PDA

View Full Version : Does Dvaita lead to the same goal as Christianity?



Seeker123
31 May 2012, 02:53 PM
Namaste,

In Christianity the goal is to go to Heaven after death and live separately with God. In what way does this goal differ from the goal of a Dvaitin (ofcourse after making allowance for reincarnation)? I dont want to get into a discussion on different Hindu philosophies.

Thank you,

ZarryT
31 May 2012, 03:12 PM
Is it not ultimately the same goal as every religion, with slightly varying parameters concerning 'heaven'?

Some might argue that the chief goal is to reach an understanding of the process and mechanic of this activity of 'life', so that we may escape the game only to return to it with a greater, richer and more exciting understanding.

philosoraptor
31 May 2012, 03:15 PM
I can't speak for Dvaita specifically. But I would say that, from the standpoint of bhakti-based, Hindu traditions, there are numerous differences with Christianity. Here are a few thoughts.

1) Acceptance of apaurusheya-agamas as authority on right knowledge, as opposed to authored works in Christianity (the Bible). Even Puranas and Itihasas are accepted only to the extent that they don't contradict Vedas.

2) Importance of understanding the difference between one's self and one's body as a prerequisite for God-realization (see chapters 2-5 of the Gita) whereas this point is totally ignored in Christianity. Note that, if you understand how the self is non-material, it becomes easier to understand how Brahman/God is non-material, so this is by no means a minor point.

3) Brahman/God in shruti is an entity with a divine form, all-pervading, yet always immune to the effects of matter. In Christianity, Jesus is God in human form who takes a body made up of flesh and suffers for humanity's sins. This idea of the omnipotent God taking a material body of flesh and blood and being tortured would not be acceptable to any Vaishnavas I have met.

4) Also, it's not entirely true that the goal is to "go to Heaven after death." Many Vaishnavas say (and with support from the bhAgavata purANa and viShNu purANa) that the goal is to develop the uninterrupted mood of wanting to constantly serve Him with no ulterior motive. It's just that, when the Lord has nothing left to offer the devotee, He then offers moksha which consists of bringing the devotee into His personal presence in param padam.

5) For goal of Dvaita (or any Vaishnava-vedAnta school) to be same as goal of Christianity, one would have to assert that the Brahman of Vedaanta is the same as the Jehovah of Christianity. I don't believe this for a second. The "God" of Christianity is (by his own words) a jealous god who punishes people for worshipping other deities and demands unquestioning obedience. Compare and contrast to Sri Krishna in the Gita who, although maintaining there was a correct path and an incorrect path, gave Arjuna the freedom to choose what he would do.

regards,

philosoraptor

charitra
31 May 2012, 04:25 PM
Admin should move the thread to christianity.

grames
01 June 2012, 03:27 AM
Hi.,

Just my few cents...

Every theistic philosophy has to have same Goal ( One God and multiple sentients). But doesn't mean all philosophies have the clarity on the relationship between God, Sentients and inert at the same level.

Dvaita or TattvaVada has lot more clarity on the relationship and nature of these three entities along with the natural, eternal differences between these three. The goal of only one sentient nature is attaining the association of personal form of God ( Mukthi Yogya - Qualified for attaining the Mukthi) and for the rest, there is no such goal.

OTOH, in Christianity there is no such clarity and it is a layman version of Saranagathi (Complete surrender and blind faith due to layman version) and Dvaita or any vaishnava schools, such blind surrender is not encouraged or even considered something that will give results. Knowing him and then Knowing HIM are the two step before the process of "surrender" happens and that is the major difference as well as greater strength of Dvaita and Vaishnava schools.

Hare Krshna!

wundermonk
01 June 2012, 04:20 AM
Does Dvaita lead to the same goal as Christianity?


"Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet."

Seeker123
01 June 2012, 08:37 AM
Namaste Philosoraptor and grames,

Thank you, you makesound points on why DVaita is better. You have shed some light.

Namaste CHaritra,

I don't belive in Universal ideas like all religions lead to same goal. While I can clearly see that the ADvaita goal is very different from dualistic CHristianity I could not say the same for DVaita. Hence my question if the final liberation is the same for DVaita and CHristianity and whether one can attain that following either approaches.

shiv.somashekhar
04 June 2012, 02:47 AM
Namaste,

In Christianity the goal is to go to Heaven after death and live separately with God. In what way does this goal differ from the goal of a Dvaitin (ofcourse after making allowance for reincarnation)? I dont want to get into a discussion on different Hindu philosophies.

Thank you,

There is no Dvaita scripture (or Christian scripture) that equates the two.

In the absence of such an identity, we would simply be speculating.

Seeker123
04 June 2012, 01:22 PM
There is no Dvaita scripture (or Christian scripture) that equates the two.

Doesnt have to. The Dvaitin may define liberation as going to Heaven and being with Vishnu while the Christian may define liberation as going to Heaven and being with Christ. The Universalist comes and says Vishnu=Christ=God; so liberation is the same for both they are just taking different paths. How will a Dvaitin challenge that view was my question.

shiv.somashekhar
04 June 2012, 06:26 PM
Doesnt have to. The Dvaitin may define liberation as going to Heaven and being with Vishnu while the Christian may define liberation as going to Heaven and being with Christ. The Universalist comes and says Vishnu=Christ=God; so liberation is the same for both they are just taking different paths. How will a Dvaitin challenge that view was my question.

The Dvaitin will reject the claim of Christ = Vishnu for lack of evidence. That is, such a claim has no basis in tattvavada (dvaita) scripture. Tattvavada is also clear that there is only one path to Vishnu and that is the path of Madhva. All other paths, including those of other Vaishnavas, will not lead to Vishnu.

Similarly, a Christian would reject such a claim as it is not founded in the Bible. Per the Bible, Vishnu is a false God and hence, is not Christ.

philosoraptor
04 June 2012, 08:00 PM
All other paths, including those of other Vaishnavas, will not lead to Vishnu.


I know Maadhvas who say that. But I wonder if there is anything in the writings of Madhva himself which indicates that - i.e. no other Vaishnavas will go back to Vishnu.

shiv.somashekhar
04 June 2012, 08:25 PM
I know Maadhvas who say that. But I wonder if there is anything in the writings of Madhva himself which indicates that - i.e. no other Vaishnavas will go back to Vishnu.

The only other mainstream Vaishnava doctrine - vishishtadvaita was in existence during the time of Madhva and he specifically criticized their understanding too (I may be able to find some specific references later). Per Madhva, though they are Vaishnavas, their understanding is incorrect and by this logic, it woud mean they cannot reach Vishnu.

Also, if Madhva admitted correctness of existing doctrines, then he would have trouble justifying the creation of a whole new doctrine and sampradaya.

Later Gurus from his line, like the prominent Vadiraja tirtha, make explicit statements on the exclusive correctness of their doctrine. Recently, Dr.Sharma (dvaita scholar) wrote a book comparing and contrasting the three pominent vedanta doctrines.

philosoraptor
04 June 2012, 08:41 PM
No doubt he criticized Vishishtadvaita, but I am interested in seeing explicit statements to the effect of other Vaishnavas are on the wrong path or going to hell or whatever. I wouldn't mind seeing those from Vadiraja Tirtha if you have them.

I know that Vishishtadvaitins criticize Dvaita also, but they don't seem as insistent on the idea that other Vaishnavas can't also go back to Vishnu.

grames
05 June 2012, 07:37 AM
:) Interesting but the topic is diverting here.

Shri madacharya never in fact "Criticized" the other Vaishnava schools as he knows very well the nature and grace that Lord vishnu showers on all those who surrender to Him. Even philosophically, TatvaVada simplified the view of Vishnu's Supermacy and relationship in the view of "differences" as the basis whereas VA gives the view of "relationship" in terms of "attachment". ( Advaita in VA is nothing to do with "monism" though most forced to believe in that way including some Dvaitins)

A good point to note here is, no Vedantin including Dvaitin will accept some random idea as truth unless otherwise it can be proven by the accepted ways of providing proof. ( Scriptural evidence is only one of them and not just everything)

Christianity in fact does not have much information about Christ Himself and drawing any parallel with our great imagination is insult to our Veda and Vedanta. Viewing christianity as a superficially simplified Vaishnava Theism is possible ( in fact, all the events, thoughts, idea that are narrated in Bible resembles the story of Krshna and Creation as per Vishnu Purana).

Christianity is Theism and as i sated earlier, all theistic belief have to have only one aim but clarity of that AIM makes the belief, practice and faith very different. The Goal may be same... but why, what, how, for who, when and with what are all light years different between Christianity and TattvaVada.

( Note: Shri Madvacharya's exclusive path or ekayanamarga is to surrender Lord Vishnu and also whom can surrender is his unique contribution ( only a MukthiYogya) and in that sense, he couldn't have said anything like anyone else who surrender to Lord Vishnu are not capable of being MuktiYogya or can attain the Goal or ParamaPada)

Seeker
05 June 2012, 11:15 AM
Vaikuntha & heaven are not the same , though translations may lead you to think so. Christian heaven is viewed as a place of beauty ,peace and wealth with entry permitted only for 144000 souls (revelation 7). It mostly pleases the senses that we know on earth.

Islamic heaven is simply a well organized brothel where men never lose libido.

With the nature of God being different (Mr Phil explained that) , and heaven being different , I would not equate Christianity same as Dvaithic , though translations might lead you to think so.

wundermonk
05 June 2012, 01:15 PM
Vaikuntha & heaven are not the same , though translations may lead you to think so. Christian heaven is viewed as a place of beauty ,peace and wealth with entry permitted only for 144000 souls (revelation 7). It mostly pleases the senses that we know on earth.

Islamic heaven is simply a well organized brothel where men never lose libido.

With the nature of God being different (Mr Phil explained that) , and heaven being different , I would not equate Christianity same as Dvaithic , though translations might lead you to think so.

+1

There is no comparison between ANY Hindu Darshana and anything that originated in the Middle East.

This should really not be that difficult to understand. Hinduism pre-dates the non-existent Adam and Eve and their fall from grace!

philosoraptor
09 June 2012, 03:31 PM
True, but if you go by logic there can be only creator (God) - is it not? The key point though (as you also imply) is that not all paths lead to that God, some paths meander.

Well, for argument's sake, how do you know that the Judeo-Christian deity is in fact God(Brahman)? As opposed to say, another entity (yaksha, raakshasa, deva, etc) impersonating God? Bear in mind that, according to the testimony of the Old Testament, the alleged "miracles" that were done by "God" could have been done by any deva or yaksha from what we know of them from scripture. And the Judeo-Christian god indulges in other behaviors which seem completely out of character for the Brahman we know from the Gita and Upanishads. For example, the Judeo-Christian god is racist - he picks the Hebrews as his "chosen people" while visiting plagues and all sorts of suffering on the Egyptians. He cannot tolerate any other form of worship, which is why he orders Moses to kill the golden calf worshippers. Compare and contrast this to what Sri Krishna says about anya-devata worship in chapters 7 and 9 of the Gita. Sri Krishna is very clear that worship of other devas leads to the temporary worlds of those other devas, and that such worship is really worship of Him albeit done in a wrong way/wrong understanding. But He never says that they will go to Hell and suffer. Nor does He order Arjuna to kill non-Vaishnavas simply because they are not Vaishnavas.

There are, in the Puraanas, a lot of references to the creation of false religions that will occur in Kali-Yuga. Some new-age Hindu people really want to believe that Christianity is just another valid form of spirituality, but objective examination of Judeo-Christian philosophy as revealed in their scriptures makes this very difficult to sustain. It is for this reason, I suspect, that ANS has to claim that all of those "jealous God" references have to be re-interpreted (in total defiance of the history of how they were understood for centuries).

regards,