Search:
Bhakti List Archives

Re: letters from Krish@astro.ge.com in gen and Re: Isvaran in particul

From the Bhakti List Archives

Mani Varadarajan • October 2, 1995 


I wish to comment on a few points made by Jay Bharadwaj:

Jay writes:
* The assumptions made by Dileepan and
* others who post articles quoting Acharyas is that the readers are aware
* that Acharyas are realized souls and therefore do not make mistakes since
* Bhagavan "preserves what they have and Carries what they lack".  What they
* say is no different from Sri Krishna talking to us.  

I do not think this is an assumption we can easily make. Due respect
must be given to Sri Azhagiya Singar and the Swami's predecessors,
since they are men of great learning, but why should we not question
them? Questioning is a vital part of religious inquiry. They are not
perfect beings simply because they are Saranagatas.  Since we do not
believe in any concept of jIvanmukti, these swamis are humans and
susceptible to error just as much as we are.

There is a definite distinction between the words of Krishna and
the word of Sri Azhagiya Singar.

* Opinions expressed on
* this bulletin board that violate this basic assumption is about as
* valuable to the serious seeker of God as that of a frog croaking to a
* seeker of classical music.

Is this not a bit too harsh?

* The word Christ (as applied to God the father) comes from the
* Greek word Christos which means God and which etymologically is the same
* as the Sanskrit word Krishta which is another (though little used) name
* for Krishna. 

"Krishna"/"Krishta" and "Christos" are in no way etymologically related, as
any linguist will tell you.  First of all, Christos is *never* used
with respect to God the Father, because Christ specifically refers to
the Lord incarnate as the Son.  Christ means Savior, since according
to Christianity, Jesus the Christ is the savior of humankind.

Christianity and Islam are *not* branches of Vaishnavism; they are
very different independent religions, though they are all inspired
by the same God. So is Saivism; it is just religion in a different
form.

Vaishnavites should have no quarrel with Saivas, Christians, or Muslims
on the basis of religious belief, since "sarvadeva-namaskaaram
keSavam pratigacchati".

Mani