Does Dvaita lead to the same goal as Christianity?

[philosoraptor]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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,