's not go overboard now!

It is the names that are different, as well our understandings of it. Of course not all people believe as I believe.

My last comment was a joke, in case anyone missed it but I believe that too. I have my own theories as to why they seem so different, but suffice to say I think it comes down to "everyone sees God in their own way" or God/dess shows him/herself (trying to be gender neutral but It and Itself sound so alien-creaturish) in a way meaningful to the follower.

 

[Vinayaka]

I don't confuse God with scriptures. Scriptures, in my view, are attempts to explain God from all the various viewpoints. That and much more, like history, ethics, metaphors, lessons in life, etc. I accept that each scripture, (Bible, Gita, Vedas, Torah, etc) are all authority for the adherents of said faith they belong to ,and no more. Each should see authority in their own scriptures, and accept the authority for others in their own scriptures, not yours.

 

[Jainarayan]

if we are to hold to a universal hinduism then we must accept eachothers texts , we canot have a brotherhood who refutes his brothers texts or even doubts their validity it simply makes a complete noncence of Hindu unity

I don't think anyone thinks that. I certainly haven't seen it... the refuting, disparaging or doubting of anyone's texts. I think everyone respects everyone else. Otherwise you wouldn't have Shaiva priests chanting the Sri Vishnu Sahasranama, singing Jai Jagadish Hare, or Vaishnava priests assisting at Sri Shiva or Devi pujas. At least that's what goes on at my temple.

 

[Jainarayan]

I don't confuse God with scriptures. Scriptures, in my view, are attempts to explain God from all the various viewpoints. That and much more, like history, ethics, metaphors, lessons in life, etc. I accept that each scripture, (Bible, Gita, Vedas, Torah, etc) are all authority for the adherents of said faith they belong to ,and no more. Each should see authority in their own scriptures, and accept the authority for others in their own scriptures, not yours.

That gets an even bigger BOOYAH!!!

 

[paarsurrey]

Jesus , Krishna- which of the two is the supreme-god?

Both Jesus and Krishna are in the image of Supreme-God, as molten iron becomes fire-like when put in the fire furnace, with all its peculiarities. They became ONE- with GOD
They never were God. Right?
Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Thanks for presenting an interesting topic! Baha'is recognise both Krishna and Jesus as Manifestations of God. As Manifestations They reflect perfectly the Light radiating from the Central Orb of the universe to the creation.

In the Bhaghavad Gita Chapter Four Krishna announces:

When Righteousness
Declines, O Bharata! when Wickedness
Is strong, I rise, from age to age, and take
Visible shape, and move a man with men,
Succouring the good, thrusting the evil back,
And setting Virtue on her seat again.

Bhagavad Gita (Edwin Arnold tr)

I learned this years ago after reading the Gita and finding Bhakti devotion to the Supreme Being.

Abdu'l-Bahá said: The Message of Krishna is the message of love. All God's prophets have brought the message of love. None has ever thought that war and hate are good. Every one agrees in saying that love and kindness are best.

~ Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, p. 35

To Israel He was neither more nor less than the
incarnation of the "Everlasting Father", the "Lord of
Hosts" come down "with ten thousands of saints"; to
Christendom Christ returned "in the glory of the Father";
to Shí'ah Islam the return of the Imam Husayn; to Sunni
Islam the descent of the "Spirit of God" (Jesus Christ); to
the Zoroastrians the promised Shah-Bahram; to the
Hindus the reincarnation of Krishna; to the Buddhists
the fifth Buddha.

- Shoghi Effendi

the promised Shah-Bahram

Please attend to the prophecy of Shah-Bahram mentioned above, by Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, p. 35.
in the thread post #1 "Zoroastrianism: And the promised Shah-Bahram"

“When a thousand two hundred and some years have passed from the inception of the religion of the Arabian and the overthrow of the kingdom of Iran and the degradation of the followers of My religion, a descendant of the Iranian kings will be raised up as a Prophet” (Zoroaster, Dinkird)
Zoroastrian Prophecies: | Iranian.com
Zoroastrian - Prophecies - Mission of Maitreya
Has the Promised Shah-Bahram come? Who is he and how? Please see the Zoroastrians point of view in post #6 of friend MD .

Thanks sand regards

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. for many years it has been simply a pilgrimage site respected equaly by the local muslim comunity , ....what I find interesting is that it has been respectfully maintained and only recently has it become anything more than local knowledge , ..in otherwords I dont think that the locals have promoted it as a tourist attraction, it is still a very modest and simple place .

It has been promoted commercially. For Muslims, to say that Jesus lies in a tomb takes away his 'Son of God' status and reduces him to be a prophet. That too not comparable to Mohammad because Mohmmad is the last one, the seal, for majority - Nabi-ul-Khatm, no more prophets. Had that been accepted, there would have been no chance for Bahaullah or Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of the Ahmadiyyas. So they ploughed a different line, and like Joseph Smith, carved their own place. That happens all the time in Abrahamic religions. In time, more representatives of God will arrive. No one has to give any proof.

.. imam vivasvate yogam, proktavan aham avyayam ..

You say it is the son of Yashoda, I say it is Brahman speaking.

 

[ajay0]

So, where is Krsna's grave?
Regarding Jesus's grave, @paarsurrey, the person who started this thread, firmly believes that Jesus is buried in Kashmir.

This is a central belief of the Ahmediya sect, and not just his personal belief.

 

[ajay0]

Ahmadiyya is a version of Islam which is inclusive of all the revealed religions revealed on their founders in the origin in any region of the world but that got altered later due to debris of time but revived/refreshed under Ahmadiyya by G-d.
Please
Regards

The ahmedityas are a sect of Islam that sees Krishna and Buddha as prophets. They are noted for their scholarship and non-violent attitude and believes strictly in spreading the message of islam through the pen, instead of the sword.

They had succeeded in translating the quran to all the languages in the world, including the eskimo language as well, from what I remember reading.

The sole muslim Nobel prize winner in the sciences all over the world came from the ahmediya sect, Dr. Abdus Salam.

The ahmediyas are a persecuted group among orthodox muslims for their views , and I would say that they have a right to propagate their views as much as any other religion or sect.

The ahmediyas sees Krishna as a prophet, and so do the monotheistic Sikhs, Arya Samajis and Prajapita Brahmakumaris.

The ahmediya perspective has its equivalent in the dharmic sects mentioned above, though it is not shared by the vast majority of Hindus.

Krishna maybe an Avatar or a prophet, but I am sure he would be content if people practice values and devotion to God peacefully without hostility to anyone differing from his or her viewpoint.

 

[paarsurrey]

Namaskaram kelly ji
for many years it has been simply a pilgrimage site respected equaly by the local muslim comunity , ....what I find interesting is that it has been respectfully maintained and only recently has it become anything more than local knowledge , ..in otherwords I dont think that the locals have promoted it as a tourist attraction, it is still a very modest and simple place .

That is right.
Regards

______________
One may like to view the following BBC Documentary:

 

[Jedster]

The ahmedityas are a sect of Islam that sees Krishna and Buddha as prophets. They are noted for their scholarship and non-violent attitude and believes strictly in spreading the message of islam through the pen, instead of the sword.

They had succeeded in translating the quran to all the languages in the world, including the eskimo language as well, from what I remember reading.

The sole muslim Nobel prize winner in the sciences all over the world came from the ahmediya sect, Dr. Abdus Salam.

The ahmediyas are a persecuted group among orthodox muslims for their views , and I would say that they have a right to propagate their views as much as any other religion or sect.

The ahmediyas sees Krishna as a prophet, and so do the monotheistic Sikhs, Arya Samajis and Prajapita Brahmakumaris.

The ahmediya perspective has its equivalent in the dharmic sects mentioned above, though it is not shared by the vast majority of Hindus.

Krishna maybe an Avatar or a prophet, but I am sure he would be content if people practice values and devotion to God peacefully without hostility to anyone differing from his or her viewpoint.

Yes, I know all this and have spent much time with Ahmadis.

The unsanswered question(at least twice) from me to @paarsurrey goes like this:

Ahmadis say Krishna was a prohpet. Fair enough, I understand it is his belief.
Ahmadis(as do most Muslims (afaik) say that a prophet alway brings a book ('revealed scripture') Fair enough, I understand it is his belief.

So my question is "what book did Krishna bring, & prove from said book that Krishna is a prophet?
This question is of the same fashion that is being asked by him of all other religions, so I am asking him by his own standards.
.
Just as he wishes to know how others arrive at their belief, I would like to know how he arrives at his.
After all, isn't the purpose of this forum, one of promoting mutual understanding and not one of prozelitation?

He chooses to ignore these and many other questions.

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram Vinayaka ji @Jainarayan ji @Kirran Ji

I am too confused there seem to be too many contradictions and confusions

firstly the claim that Vaisnavas are not monists ???

secondly Hinduism is not a revealed religion , its primary Sruti texts are not Sruti ???

I personally have no concept of avatar, its outside my narrower paradigm. Basically that means I don't believe in it at all. Great realised souls, yes, souls who have incredible wisdom, yes. Bur souls who are God (and only God) walking this planet ... no.

one minute Vinajaka ji you do not beleive in avataras , they are not an expansion of God , ..???

then you say that you do beleive that Krsna is Visnu and that Visnu/Krana are the same god as is Siva , ...and Abrahamic God , ...that all are one , ...yes yes I agree fully with this , ...this demonstrates perfectly that that Vaisnava are Monist , ...yet uou say we are dualists ???

For the record, I believe that Krishna/Vishnu and Siva are the same God, as is the God of the Abrahamics. It is the names that are different, as well our understandings of it. Of course not all people believe as I believe. Some people believe it is all different Gods, some don't. The planet is a diverse and wonderful array of beliefs.

if then as you say you beleive that all gods are the one God . which I am releived to hear as it is the same understanding that I think many have , then there should be no problem , and no problem in accepting Jesus , ....as he is the son of God appearing as did Krsna in mortal form for the benifit of mankind in any one given time or specific circumstance this is is ehat we commonly term an avatara , it simply means apperance of God or of Deity , ....question Now comes as to wheither Jesus as the son is the same as Krsna the incarnation of the supreme , this is the question of the post .

I don't confuse God with scriptures. Scriptures, in my view, are attempts to explain God from all the various viewpoints. That and much more, like history, ethics, metaphors, lessons in life, etc. I accept that each scripture, (Bible, Gita, Vedas, Torah, etc) are all authority for the adherents of said faith they belong to ,and no more. Each should see authority in their own scriptures, and accept the authority for others in their own scriptures, not yours.

this statment surly flies in the face of Hinduism's division of scriptures into Sruti and Smriti , ...???

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram Ji

It has been promoted commercially. For Muslims, to say that Jesus lies in a tomb takes away his 'Son of God' status and reduces him to be a prophet. That too not comparable to Mohammad because Mohmmad is the last one, the seal, for majority - Nabi-ul-Khatm, no more prophets. Had that been accepted, there would have been no chance for Bahaullah or Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of the Ahmadiyyas. So they ploughed a different line, and like Joseph Smith, carved their own place. That happens all the time in Abrahamic religions. In time, more representatives of God will arrive. No one has to give any proof.You say it is the son of Yashoda, I say it is Brahman speaking.

it may interest you to know that Buddhists in Tibet and Ladhak also accept that Jesus visited this area and possibly is burried here , and they have no benifit to promote either Christianity or Islam they are simply observing historical accounts .

 

[ratikala]

Namaskaram Ji

So my question is "what book did Krishna bring, & prove from said book that Krishna is a prophet?

I am not sure why we are so worried by the use of the term prophet as it simply means one who speaks the word or will of God , ...
1.a person regarded as an inspired teacher or proclaimer of the will of God.

in the case of Krsna it is God appearing to speak the word of God ,

this may appear prophetic from outside but isnt the most important thing the fact that these revelations are accepted to be the word of God .....?