Proclaim the Good News to all creation

[John Martin]

Another question? Which is it? Reincarnation, or heaven/hell? Which one do you actually believe in, in this Hindu/Christian mix? It seems confusing to me.[/quote]



Dear Vinayagam,
We need to go beyond hell and heaven and also beyond reincarnation.I do not believe in the Hindu-Christian Mix. There is a truth both in the teachings of Christ and the Vedic Sages which stands independently. it does not need a mix. Truth is not Hindu and it is not Christian. it is beyond all labels. We need to discover it.
here are my thoughts on reincarnation. I will be glad to here your comments.

REINCARNATION, BELIEF-NON-BELIEF AND FACT

There are two types of spiritual traditions: wisdom and prophetic traditions. Religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Taoism belong to Wisdom tradition. Religions like Judaism. Christianity, Islam and Bahia belong to prophetic religions. Reincarnation is the core belief in wisdom religions. They officially believe in it. Prophetic religions officially do not believe in it. Now a days people from these traditions try to argue that somehow these religions also believe in reincarnation.
I would like to propose the following:

1. Reincarnation exists
2. Just believing in reincarnation is not very helpful
3. Just not believing in reincarnation is not very helpful
4. Seeing reincarnation as a fact can help us to free ourselves from it.
5. Jesus Christ does not deny reincarnation but his approach to it would be different.

Reincarnation exists: I would like to say reincarnation exists. The essence of reincarnation is continuity. The past entering into the present and going into the future.
There are different levels of continuity:
A. physical continuity: the parents continue in and through their physical children. The genes are passed. This we can call physical reincarnation. This is not something we need to believe in but it is a fact.
b. Reincarnation of desire: Buddhism does not believe in a permanent soul. The so called soul consists of sheaths desires. These desires are reborn until the desire is completely stopped. When there is no desire there is nirvana, extinction of desire.
c. Reincarnation of individual souls: Hinduism believes in an eternal individual soul, atman. The purpose of life is moksa or liberation which happens when atman is united with Brahman or experiences oneness with Brahman (This depends what types of Hindu System you believe in). Until this realization takes the individual soul takes new bodies according its previous karma or actions.
d. Reincarnation of lamas in Buddhism. Buddhism makes a subtle distinction between rebirth and reincarnation. Rebirth is something happens mechanically according to the cause and effect, karma. Individuals have no choice. Reincarnation is a conscious choice one makes. Per example the present Dalai Lama is the reincarnation of previous Dalai Lama, because the previous Dalai Lama made a conscious choice to be born, refusing to enter into Nirvana, for the liberation of the sentient and non-sentient beings. If the present Dalai Lama makes the same choice then he will be born again in the future.
e. Reincarnation of memories; some propose that it is not the reincarnation of the individual souls but reincarnation of memories. All our experiences from the beginning of the human consciousness are stored in the akashic field, which is like a black box in the aero plane. Or it is like the Google engine in which all the information is stored and people can down load the information if they have proper address. What we call reincarnation experiences are nothing but individual consciousness coming into contact with the memories in the akashic field.
f. Reincarnation of the belief systems: many people think that they are individuals but if we go deep we discover they are not individuals but working for a belief system. Reincarnation of belief systems means belief systems which are born in the past enter into the present go into the future. For example Hindu belief system is born thousands of years ago but that belief system continuously born. Individuals are born to give continuity to this belief system. In the same way Buddhism was born 2500 years ago but that belief system continuously reincarnates. Judaism was born more three thousand years ago that belief system continuously reincarnates. Christianity was born 2000 years ago and that belief system continues century after century the same applies to Islam, which was born 1500 years and that belief system continues. It applies to all belief systems. There are six billion individuals in the world but at the level of belief systems we can count them on fingers: Hinduism takes more than a billion individuals, Judaism may take less than 100 million, Christianity may take around 2 billion, Islam may take around 1.3 billion and Buddhism may take 300 to 400 million. We can include other religions. So even though there are 6 billion individuals, there are around 20 belief systems that are living in and through the individuals. Individuals come and go but the belief systems continue. This is what I call reincarnation of belief systems. Is it a fact or it is a belief? It is a fact-not a belief. One may believe in individual reincarnation or not but the reincarnation of belief structures is a fact.
We have said reincarnation means continuity: the past entering into the present and going into the future: this continuity can embrace all the things that we have explained above. It means that the past is using the present to go to the future. The present is not free. It is not original.it is not creative. It is a mechanical movement.
If the present needs to be free then it has to be free from the past consequently from the future. Jesus saw this moment as a fact and he stopped it.
Jesus Christ said that I am the way, the truth and the life. This is the statement of someone who is freed from the past and affirms the freedom of the present. This statement has two aspects: It is a statement of freedom from all the conditioning of the past. it also means giving freedom to the future so that the future will not be the continuity of the past but the future will be completely free to say I am the way, the truth and the life. This statement is a statement of greatness and also of humility. It is greatness to be free from the past. It is humility to give freedom to the future. In this experience the present becomes original and creative. Jesus was able to do it because he saw the fact of past entering into the present and going to the future. He stopped this movement and gave freedom to the present. In this experience there is no belief but a person says 'I am the way, the truth and the life'. In this experience God's indwelling presence is experienced. This God is not the God of the past but the God of eternity, the God of now, I am who I am. Jesus said 'no one comes to the Father except through me'. No one can come to this experience of freedom except by doing what Jesus did: It is to stop the movement of the past. It is to be free from the past and the future. Jesus called this process repentance.
If we blindly believe in reincarnation without seeing it as a fact then we are conditioned by it and we are bound by it. If we blindly reject it then we do not see the reality of it, we are blind to it. It is seeing reincarnation as a fact we discover that it is worth to give continuity to it and stop it in order to enter into the eternal present. In Christianity we have the episode of virgin birth: a spiritual virgin is who discontinues the past and gives birth to eternity. It is to see God in the present moment. It is to transform our life into life of God and our actions into actions of God. It is no longer our life but God's life. We are free from our birth and death but our birth becomes birth of God and our death becomes the death of God. Jesus Christ said, 'the actions that I do are not my own but the Father who dwells in me does his works. It is the statement of someone who is free from reincarnation.

 

[Vinayaka]

Just as I expected, you did not answer my question.... which is ... What do you personally believe? I don't expect an answer by the way, because I'm not sure you know what you personally believe. OTOH, I know what I believe.

 

[Vinayaka]

This is not a mix.

Most outside observers, I'm confident, would beg to differ. An insider simple stating that it is not a mix doesn't prove it isn't. I think this Wiki article Saccidananda Ashram - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia calls it a blend. I'm curious as to what other members here may call it.

 

[Windwalker]

Most outside observers, I'm confident, would beg to differ. An insider simple staing that it is not a mix doesn't prove it isn't. I think this Wiki article Saccidananda Ashram - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia calls it a blend. I'm curious as to what other members here may call it.

If someone is able to transcend all religious boundaries, including their own, is it a mix or a blend (which happens at the same level), or an overview of common messages, merely using those words within their respective contexts to bridge the gaps of impermanent distinctions? I believe the Sages themselves did this using the local symbols to teach higher truths through them. What then when that audience is not a local village, but a global one with many systems of symbols?

I agree with John, what he is saying is not syncretism, per se. Others may see it that way because they see from within their systems across divides in hearing the interplay of language, but it is not a blending of systems. It is at its heart, an overview of what they all say. This is much more the perennial philosophy, then some "mix".


I'll share my thoughts about the proclamation message of Jesus later as time permits.

 

[John Martin]

Just as I expected, you did not answer my question.... which is ... What do you personally believe? I don't expect an answer by the way, because I'm not sure you know what you personally believe. OTOH, I know what I believe.

Dear Vinayaka,
Thank you very much for your response.You ask me what I personally believe. At the moment of my life I am not a believer.I see the oneness of life and try to live it with that awareness. This oneness of life is not a belief but it is an existential awareness. When a leaf has seen its connectedness to the tree it does not need to believe in a tree. To believe may be necessary and I have been a believer for many years. But then I discovered believe means drawing a boundary.Drawing a boundary means fragmenting the oneness of life. Drawing the boundary creates an enemy, necessitates protection, necessitates an army. Where there is boundary there is potential for war. Where there is oneness of life there is no boundary.There is no enemy. There is nothing to gain and nothing to lose. There is only one way,one truth and one life.
Thanks.

 

[John Martin]

Most outside observers, I'm confident, would beg to differ. An insider simple stating that it is not a mix doesn't prove it isn't. I think this Wiki article Saccidananda Ashram - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia calls it a blend. I'm curious as to what other members here may call it.

When you refer to the ashram, the ashram is built like an Indian ashram, with small hermitages. The temple with vimana looks like a Hindu temple. We us the scriptures of all religions,particularly the Upnishads and the Bhagavat Gita and Tamil Hindu mystics, in our readings. We use sanskrit chantings along with Christian chantings. We have vegetarian meals,practice yoga and meditations. it is possible that external appearance looks like a mix. But our vision is to go beyond the external symbols and discover that naked reality which goes beyond all name and forms, nama-rupa.

 

[Vinayaka]

If someone is able to transcend all religious boundaries, including their own, is it a mix or a blend (which happens at the same level), or an overview of common messages, merely using those words within their respective contexts to bridge the gaps of impermanent distinctions?

I agree with this, but only as it's applied at the advaitic, or mountaintop level, where the sages transcend all differences, actually becoming 'oneness' with everything, beyond time, form, and space. I'm certainly not at that level, but maybe one day, when this soul's destiny is reached.

But it doesn't work for me at the more mundane level of intellect, village level, religious belief in daily life. If you search on images for the Catholic ashrams, you get Hindu temple vimanas topped with images of Jesus instead of the Hindu gods. At that level, I think it confuses people. Another example is the names. The monks often add a Hindu name to their given Christian name. I have no idea why, other that to convince the Hindus that they are also part Hindu.

For the record, this debate has been going on a very long time. It was highlighted in the Indian press in the 1980s in a dialogue between Sita Ram Goel, a Hindu spokesman/scholar, and one Father Bede Griffiths. I was privy to watching that debate over a few years. It was summarized in an article called, "Sannyasins or Swindlers?" printed both here in America, and in India. I don't believe JM figured he might encounter someone here on RF who happened to be privy to the whole story.

So there are two sides to every story, and of course everyone is free to decide what they think. The ideas have spread somewhat to the more universal type ashrams in India, but I'm not sure about the traditional Aadheenams and Mutts. Certainly, here in America, we have several similar ashram type organisations that use a blend of Christian and Hindu mysticism in their teachings. Most traditionally minded Hindus like me tend to shy away from them because, once again, it's simply confusing when you have conflicting beliefs. Cremation or burial is another. The monks at the Catholic ashrams get buried, which indicates a belief in the physical resurrection, if I am not mistaken.

 

[Windwalker]

He (Jesus) said to them, Go out to the whole world; proclaim the gospel (goodnews9 to all creation; whoever believes and baptized will be saved; whoever does not believe will be condemned. (Mk. 16.15-16) The New Jerusalem Bible.

We know that this is the most important statement for the Christian missionaries. I want your comments on it or your own interpretations on it.

My own interpretation is that it is
1. To proclaim the good news or gospel
2. to all creation
3. Believes and baptized
4 will be saved
5. Does not believe will be condemned

I'll get the academic comment out of the way first in saying that the earliest manuscripts of Mark do not include anything after verse 8 in the 16th chapter. It rather ends the Gospel in a rather somber tone, "and they were afraid", thus reflecting the state of mind of those early Christians around the time of the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. So is this "great commission" actually something Jesus taught as it is laid out? It seems doubtful, but plays a role in what I wish to lay out.

However, to proclaim the good news so to speak, is a message of Jesus' teaching to his disciples. He does say 'you are the salt of the earth,' and "let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify God"; "a lamp that is lit is not hidden under the bushel but set upon it for all to see", and so forth. This "proclamation" is really more about letting God's light shine in the world through you, that all men are drawn to God - not to your religion, not to convert into an "ism" or a belief system, but to become a living light themselves, to realize God in themselves, and to become God in the world. "Love God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength", is the first commandment, which is the necessary act in order to perform "the second which is like unto it, to love your neighbor as yourself". On these two commandments, and these alone, says Jesus, the fulfillment of all sacred scripture depends.

This is not converting to a religion. This is becoming a child of God.

So why then all this missionary work to convert people to a religion? Because, as you pointed out well, when a Sage speaks from his altitude, above and beyond any and all systems of belief, he speaks through them to those he teaches, hoping to ignite a spark from within to hear a higher truth through his use of them, and begin to hear with their hearts, rather than their heads which are bound into these belief systems. The effect is it jars them from their thinking a little, and allows them to hear a new voice from within them. Then, following that, a new understanding unfolds, and a new understanding following that, and so on until one is fully liberated and "sees God" beyond all boundaries. That, is salvation.

But when people hear these teachings, lacking any sort of ignition of that divine spark, they interpret these words quite literally. They take them as some new law that they have to follow to be judged as righteous. Not realizing it was exactly that mindset itself that Jesus, or that Sage, hoped to jar them free from! They create a new religion in his name, not hearing that he asked them to liberate God from religion!

The missionary mind to make converts to a religion is reflective of an ethnocentric mind. Ethnocentric thinking is a step up from older kinship systems where blood lines defined ones identity within the tribe. Ethnocentric is about defining ones inclusiveness by group identification. You become a "Christian", and thus you are included. "Only Christians are 'saved'", is the mindset. It sees group membership as the door to salvation. Otherwise you are outside, lost, a heathen, sinner, etc. Rites of passage mark ones entry into the group - recite these words, put water on your heard, eat a meal, etc. While all these have importance symbolically, they are in fact taken at a literal, non-symbolic level, as actually necessary in order to be "saved". Again, "saved" means becoming part of the group.

It takes God, places him as an idol on the groups altar, and says, "bow before this God, and you shall be saved". You become "one of the group".

Here is a wonderful article that really drives this home I read recently which I stop at at this point. I really like how he puts this: Christians should abandon Christianity - Salon.com

 

[John Martin]

Thank you Windwaker,
you make clear what I wish to stay. God bless you.

 

[Reptillian]

Good news is something I like to proclaim as well.

[youtube]1D1cap6yETA[/youtube]
Good News Everyone! - YouTube

 

[Maya3]

John Martin,

I have no problem with someone who looks at Jesus with a Hindu viewpoint. Or someone who can combine Christianity and Hinduism. I think you are right that once you become Self Realized, all labels fall away and we see only AUM.
I don't care how you get there, whatever floats your boat.

But I still feel that this is a tactic to get people to become Christian. The language you are using comes from someone who knows a lot about Hinduism, still you add Jesus into it. It seems like you are doing this so that you can get Hindus to become Christian.
Having an Hindu style temple and reading both Christian and Hindu scriptures is fine if you you are honest and say that; "we are a mix, we like both Hinduism and Christianity."
But if it is really Christianity cloaked with Hindu "clothes and temple styles" to get people inside, then it is dishonest and just a new conversion technique.

If you are Christian, why do you make it seem so Hindu?

Maya

 

[Vinayaka]

Hinduism, on it's own, without any outside influences at all, has been offering this advaitic truth for centuries. Tirumular, Sankara, Ramana Maharshi, and countelss unknown others are living proof of this. So why not just go to the source?

 

[Vinayaka]

If you are Christian, why do you make it seem so Hindu?

Maya

I'm really not sure of the current situation, but I do know that the earlier abbot there got warning letters from the Pope regarding this idea, or going too far.

 

[John Martin]

I agree with this, but only as it's applied at the advaitic, or mountaintop level, where the sages transcend all differences, actually becoming 'oneness' with everything, beyond time, form, and space. I'm certainly not at that level, but maybe one day, when this soul's destiny is reached.

But it doesn't work for me at the more mundane level of intellect, village level, religious belief in daily life. If you search on images for the Catholic ashrams, you get Hindu temple vimanas topped with images of Jesus instead of the Hindu gods. At that level, I think it confuses people. Another example is the names. The monks often add a Hindu name to their given Christian name. I have no idea why, other that to convince the Hindus that they are also part Hindu.

For the record, this debate has been going on a very long time. It was highlighted in the Indian press in the 1980s in a dialogue between Sita Ram Goel, a Hindu spokesman/scholar, and one Father Bede Griffiths. I was privy to watching that debate over a few years. It was summarized in an article called, "Sannyasins or Swindlers?" printed both here in America, and in India. I don't believe JM figured he might encounter someone here on RF who happened to be privy to the whole story.

So there are two sides to every story, and of course everyone is free to decide what they think. The ideas have spread somewhat to the more universal type ashrams in India, but I'm not sure about the traditional Aadheenams and Mutts. Certainly, here in America, we have several similar ashram type organisations that use a blend of Christian and Hindu mysticism in their teachings. Most traditionally minded Hindus like me tend to shy away from them because, once again, it's simply confusing when you have conflicting beliefs. Cremation or burial is another. The monks at the Catholic ashrams get buried, which indicates a belief in the physical resurrection, if I am not mistaken.

Dear Vinayaka,
Hindu Christian dialogue is less than around 100 years old. Missionaries came to India with the motive of conversion. The founders of Saccidananda ashram began a new vision, not conversion but dialogue. They began to wear kavi and took hindu names. Their intentions were good. There were deeply inspired bythe spiritual vision of the Upanishads and wanted to integrate that vision into theie Christian vision. The reason was that it was not possible for the Christians to have an advatic expreince of God, only for God. Swami Abhishikthanada and Bede Griiths tried to open this possibilityto Christians also. it was something very new both for the Chrstians and the Hindus. This created suspicion both from the and created suspicions for both Christians and the Hindus. Christians thought that these Christian priests have become Hindus and Hindus began to suspect that these Christian priests have taken a new form to convert the Hindus. There were given the expression 'wolf with sheep skin'. They took Hindu names not to show that they are Hindus but to bear witness that they are participating in the search of the absolute through the path shown the Indian sages. Now things have Changed. There is a lot of interest in the inter-religious dialogue. Christians are also questioning their vision and mission. I am also aware of many Christian denominations who are still bent on unworthy means conversions and brings bad name to all the Christians. Mainline Churches in India does not involve much in conversions,even though in principle they believe in the mission to convert. I feel that a public statement from the Christian leaders that they do not want convert can do a great help. I have written an article recently titled : Christian Mission in India Today. If you are interested I can send you a copy. At the end I would like to say that Catholics are free to bury their bodies or cremate their bodies. i am extremely grateful to you for your provocation which helped to bring out my own vision of things. May the good Lord bless you.
John martin

 

[John Martin]

John Martin,

I have no problem with someone who looks at Jesus with a Hindu viewpoint. Or someone who can combine Christianity and Hinduism. I think you are right that once you become Self Realized, all labels fall away and we see only AUM.
I don't care how you get there, whatever floats your boat.

But I still feel that this is a tactic to get people to become Christian. The language you are using comes from someone who knows a lot about Hinduism, still you add Jesus into it. It seems like you are doing this so that you can get Hindus to become Christian.
Having an Hindu style temple and reading both Christian and Hindu scriptures is fine if you you are honest and say that; "we are a mix, we like both Hinduism and Christianity."
But if it is really Christianity cloaked with Hindu "clothes and temple styles" to get people inside, then it is dishonest and just a new conversion technique.

If you are Christian, why do you make it seem so Hindu?

Maya

Dear Maya,
thank you so much for your comments. I have studied deeply Hindusim. My dissertation was a comparative study of Shankara and Meister Eckhart. My study has made me to realize that conversion is not the way for me to day. I am very greateful to all the Hindu Sages,who have helped me to understand the Truth. I have no intention to convert any one to any religion or any person including Jesus. My only interest is how people can go to God, with religion or without religion, with masters or without masters,with whatever way they. My personal spiritual experience is very much close to the experience of Jesus. I resonate his way of feeling and thinking. But I realize that Jesus never wanted to start a new religion,he never wanted anyone to convert to a new religion.he formed a group of his close disciples as a nest which prepares people to move into the freedom of the kingdom of God. Unfortunately door are put to the nest and it has been transformed into a cage. This can happen an sage,including the Indian sages.

 

[John Martin]

I'm really not sure of the current situation, but I do know that the earlier abbot there got warning letters from the Pope regarding this idea, or going too far.

There were some individuals who have taken upon themselves the mission of finding out what is not traditional catholic practice. They have made false accusations. The Catholic hierarchy supports our ashram and our bishop has been extremely kind and supportive. Our abbot has not received any warning from the Pope.

 

[Titanic]

Dear Titanic,
Be truthful to your understanding until you realize yourself what others say.
No forcing.

I think Judaism and Islam are great religions.

 

[John Martin]

Hinduism, on it's own, without any outside influences at all, has been offering this advaitic truth for centuries. Tirumular, Sankara, Ramana Maharshi, and countelss unknown others are living proof of this. So why not just go to the source?

Many people have an advaitic experience. Each one's advaitic experience is different. Shankara's advaitic experience and his mission was different from Sri Ramana Maharishi's advaitic experience and his mission. Shankara traveled all around India whereas Sri Ramana confined to Arunachala. God does not want us either to be Shanakra or to be Sri Ramana. God wants us to be ourselves, to have our own advaitic experience, according to our need, experience and knowledge. We have to find God according to the questions we have and the possibilities we have. Imitation is violence. Each one of us is unique manifestation of God and God wants each one of us to have our own unique experience of God. We need to find God in the place where we are and in the situations where we live, not to take ideals from the past. We need to experience the God of now, the God of today. God is ever new ever creative.

 

[Maya3]

Dear Maya,
thank you so much for your comments. I have studied deeply Hindusim. My dissertation was a comparative study of Shankara and Meister Eckhart. My study has made me to realize that conversion is not the way for me to day. I am very greateful to all the Hindu Sages,who have helped me to understand the Truth. I have no intention to convert any one to any religion or any person including Jesus. My only interest is how people can go to God, with religion or without religion, with masters or without masters,with whatever way they. My personal spiritual experience is very much close to the experience of Jesus. I resonate his way of feeling and thinking. But I realize that Jesus never wanted to start a new religion,he never wanted anyone to convert to a new religion.he formed a group of his close disciples as a nest which prepares people to move into the freedom of the kingdom of God. Unfortunately door are put to the nest and it has been transformed into a cage. This can happen an sage,including the Indian sages.

Ok that sounds good.

I'm curious if you believe in the Resurrection and judgement day?

Maya

 

[John Martin]

I think Judaism and Islam are great religions.

Yes, they are great religions.