How should we view Jesus in the Dharmic Religions?

[Vinayaka]

This man is twisting things around and creating a false form of hateful paranoia.

Rajiv Malhotra is one of very few people standing up for Hindus against the onslaught of western anti-Hindu fake scholars, the Christian invasion, and more. I may not agree with everything he says either, but it's certainly better than the passivity of the past that would have brought the culture and religion totally down. I am a great admirer of his work. Somebody has to do it.

Hateful paranoia? How about a voice from the other side for once? Haven't we been belittled long enough?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Marcion, are you follower of someone called M, a muslim syncretist in South India?

 

[stvdv]

I am more so asking Hindus if they believe Jesus is cosmic or heavenly in any sense, because Buddhists of course have different views about the beings that descend from the heaven realms- even among ourselves.

My Master explained about Jesus: First Jesus was a "Messenger of God". Later He realized "I am the Son of God". Finally He realized "Me and My Father are One"
He also said: First you are "in the Light". Next the "Light is in you". Finally "you are the Light".
With these I can reconcile even Buddhism; my first spiritual Love

 

[stvdv]

I don't believe he rose from the dead or the second person of any divine Trinity

The Trinity explanation I believe to be human invention. The part "He rose from the dead" is easiest to believe for me. When on the cross Jesus allegedly/understandably said "Father why have you forsaken me". Obviously Jesus was "Body Conscious" [dead]. BUT at least at that final moment He thought of God [So He rose from the dead].

I remember in this context a story where a man verbally abused Krisha who finally "chopped off" his head with his "chakra disk". Head/blood fell on Krishna's feet. Before people were angry the man verbally abused Krishna, now they were even more upset the man being rewarded merging in Krishna [highest boon]. Krishna explained "Praise and Blame are for me the Same". If you call my name, that is enough. This man was so mad at Me that He thought of Me even 24/7.

 

[Marcion]

How about a voice from the other side for once? Haven't we been belittled long enough?

If you want to fight narrow-mindedness, irrationality and dogma you should not mirror the mistakes of your adversaries but must transcend, outwit and expose them.

 

[Vinayaka]

If you want to fight narrow-mindedness, irrationality and dogma you should not mirror the mistakes of your adversaries but must transcend, outwit and expose them.

Agreed.

 

[Vedic]

by original Dharmic Faith only Indra is the god and Hindu-Buddhist religions aren't even Regions.

 

[Aupmanyav]

by original Dharmic Faith only Indra is the god and Hindu-Buddhist religions aren't even Regions.

What Aryans followed at one time is designated as Vedic religion. I do not know how many times 'dharma' is mentioned in RigVeda Samhita. My initial search shows that it is not mentioned. If you have better information, please let me know. 'Dharma' is a concept associated with indigenous beliefs. Vedic belief is now a small part of the larger Hindu belief.

 

[Vedic]

What Aryans followed at one time is designated as Vedic religion. I do not know how many times 'dharma' is mentioned in RigVeda Samhita. My initial search shows that it is not mentioned. If you have better information, please let me know. 'Dharma' is a concept associated with indigenous beliefs. Vedic belief is now a small part of the larger Hindu belief.

A religion is Dharma.

idol and Penis worshiping Hindus and atheist Buddhist are as "Dharmic" as Chinese are Europeans.

 

[Aupmanyav]

See the definition of 'dharma' anywhere. It is never religion. To translate it into religion is a mistake. It is duty and ethical action. We did not even have a concept of religion.

Idol (murti) and linga (symbol) worship is an integral part of Hinduism. Was Dayananda a Christian or a Muslim to denigrate idol worship and Hindu Gods? A few Arya Samajis are not going to change our views.

Dayananda misled you. His absurd translation of RigVeda in never even mentioned in scholarly circles.

Aryans were a group of tribes. Belief does not make one Aryan. And Aryans were no different from other people. They did not have any blue blood.

"Kahin ki int, kahin ka roda, Bhanumti ne kunba joda". And you all became Aryans. That is a joke.

 

[Vedic]

Hinduism is adharma lol

 

[Aupmanyav]

Hinduism is adharma lol

Sure, you are not a Hindu and if you think Hinduism is 'adharma', it is your view, and you are welcome to it.

I am of Aryan descent (Kashmiri Saraswat Brahmin). My forefathers wrote hymns of RigVeda (Upamanyu - Wikipedia). One of my clansman was a Vedic commentator (a 'niruktikara') prior to 700 BC, earlier than Yaska (Aupamanyava - Wikipedia). My grandfather was a historian and a Sanskrit scholar who wrote many books including a few on RigVeda and a 8,000 verse smriti which went by the name of 'Vishweshwara Smriti' (Bishweshwar Nath Reu - Wikipedia).

My Aryan forefathers became a part of Hinduism, the indigenous religion, with a mutual agreement. Hindus accepted the Vedas, adopted Sanskrit as the scholarly and liturgical language while my forefathers accepted the indigenous Gods and Goddesses (Shiva, Rama, Krishna , Durga, etc). We have lived together as one for thousands of years (probably some 3,500 years), and had marital relations with the indigenous people. I have no need or reason to repudiate that agreement. If idol worship is a part of Hinduism, it is my way too, because I am a Hindu.

Dayananda was a 'dambhi' (a vain person, arrogant and conceited) and he resorted to falsehood in his translation of RigVeda, which happens to be the worst of all translations ever. Perhaps he was needed in his time to counter the missionary propaganda, but now the situation is different. What all Dayananda succeeded in doing is creating a schism in Hinduism and weakening Hinduism. That is not much different from what the missionaries wanted.

 

[ajay0]

Swami Dayananda Saraswati was the first Hindu reformer to campaign for the abolishment of Sati or burning of Hindu widows mercilessly till death, and also campaigned for the eradication of casteism, untouchability, inequallity, suppression of women and other superstitions which had dehumanised the Hindus for centuries, and had no foundation in the vedic religion.

It is because of such evils that conversion of Hindus to Islam and Christianity became rampant in the preceding centuries and Dayananda helped to put an end to such practices.

Through the Arya Samaj, Swami Dayananda Saraswati humanised and rationalised Hinduism, and helped Hinduism to become a progressive religion rather than the regressive one it had been for many centuries.


S.Radhakrishnan, renowned scholar and former president of India expressed tribute to Swami Dayananda Saraswati and the Arya Samaj in this statement...

"Swami Dayananda ranked highest among the makers of modern India. He had worked tirelessly for the political, religious and cultural emancipation of the country. He was guided by reason, taking Hinduism back to the Vedic foundations. He had tried to reform society with a clean sweep, which was again needed today. Some of the reforms introduced in the Indian Constitution had been inspired by his teachings."


If Swami Dayananda Saraswati had appeared a millenium back and effected his reforms then, the foreign invasions of India by the mughals and colonial powers could have been prevented.

As a saying by Will Durrant goes, "A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within."

 

[Spirit of Light]

In my understanding Jesus was an Enlighten being with tataghata level of wisdom similar to Buddha Sakyamuni, But of different schools and of different masters.
A lot of the teaching about Jesus early days and who his masters was is unknown as far as i know, But in my understanding the view of Jesus as Gods Son was writting in later to the religious scriptures.

 

[ajay0]

In my understanding Jesus was an Enlighten being with tataghata level of wisdom similar to Buddha Sakyamuni, But of different schools and of different masters.
A lot of the teaching about Jesus early days and who his masters was is unknown as far as i know, But in my understanding the view of Jesus as Gods Son was writting in later to the religious scriptures.

There is a saying in the ancient Mundaka Upanishad.

Brahmavit brahmaiva bhavati -- 'The knower of Brahman becomes Brahman'. (Mundaka Upanishad 3.2.9)


This is similar to Jesus' saying....

I and the Father are one. John 10:30


It is probably from his enlightened perspective that he stated that he and God are one, or that he was the son of God.

 

[MonkeyFire]

Jesus is the greatest pacifist ever.

 

[Rubellite Fae]

I see no problem accepting that a human named Yeshua ben Yosef achieved moksha and REALized his oneness with Brahman. He then used the language of the culture of the day to spread his findings to others. That said, he wouldn't have been so influential without the efforts of Paulos--who seems to have altered his original message.

In other words, Yeshua was speaking the truth of his experience, but it was difficult to understand and altered by his disciples.

 

[Samana Johann]

How should we view Jesus in the Dharmic Religions? was asked: A poor born Brahman who did not come into touch with the Buddha and his teachings, yet taught faith into kusala deeds, certainly guided toward heavens, nevertheless 'just' householder(ing) Dhamma.

 

[Samana Johann]

Brahman Father Anthony de Mello, previous follower of the sect, had the "luck" to encounter the teachings of the Buddha, meeting Ven. Ajahn Chah, was expelled from the church later, as far Atma knows.

"How few understand what love really is,...

...and how it arises in the human heart. It is so frequently equated with good feelings toward others, with benevolence or nonviolence or service. But these things in themselves are not love. Love springs from awareness. It is only inasmuch as you see someone as he or she is really here, and not how they are in your memory or your desire or in your imagination or projection that you can truly love them; otherwise it is not the person that you love but the idea that you have formed of this person, or this person as the object of your desire not as he or she is in themselves.

The first act of love is to see this person or this object, this reality as it truly is. And this involves the enormous discipline of dropping your desires, your prejudices, your memories, your projections, your selective way of looking ...a discipline so great that most people would rather plunge headlong into good actions and service than submit to the burning fire of this asceticism. When you set out to serve someone whom you have not taken the trouble to see, are you meeting that person's need or your own?"

from The Way to Love--- Father Anthony de Mello

 

[crossfire]

Jesus is the greatest pacifist ever.

Well, except maybe when it came to driving the money changers out of the temple.