PDA

View Full Version : Bhaivishya Purana and Jesus Christ



Adhvagat
03 January 2011, 11:42 AM
I'd like to kindly ask people to read this article:

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/jesus_predicted_in_the_vedic_literature.htm

Do you think the acharya of the Mleccha Dharma is indeed Jesus Christ?

Ramakrishna
03 January 2011, 05:54 PM
Namaste Pietro Impagliazzo,

I have read that article before as well as other sources on the subject. Jesus was not originally mentioned in the Bhavishya Purana or any other Hindu scriptures for that matter.

The Bhavishya Purana is supposed to contain prophecies about the future. However, it has been corrupted and tampered with by Christian missionaries and others. There are several different versions of the text and none of them predate the British rule of India. Missionaries put Jesus in there to try to show that he was in Hinduism and then they would sucker the Indians into converting by saying they need to accept Jesus as their savior or burn in hell.

Jai Sri Ram

Adhvagat
03 January 2011, 06:29 PM
Well... I see some issues with this theory:

Accepting that Jesus is actually the mleccha-dharma bringer puts the whole Christianity below Hinduism (from a Christian POV), because first their avatar who needs whole divinity and for the evangelical sects, needs to be God himself, is only a guru in the parampara of Sanatana Dharma.

This really doesn't sound like conversion material to me... It doesn't make any sense! I repeat, it doesn't make any sense!

Predating or not predating, the issue that the article mentions about British seizing all sanskrit writings may be the cause and it also brings the question: What else was modificated with a malicious intent?

However it was not clear to me if all the differing versions of the Bhaivishya Purana contains the prophecy of Isha Mashiha or not. That asks for further study!

Om Tat Sat

Alise
03 January 2011, 06:53 PM
Namaste,

Go read: http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/features/01-06/features186.htm

Have a nice day,
~Alice

Sahasranama
04 January 2011, 08:02 AM
Well... I see some issues with this theory:

Accepting that Jesus is actually the mleccha-dharma bringer puts the whole Christianity below Hinduism (from a Christian POV), because first their avatar who needs whole divinity and for the evangelical sects, needs to be God himself, is only a guru in the parampara of Sanatana Dharma.

This really doesn't sound like conversion material to me... It doesn't make any sense! I repeat, it doesn't make any sense!

Predating or not predating, the issue that the article mentions about British seizing all sanskrit writings may be the cause and it also brings the question: What else was modificated with a malicious intent?

However it was not clear to me if all the differing versions of the Bhaivishya Purana contains the prophecy of Isha Mashiha or not. That asks for further study!

Om Tat Sat

It does makes sense. What they want to show is that all other religions are inferior and only lead towards Christianity. They claim Jesus was the messiah predicted by the Jews, in this way they can claim that Judaism was leading towards Christianity. In the same way, if they can make Hindus believe that Jesus was predicted as a prophet or messiah in Hinduism, they can say that Hinduism was only leading towards Christianity, so that the words of Jesus should be accepted as final by people of both Judaism and Hinduism. This was the agenda of the Christian indologists. In turn neo-Hindus play the same card against the Christians, trying to show that Christianity is only a branch of Hinduism, they have tried to remodel Jesus just like the indologists tried to remodel Hinduism. Maybe this is a result of their karma.

The best approach for traditional Hindus is just to avoid mingling Jesus, Abraham, Noah, Adam and Eve in Hinduism, because it will ruin our religion, like a drop of poison can ruin a glass of pure ganga water. Some acharyas use this poison only in homeopathic doses, they talk solely of Sanatana Dharma, but still use the name of Jesus to explain it. This is unnecessary nonsense. There is absolutely no reason to use Jesus to explain Sanatana Dharma. Hinduism has its own rich culture and history, we should not have to resort to Christian fables. The names of the important figures of Sanatana Dharma should be chanted every morning right after waking up, this is very auspicious. Hanuman, Vibhishana, Prahlada, Bhishma, Nala, Harishchandra, Yudhistira, Sapta Rishis, Kumaras, Acharyas like Vyasa, Shankara, Ramanuja, avataras of Vishnu, the 12 jyotirlingas, the tirthas, the planets, names of Ganesh and Surya, women like Ahalya, Draupadi, Kunti, Tara, Mandodari and Sita. These names will purify the Hindu, but being infatuated with the name of a mleccha who condems us all to hell will not be auspicious and therefore should be avoided.

Adhvagat
04 January 2011, 09:20 AM
Sahasranama, It's not using Jesus to explain SD, it's investigating if those verses of the Bhaivishya Purana are authentic or not.

It would be the same to say that any of the personalities described there are poisons and shouldn't even be material of puranic research. A little farfetched and heavy on fear for my taste.

And coming to the conclusion that Jesus was indeed predicted in this Purana (after research) will conclude that Christianity is SD for the not so capable and I still have no idea how can this something a Christian would want to admit, maybe it can be used for conversion but maybe only for people who would be converted by anything in the first place. I also don't see how that is "mingling Jesus" with SD.

The text Alisija sent is very good. I'll keep looking for other opinions and writings about it.

Om Tat Sat

Sahasranama
04 January 2011, 09:31 AM
My first paragraph was a response to your topic, my second paragraph was just a rambling on the topic of the use of Christian fables in modern Hinduism.

Adhvagat
04 January 2011, 09:33 AM
Duly noted.

sanjaya
04 January 2011, 09:37 AM
Heh, yeah I've read this before. I've never had a missionary through this one at me. But if he or she did, I wouldn't bother bringing out the facts and arguing. For me a simple "no, I'm not converting" will suffice.

Glad to see, however, that others have done research and exposed this claim for the fraud that it is.

Sahasranama
04 January 2011, 09:58 AM
I agree, I wouldn't be bothered with the Bhavishya Purana. The original Bhavishya Purana has been destroyed. The modern versions only mention "future" events up untill victorion rule over India. I think that says enough. It doesn't matter who did the tampering, missionairies or someone else, it's clear that the purana is not authentic.

sm78
05 January 2011, 03:50 AM
The names of the important figures of Sanatana Dharma should be chanted every morning right after waking up, this is very auspicious. Hanuman, Vibhishana, Prahlada, Bhishma, Nala, Harishchandra, Yudhistira, Sapta Rishis, Kumaras, Acharyas like Vyasa, Shankara, Ramanuja, avataras of Vishnu, the 12 jyotirlingas, the tirthas, the planets, names of Ganesh and Surya, women like Ahalya, Draupadi, Kunti, Tara, Mandodari and Sita. These names will purify the Hindu, but being infatuated with the name of a mleccha who condems us all to hell will not be auspicious and therefore should be avoided.

Very potent advice capable to exorcising the christist ghost for ever from those afflicted, which includes not just common people but so called acharyas, gurus and lofty spiritualists. It is necessary to remember the great men and women of this culture prior to remebering even the gods, so that the foundation is laid correctly.

But I doubt those hindus possessed with the christist 'holy' ghost will heed to this advice. But without this, any amount of spiritual sadhana, meditations, rituals,puja & homas will only intensify the poison and stregthen the ghost.

satay
05 January 2011, 10:03 AM
namaste,
Well, those who accept that hindu scriptures speak of jesus accept the 'authority of the hindu scripture' thus they are themselves Hindu and they should take their rightful place in the hindu dharma. :) They can safely burn whatever scripture they had previously believed in.

Sahasranama
05 January 2011, 10:18 AM
That would be the logical thing to conclude, but I have a feeling that the people who tampered with the bhavishya purana weren't thinking clearly, whoever they might have been. I don't think the purpose of the tampering was meant for people who were already Christians, but only for guilable Hindus. Adding Jesus to the Hindu pantheon was a desperate attempt after other methods of conversion were not succesful among the large population.

OjasM
13 February 2012, 10:23 PM
I have also read about Bhavishya Purana predicting Prophet Muhammad. He is shown in negative light. But is this an original prophecy? There is no possibility that muslim leaders would have crept it.

sorry for the english.

anirvan
14 February 2012, 01:20 AM
I doubt any such puranas predicting future has any authenticity. Any siddha,self realized and drasta of past-present-future will always live in Brahman.and Brahman never reveals any future knowledge to common peoples(except siddhas) because it will never serve any purpose,but brings upon chaos.

The very survival of Human race is depends upon Mystery,uncertainty which is tricks of Prakriti(maya). Otherwise who will run after Illusion,will marry,makes offsprings etc.

Mahapurus/saints never utter a single word without the wish of Brahman,and speaks only the necessity of the particular specific time.not a single word excess or less.

Any Future prediction books must be by some astrologer or some half baked siddhas and un-authentic.Wise should never heed to such things.

Jayaguru

Seeker123
14 February 2012, 01:26 PM
If the future is already written (through prophecies etc.) doesnt it nullify freewill? I subscribe to the view that future events are based on our past Karma but we have free will to affect it.

anirvan
15 February 2012, 02:06 AM
If the future is already written (through prophecies etc.) doesnt it nullify freewill? I subscribe to the view that future events are based on our past Karma but we have free will to affect it.

You are very correct.This is what is called KARMA RAHASYA(secret of karma) By Lord Krisna in BG. Its a very thin line between karma and destiny.Peoples mostly confused about it and sometimes become lazy,sometimes blame the destiny.

Just one small story I heard from my beloved Gurudev will sum it all.

There were two friends,one day one friend called the other to join him to go to a bhagabat katha,but the other one was going to some dance program and asked the first one to join him.but both went to their prior destination.

The person going for bhagabat katha had a accident and broken his leg.and the one going to the dance of female dancers got a bag full of money on the way.

When they united next day,the materialistic friend laughed the foolishness of the devoted friend and showed his money proudly.

The poor devotee gone to a saint nearby and asked about his misery The saint told after seeing the destiny of both that,on that particular day,the devotee was destined to die in accident and the wicked one was destined to be chosen to be a king by one childless old king.

The karma secret is very confusing.some peoples gets success after success without obvious talent/effort,few gets misery only even having continuous effort and supreme talents.

Jayaguru

Satyamavejayante
20 February 2012, 08:47 PM
I have also read about Bhavishya Purana predicting Prophet Muhammad. He is shown in negative light. But is this an original prophecy? There is no possibility that muslim leaders would have crept it.

sorry for the english.

I have that story,
According to Bhavishya purana
Mahamada (Incarnation of Tripurasura the demon) = Dharmadushika (Polluter of righteousness)
Religion founded by Mahamada = Paisachyadharama (demoniac religion)

Its the same with Jesus, they are just looking for something to clarify his existence.

Satyamavejayante
20 February 2012, 08:51 PM
I'd like to kindly ask people to read this article:

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/jesus_predicted_in_the_vedic_literature.htm

Do you think the acharya of the Mleccha Dharma is indeed Jesus Christ?

Mlechha (meaning)
(from Sanskrit dictionary)

म्लेच्छ mleccha

1 A barbarian,a non Aryan ( One not speaking the Sanskrit Language or not conform in to Hindu or Aryan institutions),a foreigner in general

2 An Outcast, a very low man, Bodhayana thus defines the word:
gomAmsakhAdako yastu viruddhaM bahubhAshhate | sarvAchAravihInashcha mlechchha ityabhidhiiyate |
He who eats cow’s meat, and speaks a lot against shastras and he, who is also devoid of all forms of spiritual practice, is called a mlechha.

3 A sinner, A wicked person, A savage or barbarian race

That fits the character of Jesus perfectly.

Moonlight
21 February 2012, 04:32 AM
What are rules on Miracles in hinduism?
Jesus always used them to prove something so he isn't a buddhist cause the Buddha forbid any form of supernatural powers from his followers.

http://reluctant-messenger.com/gospel_buddha/chapter_42.htm

just forbidding Miracles will exspose any religions who has a leader who used powers to build there own religion.

PARAM
21 February 2012, 06:18 AM
Dharma Granths are always used to misprint and take Hindus to believe in something Adharm. Islam and Christianity both maha Adharm are taking their black shadow to fight against Dharma. Christianity was made with all wrong means and forced on Hindu pagans. Islam itself occurred and destroyed Dharma to spread Adharma.

Some Christians take peace and love to only show but Muslims are showing peace only where they are very much minor in population and they throw away their peace once they cross even 2% of the population, Islamic terror is established where Muslims form even 5% of total population. Christianity only take their population and force on others with heavy penalties but lose at every direction and only use fake issues to malign Hindu leaders. In the name of God Islam follows Pishach and Christians follow Asuras.

Jainarayan
21 February 2012, 09:00 AM
This is all my opinion...

Christianity was meant for the Jews of the time; Islam for the Arabians of the time. It was not meant for Hindus, Buddhists; Jains, Sikhs, Zoroastrians, Baha'i, Shinto, etc.

Some of what Jesus said makes sense: do not judge others, love others, have faith and trust in God, do not put trust inthe material world, and so on. Those are not bad things. But the aforementioned faiths and belief systems already knew (though Baha'i came in the 19th century) the way to God. Hinduism knew it for over 5,000 years, probably longer. Hinduism doesn't need Christianity. Rather, I daresay Christianity needs a healthy injection of Hinduism, like a massive B-12 shot.

Again just my opinion and belief: Jesus is not an avatar of God nor svayam bhagavan, as Christians believe, if I'm using the term correctly in context. If anything Jesus spoke things relevant to the Jews of his day who needed to be slapped down and brought back into line and into true faith in God.

There's no need to have exported Christianity outside the bounds of the Middle East, except maybe to the savage and decadent Roman Empire. Even then it seems to have made things worse. Having been raised and lived as a Christian, I know first-hand how vicious and hypocritical "Christians" can be, especially those who take clerical vows.

PARAM
21 February 2012, 09:16 AM
Christianity was meant as a Religion for the supporters of Jesus, some of what Jesus said does makes sense but all of his words came from Hinduism, this makes Christianity a religion that was corrupted

Islam was never a religion but a terror spread on the name of Allah and based on the belief of Sex and Wine in Jannat. Islam means submit or die i.e. submit to Muhammad or die, and this was accepted as a divine way to destroy innocents.

Hinduism is the origin and core of everything, Dharma Granthas give all the details of what to do and what not to do. No hate against others and no support to Adharm.

This makes Christianity a Religion, Islam Terrorism, but Hinduism the Way of Life.

Jainarayan
21 February 2012, 09:29 AM
...but all of his words came from Hinduism, this makes Christianity a religion that was corrupted...

I absolutely believe and subscribe to this. I forgot to mention it here, though I've mentioned it elsewhere. He taught nothing new, only to a new audience. What he taught was said at least 1,000 years early by Lord Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita. What I also believe is that if his intentions were good, it was his followers who corrupted it... they just didn't get it, and still don't.

Now, this may not sit well with some, but if Hindus had proselytized and evangelized, instead of the Christians and Muslims (who probably wouldn't exist if Hindus had proselytized) maybe the world would be a happier and more peaceful place.