Would you like to contribute to a text about how Hinduism views Jesus (and perhaps others)?

[Contemplative Cat]

well alright then.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram :namaste

Enlightenment philosophies all have similar elements;
Buddhists, Vedanta, Taoism, &Gnosticism

prehaps one could say all enlightenment philosophies belive that they have the same goal ...but ask these four to define enlightenment and I am sure you will get very different answers !

they may all say that enlightenment is the attainment of true insight in to the nature of tue ultimate reality , but then from their un enlightened veiw point they will argue what the ultimate reality is or is not .

The sign of a real vedantin is dispassion. And acceptance of Gods will to guide the world.

do you mean dispassion , or do you mean surrender ?

surely to accept gods will is surrender , but I am no vedantin so you will have to explain dispassion ?

If you are a advaita yogi. You know these mental notions of mine and other are illusions and thus nothing to get worked up over.

so you become dispassionate ?

It would go to reason that anyone who seeks liberation
, would seek to end duality, and look to see how all opposites are one
& would trust in enlightened beings.

liberation yes from illusion , but even within the hindu tradition there is no agreement about the end of duality , as you would most probably gather I vere towards Achintya Bheda Abheda .

the oposites however are truth and ignorance , enlightenment and unenlightenment , the different degrees of realisation atained by different religions are not oposites they are degrees of wisdom .
before one can trust one has to ensure that one is following a truely enlightened being ,
the question of jesus as an avatar has become a debate about liberalism in approach .
yes true most philosophies or religions have similar elements , these are the most basic of realisations any inteligent person should intuitivly understand from within as they are inate truths . the next step is to contemplate higher truths

 

[Jaskaran Singh]

well alright then.

Here is what the kenopaniShad says about brahma:

तद्ध तद्वनं नाम।
तद्वनमित्युपासितव्यं।
स य एतदेवं वेदाभि हैनं सर्वाणि भूतानि संवाञ्छन्ति॥४.६॥

Transliteration:
taddha tadvanaM nAma|
tadvanamityupAsitavyaM|
sa ya etadevaM vedAbhi hainaM sarvANi bhUtAni saMvA~nChanti||4.6||

tad- that/this; ha - certainly; tadvanaM - that which is praised/loved; nAma- is called as; tadvanaM - same as before; iti - this; upAsitavyam - to be worshipped (from upAsita [worship], in turn from upa+√As lit. to exist subordinately); sa - he; ya - who/which; etad - this; evam - surely; veda - know; abhi - upon; ha - certainly; enam - he [becomes]; sarvANi - all; bhUtAni - that exists; saMvA~nChanti - the desire/longing

"This [brahma] is certainly called as tadvanaM (i.e. that which is praised). This tadvanaM is to be worshipped. Whosoever (lit. he who), upon knowing this, certainly becomes the desire of all that exists."

Clearly, brahma is said to be supplicated to, as in a deity. Similarly, kR^iShNa replies to shrI arjuna in the gItA, stating as follows:

श्रीभगवान् उवाच।
मय्यावेश्य मनो ये मां नित्ययुक्ता उपासते।
श्रद्धया परयोपेतास् ते मे युक्ततमा मताः॥२॥

shrIbhagavAn uvAcha|
mayyAveshya mano ye mAM nityayuktA upAsate|
shraddhayA parayopetAs te me yuktatamA matAH||2||

shrI - the venerable/auspicious (lit. radiant, used as an honorific usually); bhagavAn - lord (lit. posessor of wealth/bounty); uvAcha - said (parokShabhUtakalA of vach, meaning speech); mayi - to me; Aveshya - enter in; ye - they who; mAm - unto me; nityayukta -constantly joined/engage in; upAsate - worship; shraddhayA - with faith; parayA - of otherness/transcendent; upetAH - fixed in; te - those; me - mine; yuktatamA - most great; matAH - I consider

"The venerable Lord said: 'Those who are are constantly engaged worship unto me, enter into me. Those [devotees] of mine, who are fixed with transcendent faith, I consider to be most great.'"

After reading the above, you could still view brahma not as a deity, but does that really make sense from a scriptural standpoint? Not really (why would you worship a concept?). Also, keep in mind I'm talking about brahma (ब्रह्&#2350, the supreme deity, not the brahmA (ब्रह्म&#2366 with the chaturAnana (four mukha-s) who is engaged in the recitation of the veda-s. I don't want you to get the two confused solely because they have the same uninflected form (brahman/ब्रह्मन&#2381. From a grammatical standpoint, the only difference is that the former (brahma) is neuter-gendered whereas the latter (brahmA) is masculine-gender, so I can kind of understand. However, not knowing the difference can often be problematic (for example, what if you though the mahAvAkya aham brahmAsmi meant aham brahmA+Asmi rather than aham brahma+Asmi, lol ).

 

[Aupmanyav]

Deleted.

 

[atanu]

Hi everyone.
1.3.1 Yogananda's SRF
The SRF is known to acknowledge Jesus as a legitimate Avatar of God. ....

Can I request the exact statement of Sri Yogananda on this from any of his written accounts? I do not know and I am curious.

Thanks.

I have not met any Hindu who considers Jesus as an Avatara of Vishnu. But many Hindus, especially of Vedantic orientation, believe "The knower of Brahman becomes Brahman".

This belief is probably reflected in SRF statement "To reveal the complete harmony and basic oneness of original Christianity as taught by Jesus Christ and original Yoga as taught by Bhagavan Krishna; and to show that these principles of truth are the common scientific foundation of all true religions"

This is not SRF statement alone. But, in some or other variation, this has been taught to us by many teachers.

The basic reason for this is that most Hindus understand that "the Param Atman who wants to grace the worshipper, whatever be his faith, is the same. The different religions have taken shape according to the customs peculiar to the countries in which they originated and according to the differences in the mental outlook of the people inhabiting them. The goal of all religions is to lead people to the same Paramatman according to the different attributes of the devotees concerned". (From Sri Sri Chandrasekhara Saraswati's book "Hindu Dharma").

 

[LuisDantas]

It is a shame that this idea did not truly take off.

But then, I did not understand how divided opinions are. I used to believe Muslims had controversial beliefs about who qualifies as a true believer or not. I stand corrected.

If this text materializes at some point, I fully expect it to be deeply sourced and to make a point of including dissenting views for most any of its statements.

 

[atanu]

But Luis can I again request you to provide some reference to "The SRF is known to acknowledge Jesus as a legitimate Avatar of God. ....", of the OP, if possible without much extra effort? Else just forget it.

Why I am interested is that in recent times, I have observed many hindu teachers have been criticised as being pandering to christians or muslims etc. Many of such accusations are based on free floating statements of individuals or in some cases by some scholars. But some of us have conviction that there is a common goodwill across all times and places and it is that common goodwill that Teaches the suffering mankind the way out of the entanglement. That common goodwill has no religious tag.

 

[LuisDantas]

But Luis can I again request you to provide some reference to "The SRF is known to acknowledge Jesus as a legitimate Avatar of God. ....", of the OP, if possible without much extra effort? Else just forget it.

Why I am interested is that in recent times, I have observed many hindu teachers have been criticised as being pandering to christians or muslims etc. Many of such accusations are based on free floating statements of individuals or in some cases by some scholars. But some of us have conviction that there is a common goodwill across all times and places and it is that common goodwill that Teaches the suffering mankind the way out of the entanglement. That common goodwill has no religious tag.

Not sure why you direct your request to me, frankly.

 

[atanu]

Not sure why you direct your request to me, frankly.

Only because it was in the original post. No other reason Luis. You got to trust me this much at least.

 

[LuisDantas]

Only because it was in the original post. No other reason Luis. You got to trust me this much at least.

That may well be.

I have learned to become wary of your judgements about what is proper Dharma, though. You have a way of pushing them forcefully which I do not wish to condone or encourage.

 

[atanu]

That may well be.

I have learned to become wary of your judgements about what is proper Dharma, though. You have a way of pushing them forcefully which I do not wish to condone or encourage.

Ok. I accept this as a good advice.

 

[atanu]

..... in a word, mettā. It's strange that Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains see this, but Hindus, at least the Hindus here, seemingly, do not. Too many Christians don't see it either, unfortunately; they are not above reproach either.

Kindly factor in the historical facts of forced conversions and missionary activity. You cannot see only one side. OTOH, you read from any Hindu teacher (punkd has shown us some) and they do not teach divisively and not all Hindus think divisively. I am yet to understand your strong view, given that you yourself are encouraging universal values and compassion.

 

[atanu]

I also use the quotes "jāki rahi bhāvanā jaisi prabhu mūrat dekhi tin taisi." and "ekam sat viprah bahudha vadanti". Vedic purists may say that RV 10.164.46 refers only to the Vedic deities. But if the Vedas are universal and there is only one God, ....

I agree. Vedic deities beginning with Soma (mind), Vishnu (the primeval sacrifice and the all pervading), Indra (Thunderbolt), Vayu, Agni, the 33 Maruts are all non temporal universal tattvas (Thatness). We cannot make the deities local and temporal.

However, the sacrificial procedures are not universal. Those are only known to some. Well. That is nature.

 

[Jainarayan]

I am yet to understand your strong view, given that you yourself are encouraging universal values and compassion.

My compassion card needs to be renewed.

As I noted elsewhere, it's based on the pontifications and proclamations of a few on this site, and most on another site. I do understand they don't represent all of Hinduism, and are probably in a small minority of ultra-orthodox. The Hindus I've met and know in real life are just plain folks slogging and trudging through life. As for the missionary activities and forced conversions, I'm still at a loss to understand how 24 million Christians, 2% of India's population, and 138 million Muslims, 13% of India's population are a threat to Hinduism. Hindus in India are not squeaky clean. Christianity in India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Hindu–Christian conflict

 

[Poeticus]

To the best of my recollection,
a majority of Hindus, either
orthodox or not, find the mere
question to be irrelevant. What
still perplexes me is why was this
thread in the comparative rel.
section and not where it belongs,
in the HinduDIR? If you want to
know how Hindus view Jesus,
it should belong in the HinduDIR -
wherein...the majority will clearly
say....he's quite irrelevant.​

 

[Jainarayan]

If you want to
know how Hindus view Jesus,
it should belong in the HinduDIR -
wherein...the majority will clearly
say....he's quite irrelevant.

There is one there, and it caused quite the **** storm, as usual. One poster rails against Jesus in the Hinduism DIR, and here you are supporting it.

 

[Poeticus]

There is one there, and it caused quite the **** storm, as usual. One poster rails against Jesus in the Hinduism DIR, and here you are supporting it.

EDIT:

Scratch that thought about
the poll; it may cause a lot
of controversy.​

 

[atanu]

My compassion card needs to be renewed.

..As for the missionary activities and forced conversions, I'm still at a loss to understand how 24 million Christians, 2% of India's population, and 138 million Muslims, 13% of India's population are a threat to Hinduism. Hindus in India are not squeaky clean. Christianity in India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Hindu–Christian conflict

Historically these numbers had no meaning. Conversions were through violence or through inducements.

And at present it is not the Indian christians but the global evangelical associations that are active. Are you aware of AD2000 and Joshua projects? The goal of the AD 2000 project was "A Church for Every People and the Gospel for Every Person by the Year 2000".

Many people do not know of these things and the havoc that these subversive projects have had all over the world. These guys planned to convert all poor people around the world and they have indeed succeeded in their mission to some extent. They are, in my estimation, much more dangerous than the islamic invaders.

If you were in India and had you seen the brute money power employed, you would have appreciated what I am trying to say. Under onslaught of such conversion tactics even the most sane man will rebel. It is an example when compassion is poison.

Enough said. :sorry1:

 

[atanu]

""The mission of Joshua Project II is to highlight the peoples of the world who have the least exposure to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Joshua Project II seeks to accomplish this through information sharing and networking… the mission of the Joshua Project is threefold.

First, to gather, manage and distribute strategic population, progress indicator and ministry activity information to maximise the visibility of the least-reached peoples to the Church. The goal is a comprehensive, accurate, validated, public ally available list of all the ethno-cultural people groups of the world.

Second, to be a least-reached peoples networking resource to the Christian mission community.

Third, to enhance the flow of information between Great Commission organisations by using standardised data coding.""

The anger that one sees is not against Jesus and his teaching. But the anger is usually against the churchianity and their anti Christ methods.

 

[Jainarayan]

AD2000 and the Joshua Project seem to have been a dismal failure. I doubt they reached into the hinterlands of the People's Republic of China, or the Amazon rain forest, much less making any inroads in India. They haven't done a very good job in India if still only 2% of the population are Christian. I don't see any compelling evidence of their success, not when 80% of Indians are Hindu, >800,000,000.