Originally Posted by
Satay
Could you please share with us the context of these quotes?
Namaste Satay,
The context of the whole Bible is the relation of ‘yahva’ and ‘yeSu’.
The context of Psalms 18 and 19 is the singer dAva (agni) or dAvat (“giving”) offering praise to the chief musician (yahvI or rodasI or iLA ~ i.e. vAc ~ or to yahvaH, who is agni himself).
Originally Posted by
Satay
I don’t see how this quote means David is asking for ‘enlightenment’ i.e. the realization that ‘he is GOD’!
It is not possible to realize identity with God by asking for anything.
David composed Psalm 18 on the day of his deliverance from all his enemies, and the greatest ‘enemy’ of every mortal being is the consuming darkness of death.
From Psalm 18:
I will call upon the Lord, who is worthy to be praised: so shall I be saved from mine enemies.
The sorrows of death compassed me, and the floods of ungodly men made me afraid.
The sorrows of hell compassed me about: the snares of death prevented me.
Then the channels of waters were seen, and the foundations of the world were discovered at thy rebuke, O Lord, at the blast of the breath of thy nostrils.
He sent from above, he took me, he drew me out of many waters.
He delivered me from my strong enemy, and from them which hated me: for they were too strong for me.
They prevented me in the day of my calamity: but the Lord was my stay.
He brought me forth also into a large place; he delivered me, because he delighted in me.
For thou wilt light my candle: the Lord my God will enlighten my darkness.
For by thee I have run through a troop; and by my God have I leaped over a wall.
As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the Lord is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.
It is God that girdeth me with strength, and maketh my way perfect.
He maketh my feet like hinds’ feet, and setteth me upon my high places.
Thou hast also given me the shield of thy salvation: and thy right hand hath holden me up, and thy gentleness hath made me great.
Thou hast enlarged my steps under me, that my feet did not slip.
I have pursued mine enemies, and overtaken them: neither did I turn again till they were consumed.
He delivereth me from mine enemies: yea, thou liftest me up above those that rise up against me: thou hast delivered me from the violent man.
Great deliverance giveth he to his king; and sheweth mercy to his anointed, to David, and to his seed for evermore.
From Psalm 19 (the jihva of dAva praising the vAc of yahva):
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.
Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.
There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.
Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,
Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.
The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes.
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, my strength, and my redeemer.
The nature of this enlightenment is more explicitly revealed as the Bible unfolds.
Psalm 18 ~ “the lord my god will enlighten my darkness”
What darkness will be enlightened?
Psalm 19 ~ “the commandment of the lord is pure, enlightening the eyes”
The darkness of my eyes?
Ephesians 1 ~ “the eyes of your understanding being enlightened”
The darkness of the eyes of my understanding.
The nature of the darkness is clear, but what is the nature of the enlightenment?
Ephesians 1 ~ “that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints”
So enlightenment involves knowledge of “the glory of his inheritance in the saints”.
And Jesus instructed his disciples to follow his proven way to the Father, but very few have actually done that, and those who have are now counted as Saints.
The understanding of the Saint and the understanding of those who worship (but not imitate) the Saint are very different things.
Ephesians 1 ~ “that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him”
“The glory of his inheritance in the saints” is “the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him” (i.e. of God).
And, the “spirit of wisdom” and “revelation of knowledge” is described:
Ephesians 1 ~ “the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, and what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come.
And Hebrews 6 provides more details of the enlightened ones, who “have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the holy ghost, and have tasted the good word of god, and the powers of the world to come”.
The Rgveda includes more than a thousand hymns, and every one is (at least figuratively) spoken by a RSi to a devatA, and the process of sacrifice operates (and can only be spoken of) in such a dualistic frame, but the ultimate aim is a spiritual union and a successful conclusion cannot be attained without unity ~ and the unifying process is a spiritual communion, which demands (and simultaneously confers) an absolute unity of spirit.
The path of bhakti (“division or sharing” or “worship or devotion”) is inevitably divided, but in the end it merges with the path of jñAna, which itself began amid the mAyA of dvaitam and only ends when the satyam of advaitam is actually attained (not merely held as a theory, but truly experienced as a fact).
Originally Posted by
Satay
‘Hinduism’ is one such EVIL force in the context of christianity, as it tempts the man away from GOD by saying, “man you yourself are GOD but have forgotten your real nature due to maya”.
And Jesus instructed his disciples to follow his proven way to the Father, but very few have actually done that, and those who have are now counted as Saints.
The understanding of the Saint and the understanding of those who worship (but not imitate) the Saint are very different things.
If ‘Hinduism’ is ‘EVIL’ for this reason, then ‘Jesus’ must equally be regarded as ‘EVIL’, having remembered his true nature as nArAyaNa, the son of nara, and the veritable right hand of nara-nArAyaNa (the twin yahvyau, uniting heaven and earth).
Originally Posted by
Saidevo
Does Christianity really teach Advaita?
Similarly, one could ask whether Hinduism really teaches Advaita. And the answer would depend on the particular texts selected for consideration, and on the particular philosophical viewpoint one adopted while interpreting those texts.
When you say “Christianity”, do you mean the English interpretation propagated by Protestant Christianity (which itself comes in very many shades), or the Latin interpretation of Catholic Christianity, or the Greek and Aramaic interpretations of the various Orthodox Churches, or the Essene interpretation, or an interpretation based only on the Gospels, or an interpretation based on the surviving words attributed to Jesus himself ?
Originally Posted by
Satay
Redemption, as “deliverance from sin” (redeeming immortal life by the submission of mortal life), is the same idea as moksha (release from the bondage of reincarnation), which equally involves the extinguishing of all personal karma and the absolute submission of one’s mortal life to the one divine essence of immortal Life.
‘redeeming immortal life by the submission of mortal life’ ... yes, I get that ... But what’s the purpose in the Christian context of this ‘immortal’ life?
The purpose of the ‘immortal life’ as I understand is to be ‘in service’ to God, to ‘spend’ this immortal life in the ‘presence of God’ or ‘at his feet’ ~ NOT to ‘be GOD’ as in moksha ... merging back to the source!
While yet possessed of a mortal body, the spiritual ‘purpose’ of life is in the service of God and regular communion with God, dwelling always in his presence, so to speak.
The exact degree of distinction maintained by a disembodied jIva in the presence of brahma has always been a matter of great debate, and the various schools of Hindu philosophy would all offering differing opinions.
And likewise in Christianity, but if the path of yeSu is taken as the archetype of kRSTaya dharma, then surely the conclusion of his path is an eternally restful and blissful existence in absolute unity with God (or at least equivalence with the “hand” of God, who, being ultimately ekapAt, is entirely known by identity with just one limb).
If a myriad of separate eternal spirits are imagined, forever separated both from one another and from the one eternal spirit of God, all resting in a heaven that is distinct from their various selves, then we have innumerable rivals for God-head ~ and dvaitavAda par excellence.
But what do the words of Jesus tell us of such an eternal separation from God, and what does his own example teach us? I can see no evidence for dvaitavAda in the teaching of Jesus Christ, but throughout this thread I have not particularly considered the exact nature of Jesus’ advaitavAda (which includes various streams, from ajAtivAda to vishiSTAdvaitavAda).
To my mind, the whole story already appeared in Hindu scripture long before the supposed historical events, so no particular person or true historical events are actually required to explain it.
Originally Posted by
Saidevo
I have some doubts and questions about this text of yours. If you don't mind, you might add more clarity to them:
1. Which Hindu scripture gives ‘the whole story’ about the birth of Christianity?
Since the very beginning of this thread, I have been trying to show that the story of Christianity (which includes both the Old and New Testaments, related in a similar manner to the veda and vedAnta of Hinduism) is largely repeated from saMskRta themes, but in an independently elaborated apabhraMsa ‘translation’. And whether nArAyaNa (yeSu), in heaven, is considered as absolutely identical with nara (yahva), or sitting on the right hand of nara, or running in circles with nara on his head, it makes little difference to the overall story.
Re: muSAya moSIs
Re: Extrapolating Christianity--to What End?
Re: Extrapolating Christianity--to What End?
Bookmarks