The Risen Lord Krishna and Other Spiritual Experiences

[jbeck43]

The truth is that all religions are an expression of experiences with God by one group of people or another. What you worship is the way in which God chose to relate to a particular group of people. The rest of the world is not there to serve as a backdrop against the effulgence of one small piece of God’s creation.

Your statement is a bit contradictory here. You are making a declatory statement on who or what possesses truth, while at the same time denying that certain groups have the ability to express the very same thing that you have casually taken for granted. The Catholic Church’s declaration on truth is very different from hinduism and frankly exclusive from it. Now that either makes Hinduism–or Christianity the correct path. But It really can’t be both.

That which spoke those words were not the hair,skin capillaries, fingernails and teeth, mouth and voice of a man named Jesus. It was the words of the Christ Consciousness speaking through the man Jesus. This same Christ Consciousness has spoken to us through other incarnations of God long before Jesus and many times after. The Christ Consciousness is in you too, and no one comes to the Father until they see that in themselves and others. You are taking the literal and primitive interpretation of people who were closer to Neanderthals than to you and me in regard to the information available to them and their ability to understand what they heard. What you believe is not what Jesus said. What you believe is how you are processing what Jesus said, and I think it’s your right to do so.

Well if it’s my right to do so, then how can I be wrong? And if those were the interpretations of Neanderthals, then by what right do you have to interpret them from those whose interpretations were positively prehistoric? Once again, you are imposing a Hindu world view on Catholic texts that frankly do not express any such thing. I wonder how the Hindu world would take to a bunch of old Catholic theologians reinterpreting the Vedas for it? The sentiment that all religions are true is still a declatory statement that explains truth that is exclusive to your world view. It’s like saying you hate prejudice people. While it sounds inclusive, it’s still exclusive and contradictory all the same.

Hinduism is monotheistic, but again your mistake is a common one for people who know nothing about Hinduism. If you were to read the Hindu scriptures such as the Bhagavad Gita and the Upanishads you would not say that we are polytheistic.

You are correct that I don’t know a great deal about Hinduism nor its scriptures. I know only a little. I have followed the goings on of Sathya Sai Baba for roughly thirty years ever since I picked up a book written by an avid devotee (a catholic priest, no less, who was later excommunicated for those beliefs), who had a following (Sai Baba passed away a few months ago) that numbered in the tens of millions–perhaps larger than the total number of Mormons and Jehovahs witnesses combined (I only use those two groups because we hear so much about them, but of a figure whose followers perhaps greatly exceed their numbers, we in the west know little or nothing about) . I have watched with interest debates between Hindus and Christians, and have various short histories in my library on Hindu belief and origins. So I wonder in my limited knowledge if I’m still overreaching to ask if Hindusim isn’t practical polytheism for the large majority of Hindus who haven’t studied the entirety of Vedic texts, but who of course know the Ramayana, and other dharmic histories, and only monotheism for the gurus and Vedic masters. The lingams (manifestations of Shiva) produced by Sai Baba during his various audiences over the years have only seemed to reinforce this to his audiences in my mind when they kiss his feet and lay wreaths over his head–that they believe he is a god is evident. My honest question for you is what are your thoughts of Sathya Sai Baba? Is he a god? Is he an avatar of the divine?

That’s why any religion that believes that the unfathomable expanse of Universe that we live in was created for the pleasure and benefit of one sect of people on one small planet would have to be false religion.

Except that Hindusim occupies an even smaller footprint on that one small planet which would also disqualify your religion as well. You might call it a belief system that encompasses all sects and belief systems–but as I have said earlier, that is still a belief exclusive to you and your system.

 

[Sufjon]

You say that Jesus was God in human form. Well, this is dicey area. Jesus was not God in human form per se. Jesus was a fully man and fully God. The triune Christian God consists of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as you probably already know. In other words, there is the lover, the beloved, and the love they share. The New Testament says that “God is Love.” Love exists as a dynamic, thus implying the lover and beloved and the love they share. Therefore, it is absolutely essential to keep these entities separate.

Hi Thomas: I only have time to respond to one post today. I see what you are saying above, but again, we are running into the difficulties in understanding one another caused by our perspectives. I understand the Trinity concept, but I can’t help but see the Trinity as three aspects of the One. God in three persons, expressed as three, but in fact one. That is how I understand it. We run into these contradictions and tangled hierarchies when dealing with the mind and the physical world. God is beyond the mind and the physical world, therefore incomprehensible when using the mind. To comprehend Him, one must leave the realm of the mind and spend time in direct communion with Him. Then these questions cease.

When you say Jesus is God in a human form, you are flirting with the concept of “Modalism.” Since you are a fan of good music, I suppose you know that E minor is a modality of G major, the same notes comprise each but are expressed in different ways. This is not quite the concept of the trinity. The trinity is more abstract than that. The trinity was never supposed to make perfect sense – Christian mysticism puts God into the realm of the ineffable. Christian philosophy creates the language in order to define the mystery but not solve the mystery.

Thanks for the compliment on the music. I suppose all music is good as long as it stirs something in someone. I agree with everything you’ve said here.

1. You also say that Christians see Jesus as the culmination. This is true. But you also say that we have difficulty seeing Jesus as part of a Continuum including Buddha and Krishna. Apart from Buddha and Krishna, yes. But as an isolated occurrence apart from a continuum, no. Christ’s fingerprints exist throughout the Old Testament. The Book of John, one of my favorites and one of the favorites among Hindus so says by Hindu friend, says that the Word was God and the Word was with God and through Him all things were made. Christ was the footsteps in the Garden of Eden. Christ was the fourth person in the furnace in the Book of Daniel. After His death, resurrection, and ascension, Christ appeared to Paul on the road to Damascus. He was also appeared in visions at Fatima, Mary Faustina Kawalska, and perhaps St. Jerome.

Again you are right. Jesus can be seen as part of a continuum for Christians in relation to the Old Testament and developments in the Christian world thereafter. I, on the other hand, see Him as part of a larger, less closed context. My sense if that we are both right. We are just looking at it from different viewpoints. As a Christian it is your way and your path to God to see it as you do. As a Hindu, I have a way and a path that is somewhat different, and it does change the theology in regards to Jesus.

Moreover, Christ has promised to come again. And last and profoundly, through the consumption of Christ’s flesh and blood at mass - we, as Catholics, become united in one body - “I in you and you in me” (paraphrasing of course). Additionally, Catholics are also quite aware of Anti-Christs, false prophets and the like. Thus, we are very skeptical of those who come in the name of Christ. You may want to spend some time with the concept of “Christophanies” – this is deeply mystical territory and you would probably enjoy reading about them. Take care and God bless.

You are certainly eating the Body and Blood of Jesus in your Eucharist, but I think the whole point of the Last Supper was to drive home a much bigger truth. This is a truth that we are part of whether we know it or not. The Eucharist gives one some understanding of this.

I think the idea of Christ coming again is a very interesting thing. I expect that this event is at a different time and place for each person. I don’t think it will ever be a trans-global event. It’s a one by one thing, or at least that’s my expectation.

Y

our name is not exactly the same as this artists but it’s close. Nevertheless, I thought of you and thought you might like this song. It might be too “low brow” for your musical tastes but I like eclectic stuff and perhaps you do too! On a side note, did you know that some Ethiopian Orthodox in America claim John Coltrane as a saint and play portions of “A Love Supreme” at their liturgies? Interesting, yeah?

Thanks for the link - I do like Sufjan Stevens quite a lot, although his last few releases don’t seem to me to be on par with his earlier work. I didn’t know that about John Coltrane, but he is one of my son’s favorites.

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[Ahimsa]

Thanks for the link - I do like Sufjan Stevens quite a lot, although his last few releases don’t seem to me to be on par with his earlier work. I didn’t know that about John Coltrane, but he is one of my son’s favorites.

Your friend,
Sufjon

Coltrane’s wife eventually became a swami.

 

[Sufjon]

Coltrane’s wife eventually became a swami.

Thanks Ahisma - I didn’t know that. Looks like I need to keep up with the times more!

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[Sufjon]

Your statement is a bit contradictory here. You are making a declatory statement on who or what possesses truth, while at the same time denying that certain groups have the ability to express the very same thing that you have casually taken for granted. The Catholic Church’s declaration on truth is very different from hinduism and frankly exclusive from it. Now that either makes Hinduism–or Christianity the correct path. But It really can’t be both.

 

[tlimon]

I think the idea of Christ coming again is a very interesting thing. I expect that this event is at a different time and place for each person. I don’t think it will ever be a trans-global event. It’s a one by one thing, or at least that’s my expectation.

Yikes. The implication of this really limits some of the most profound aspects of Catholicism. Humanity has evolved in Christ’s resurrected body. He made a big point of letting people know that He bodily rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. Our resurrected bodies will be much the same. When the resurrection occurs, there will be a “new physics.” The entire dynamic of space and time temporality as we know it will be merged or synthesized into the eternal God. We will be able to ascend and descend (to other planets maybe?), we will be able to walk through walls, and bi-location will be possible (See Padre Pio).

All this happens after Christ’s return. Heaven is not the primary destination for the Christian, the resurrection of the dead is our ultimate hope for which the Eucharist is but a foretaste. As a matter of fact, the Eastern Orthodox believes the liturgy actually takes place outside place and time.

I do agree that there are cycles. Nero was an anti-Christ. Hitler, too, was a kind of anti-Christ. Babylon fell, Babylon has fallen since then, and Babylon will fall again. That said, Catholicism for sure teaches that the play will have a final act. Take care and God bless.

Best Regards,

Thomas

p.s. Don’t feel obligated to respond if you haven’t time. I’m just putting this stuff out there.