Jesus in India

[sridatta]

Jesus Christ came to India and He was honoured by Indians. He wandered all over India and several Indians were attracted to His shrewd preaching given with excellent analysis. He lived up to 85 years of age and was buried in Kashmir with all the spiritual honour. Hindus treated Him as their own preacher.

Similarly, Christians honoured Swami Vivekananada and His preaching was appreciated. Christians loved Him from the bottom of their hearts. They treated Him as their beloved preacher. No two religions can mix so fast and so homogeneously as Christianity and Hinduism.

The reason for this is that the spiritual skeleton of both religions is one and the same. When the skeleton is similar, the flesh and the skin cannot make much difference between two bodies. Any two living beings belonging to the same category [species] may differ by the quantity of flesh and colour of the skin but the skeleton is the same. The common spiritual framework of the two religions is the concept of the human incarnation.

The Gita says “Manusheem Tanumaasritam”, which means that God enters a human body. Similarly, the Christian scripture says “God in flesh”. The God who is mentioned in both the religions is one and the same. The flesh may differ qualitatively and quantitatively. The Christian flesh may be richer in proteins and the Hindu flesh may be richer in vitamins.

The composition of flesh may differ a little. The Christian skin may be white and the Hindu skin may be black. These differences are only external. Both Christians and Hindus should understand the same concept. Both may have external differences but the internal casual body or Karana Sharira which is called as Atman or soul is one and the same. The gross bodies may differ in flesh and skin.

The inner subtle body may also differ due to different proportions of the qualities. But the souls are one and the same. Thus, both of you [Hindus and Christians] should find the homogeneity in the souls of each other. If you cannot appreciate the uniformity at this basic level itself, how can you find the uniformity between Krishna and Jesus?
In both these human incarnations, God is one and the same. In both incarnations, God is surrounded by the casual body, which is the pure awareness. This casual body is also one and the same in both cases. The difference may be in the subtle and gross bodies. The gross bodies of Jesus and Krishna might differ in colour.

The composition of their flesh also may be different. When you compare the subtle bodies of Jesus and Krishna there is a difference. In fact, any subtle body is made of three qualities called Sattvam (good qualities), Rajas (qualities of ego) and Tamas (qualities of ignorance). In fact, all these three are equal in proportions and exist in equilibrium.
But the equilibrium appears to have been disturbed. The inequality is only in expression or vision. In the case of Jesus, Sattvam was fully expressed. The other two were hidden. An exactly similar human incarnation in Hinduism is Lord Rama who is the embodiment of all good qualities alone.

A branch in Hinduism called as the Vaishnava cult, worships Lord Vishnu alone as God. Lord Vishnu is representative of Sattvam. Lord Brahma represents Rajas and Lord Shiva represents Tamas. They [The Vaishnavas] do not consider Brahma and Shiva as God.

Christianity, Buddhism, Jainism and Islam can be treated similar to the Vaishnava cult. The impression about God in general is that He is the embodiment of all the auspicious and good qualities only. It is easy to love God associated with good qualities.

All parents love their sons if they are good. Such love is great. But a greater love is that in which one loves the son having both good and bad qualities. Such an expression of the mixture of the three qualities, is seen in Lord Krishna. The greatest love is that in which one loves the son even though he has only bad qualities. Such an expression of bad qualities is seen in Lord Datta.

Bad Qualitites in God

The introduction of a bad quality in God cannot be generally digested by the majority of people. God created this universe. In that case, God alone created all the qualities [good and bad]. God created even Satan. The Gita says that God created all the three qualities (Ye Chaiva…). The writer of the story of a movie creates the role of a villain in the story. The producer of the film gives remuneration to the actor who does the role of the villain as well as the hero.
The audience will be bored without the role of the villain in the cinema. A person who eats food is also bored if the food is just sweet and there are no salty and spicy dishes in the food along with the sweet. Day has no meaning without night. Summer is boring without winter. Goodness itself cannot be recognised without the bad. Therefore, the creation of contrast is essential.

If one realises this concept, no hatred or anger can rise in his heart. Anger or hatred is generally towards the bad qualities. If you consider the Lord as the creator and maintainer of the entire universe and if you treat the universe as the body of the cosmic Lord, you have to accept that both bad and good qualities are in the body of the Lord.

If you say that the body of the Lord contains only good qualities, then only a little part of the cosmos would have been created and maintained by the Lord because good qualities are very few compared to the bad qualities in this universe. The region occupied by good qualities is very less compared to the region occupied by bad qualities.
There is a difference between the bad qualities in the Lord and the bad qualities in a demon. A demon uses the bad qualities to trouble devotees and good people, which lead to the disturbance of world peace. But the bad qualities in the Lord are used to test hypocritical devotees who boast that they are the topmost devotees. By such hypocrisy, ego develops in them and they fall.

To prevent such fall, the Lord conducts tests so that they will realise their true positions. For such tests, bad qualities are utilised. Thus, the bad qualities of the Lord are the means for delivering this spiritual preaching. When a stone falls on you, it is not your fault. But if you jump on the stone [and get injured], you are responsible.
Similarly, when a demon comes to you and shows his bad qualities and disturbs you, you are not responsible. But when you go to Lord Datta and want to develop in the spiritual line, you have to be constantly tested and in such occasions, Lord Datta exhibits bad qualities to test your faith in Him. You can find fault with the demon but not with Lord Datta.

When somebody throws a stone on you, you can find fault with him. But when you yourself jump on the stone and break your limbs, you cannot find fault with anybody. Lord Datta did not come to you. You have gone to Datta. In fact, when you approach Datta, He threatens you in the beginning itself and tries to throw you out.
But you have clung to Him and have constantly pestered Him for salvation. The sages pestered the Lord for salvation. The Lord agreed and gave them the birth of Gopikas in Vrindavanam. He stole their hard earned wealth, which was butter.

By this He broke their bond with wealth. For us it appears as if the Lord cheated them and stole their wealth. But if you analyse their previous birth and their request, this act is perfectly justified. In fact, this act is done due to extensive grace of the Lord. The Lord is criticised as a thief and acquired bad name for the sake of the Gopikas. He tolerated all this negative criticism for the sake of the sages [Gopikas]. The Lord had not even a trace of need to steal their wealth.

The Lord attracted their children and played with them, doing a lot of mischief. This cuts the bonds of the Gopikas with their children. Again this brings a bad name to the Lord because it appears that the Lord spoiled their children. In fact, the Lord does not spoil anybody. Thus again this act is the extreme grace of the Lord alone. The Lord danced with the Gopikas at midnight without the knowledge of their husbands. This is the climax of sin.

The Lord is criticised extensively for this act and is called as the greatest sinner. People blame the Lord for this. In fact, He has no desire even to look at any lady. The Lord is the Infinite Ocean of bliss. He does not require any external object to gain happiness. The Veda says that the Lord has no desire, which is not fulfilled (Apta Kamah…).
Such a Lord got eternally defamed in this world. Several devotees doubted the divinity of Lord Krishna due to this. Even the greatest devotee like Hanuman criticised Krishna for such an act. The actual reason for the Lord to act in this way is that the Lord broke the bonds of the Gopikas with their husbands. When the bonds with wealth, children and husbands or wives are fully broken, salvation is complete.

For the sake of salvation of the sages, Lord Krishna sacrificed even His name and fame. This shows the unimaginable love of God towards His devotees. Without understanding this background, ignorant people criticise Lord Krishna. Even Lord Jesus patiently suffered all the negative criticism and all sorts of insults to protect His devotees. This shows the divine love of Jesus.

Jesus kept silent in the court when He was charged with so many crimes. The silence shows His deep love towards His devotees. Due to such silence alone did the judge order crucifixion. Unless the crucifixion was implemented, He could not have suffered for the sins of His devotees. Thus, the Lord tolerates anything, even things which damage His personality for the sake of His devotees. Due to the crucifixion, devotees misunderstood Jesus and criticised Him as incapable. Here, the firm faith of the devotees was tested.

Testing Devotees

Similarly, Lord Krishna or Datta tests devotees by exhibiting bad qualities. Several devotees misunderstood Krishna for this dance and thus the depth of their faith was exhibited. Lord Datta came as a human incarnation in Punjab by the name Ramlal. Ramlal stayed in a village and attracted all the devotees by His divine knowledge and miracles. When He was finally leaving the village, all the villagers followed Him stating that they could not live without Him.

They said that Ramlal was their very life and entire love. Then Ramlal stood for some time and smiled. He asked the villagers whether they could accept Him as the husband of their wives. Ninty percent of the villagers scolded Him and returned. Only ten percent accepted the statement of Ramlal and followed Him sincerely. Ramlal was extremely pleased with them and gave them full divine knowledge and assured them that He would protect them always.

The word ‘husband’ in Sanskrit is translated as ‘Bharta’ which actually means the maintainer and protector. Ramlal used the word in that sense. But people took the word in another sense and were misled. The ego of the husbands was touched. They boasted of their extreme love for Ramlal and that they could sacrifice anything or anybody for the sake of Lord Ramlal.

Ramlal knew exactly the item, which they could never sacrifice—their bond with their wives. Thus, Ramlal exposed the hypocrisy in devotion. He used the word in different sense and tested their faith and sacrifice. The only protector and maintainer is the Lord. Thus, the Lord is the only husband for all the souls in this world. The difference between a male and female is only in the external gross body. The soul is the same in the gross body of a male or female.
[Some devotee from USA asked Me to analyse the philosophy of Osho.]

I think that Osho pleads for freedom in the love of even married human beings. He pleads that secret contacts are wrong. He says that even illegal contacts should be frankly spoken out. This concept is wrong in two stages. In the first stage the illegal contact itself is wrong. In the second stage, when the other partner [whose partner has cheated him or her] comes to know of the illegal contact, the other partner undergoes unimaginable agony.

To do a sin is one mistake. To hurt the heart of any human being is another mistake. It is a double sin and such a soul, whether male or female will be punished twice in hell. According to the old ethical scripture of Hinduism, a red-hot copper statue of the person with whom the illegal contact was done is placed before the sinner and he or she will be forced to embrace it.

The attitude differs from one culture to another. The villain stole Helen of Troy. Helen led a family life with the villain. When Helen returned, she again had a normal family life with the hero. But when Ravana stole Sita, Sita did not even look at Ravana. Therefore, there is a vast difference in the cultures of the East and the West in the root itself. I do not criticise or praise any culture. But even Jesus did not agree to any such illegal contacts of any married human being. He criticised even prostitution. Thus, the field of Pravritti is one and the same in view of God, whether it is East or West. Therefore, this again proves that God is one and the same.

Now the point of Lord Krishna comes for analysis. The field of Nivritti is completely different. As analysed above, the background was completely different. The meaning of the act was totally different. The act was done by the request of the soul. The act means the breakage of bonds and the complete liberation of the soul. The act does not mean any secret dealing to pacify blind lust. The Lord has no trace of such a necessity. The Lord did this act only in Vrindavanam and only in the case of the Gopikas. After leaving the Vrindavanam, He never repeated this with any other soul.

Universal Spirituality for World Peace

[brunumb]

[Replying to sridatta in post #1]

So, what is the subject that is up for debate?

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to sridatta in post #1]

So, what is the subject that is up for debate?

How about: "Christians, are you going to swallow that even for an instant?"

[1213]

Jesus Christ came to India and He was honoured by Indians. He wandered all over India and several Indians were attracted to His shrewd preaching given with excellent analysis. He lived up to 85 years of age and was buried in Kashmir with all the spiritual honour. ...

Why do you believe that?

[sridatta]

[Replying to sridatta in post #1]

So, what is the subject that is up for debate?

How about: "Christians, are you going to swallow that even for an instant?"

Let us analyse it. Some people say Jesus resurrected. What do you mean by resurrection? If it means rising from the dead, there is no problem in saying that Jesus was resurrected after three days. There are different versions of the life of Jesus. As per one version, Jesus died on being crucified and rose from the dead again. Then, after His resurrection, He travelled to India and lived for many decades, during which He interacted with many Indian philosophers. Finally, at the age of 85 years, the inevitable death of His mortal body took place and the tomb of Jesus exists in the Himalayas, even today. There is no audio-video recording of the life of Jesus which can be treated to be the accurate record of His life. Whatever most people think is true about the life of Jesus is also one of the versions, which is based on someone’s writings. But it is also claimed that the writings of the disciples of Jesus have been modified by the Church.

In that case, all the various versions regarding the life of Jesus have an equal probability of being true. We can accept any version that does not conflict the divinity and spiritual knowledge of Jesus. If the version that Jesus lived in India after His resurrection is bringing Hinduism and Christianity closer, why should it not be accepted?
There is another version that Jesus did not die on the cross due to His miraculous power. Written records mention that when Jesus was thought to be dead on the cross, a Roman soldier pierced a spear into His side, to confirm that He was dead. Since Jesus did not react in pain, He was believed to be dead, after which He was brought down from the cross and moved to the cave. But it is also mentioned that blood gushed out from the injury made by the spear. Blood does not gush out from a dead body, when it is pierced, as per medical science. Hence, some people believe that He was not dead when He was brought down from the cross.

He remained in the cave in an inactive state and rose on the third day as stated by Him before His crucifixion. He had spoken of the church being destroyed and rebuilt in three days. The word ‘church’ in His statement denotes His divine body and the reconstruction of the church in three days meant His rising from the dead.

Surviving the crucifixion, remaining in an inactive state for some time and rising on the third day, were all certainly possible for Jesus, who possessed God’s miraculous power. In fact, anything is possible with the miraculous power of the unimaginable God, who had merged with the human body of Jesus. With the miraculous power of God, it is very much possible that Jesus did not die on the cross. It is also possible that Jesus died on the cross and rose from the dead. It is even possible that Jesus died at the age of 85 years and subsequently, began to appear to devotees in an energetic form to devotees all over the world.

There is also no reason to reject the version that Jesus, with His living physical body, ascended to heaven. The unimaginable miraculous power of the unimaginable God who had merged with Jesus, allows any of these possibilities to be true. There is no need to condemn any of the above versions or even any other version, as long as the version does not contradict the divine power and divine knowledge of Jesus. There should be no objection to the claim that Jesus died on the cross and rose on the third day also because prior to His crucifixion, Jesus had already resurrected a devoted follower, Lazarus. It proves that Jesus possessed miraculous powers. If He was capable of raising others from the dead, it is not hard to believe that He was capable of rising from the dead Himself.

Whether He died on the cross and rose after three days or He did not die at all, there is no doubt that He was seen by His disciples alive, in physical form, after three days. Thomas even touched the wounds where nails were driven into His hands to confirm that it was indeed Jesus who had risen. There is agreement between all versions, on this point that Jesus was seen alive, in a physical body, on the third day.

The next question is whether Jesus exists even today in a living physical body. In the long time from the resurrection to this day, I do not think there has been any case, other than that of Thomas, when the existence of Jesus in a physical body was confirmed. Whenever Jesus has appeared to anybody, He has only appeared in energetic form and not in human form. The soul enters an energetic body after the natural death of the human body and this is the divine law of God’s creation. At the time of the crucifixion, Jesus was about 32 years old.

After the resurrection, He probably lived in the physical body upto the age of 85 years. Then, as per the divine law of creation, the mortal body died and He was buried in the tomb, which is seen even today in the Himalayas.

Interestingly, there are records of Jesus being with His parents only upto about sixteen years. Then He left home and returned only when He was about thirty years old. In this period of fourteen years, He did a lot of penance in association with several sages in the Himalayas. The Hindu scripture, Bhaviśya Purāṇam, speaks about the arrival of Jesus in India after His resurrection. In this scripture, Jesus says to king Śālivāhana “I am the Son of the Lord and I was born to an unmarried woman. I have propagated spiritual knowledge in a foreign country…”. (Īśa putraṃ ca māṃ viddhi, kumārī garbha sambhavam, mlecchadharmasya vaktāram…).

You can find the influence of Hindu philosophies on the spiritual knowledge preached by Jesus, which is in line with His long stay in India. Jesus said that He is the Truth and Light, which means that He is God Himself. This is the philosophy of monism (Advaita). Jesus said that He is Son of God and this concept belongs to the philosophy called qualified monism (Viśiṣṭa Advaita), which is an intermediate stage between monism and dualism. Jesus also said that He is the messenger of God, which indicates perfect dualism (Dvaita). In the philosophy of dualism, the soul is different from God and is said to be a servant of God. But the soul referred to in the philosophy of dualism is not an ordinary worldly human being.

The servant or messenger of God stands at a very high level of spiritual progress, far above ordinary souls. These three philosophies existed in the Veda and corresponding statements can be found in the Veda. The philosophy of Jesus, which matches with the three philosophies of the Hindu Vedic religion is reflected in the three famous statements of Jesus: (1) I am in the Light (dualism), (2) The Light is in Me (qualified monism, which is an intermediate stage between dualism and monism) and (3) I am the Light (monism).

[oldbadger]

There is another version that Jesus did not die on the cross due to His miraculous power. Written records mention that when Jesus was thought to be dead on the cross, a Roman soldier pierced a spear into His side, to confirm that He was dead. Since Jesus did not react in pain, He was believed to be dead, after which He was brought down from the cross and moved to the cave. But it is also mentioned that blood gushed out from the injury made by the spear. Blood does not gush out from a dead body, when it is pierced, as per medical science. Hence, some people believe that He was not dead when He was brought down from the cross.

I don't think that Jesus died on that cross, and I don't think that Pilate wanted him to die, so the above paragraph is interesting.
The lungs can fill with fluids and cause the condemned to 'drown', but a spear thrust in to the lower lung might clear blood and fluids so as to allow some breathing. I've seen a doctor in an emergency ward 'lance' a boy's lower lung to clear it of bloody fluids...saved his life.
And so...yes.... I don't think that Jesus died.

But....... I've been hoping that you can provide sources about Jesus in India. Are you saying that any sources about this are only through Oral Tradition?
Yes? No?

[sridatta]

There is another version that Jesus did not die on the cross due to His miraculous power. Written records mention that when Jesus was thought to be dead on the cross, a Roman soldier pierced a spear into His side, to confirm that He was dead. Since Jesus did not react in pain, He was believed to be dead, after which He was brought down from the cross and moved to the cave. But it is also mentioned that blood gushed out from the injury made by the spear. Blood does not gush out from a dead body, when it is pierced, as per medical science. Hence, some people believe that He was not dead when He was brought down from the cross.

I don't think that Jesus died on that cross, and I don't think that Pilate wanted him to die, so the above paragraph is interesting.
The lungs can fill with fluids and cause the condemned to 'drown', but a spear thrust in to the lower lung might clear blood and fluids so as to allow some breathing. I've seen a doctor in an emergency ward 'lance' a boy's lower lung to clear it of bloody fluids...saved his life.
And so...yes.... I don't think that Jesus died.

But....... I've been hoping that you can provide sources about Jesus in India. Are you saying that any sources about this are only through Oral Tradition?
Yes? No?

When Jesus was crucified based on simple emotional slogans. His death was not justified and therefore He rose and walked out. When the soldier was leaving finally, he pierced the stomach of Jesus with his weapon. Then blood came out. Blood will not come out from dead body. Jesus was alive and He was brought down by His disciples. Then He was kept in the cave. He knew the protection of His life. He walked into India and met the king Salivahana and talked with him. His conversation was recorded in “Bhavishaya Purana” of Vyasa. This scripture speaks about the future. Vyasa wrote this long back.

The verse in scripture is ‘Esa Putram Cha Mam Viddhi, Kumari Garbha Sambhavam, Mlechcha Dharmasya Vaktaram…’, which means “I am the son of the father of heaven. I was born to unmarried girl. I preached spirituality to Muslims.’ Thus spoke Jesus to Salivahana. He stayed in India till He attained the age of eighty-five years and died in Kashmir. You can find the buried tomb of Jesus there even today. On the tomb it is written “Jesus” in Hebrew language.

Jesus disappeared from home at the age of 16 years. He returned at the age of 30 years. He was crucified in 32nd year. From 16th year He was in Himalayas in the association of several sages. He was a good Sanskrit scholar. He studied all the Hindu philosophy and this is the reason why the Christian and Hindu philosophies are almost similar in concepts.

Krishna told that He is God. Jesus told that He and His Father are one and the same. Krishna told that He would come whenever there is necessity. Jesus told that He would come again. Krishna told that He is the only ultimate goal. Jesus told that one could attain God through Him only. All these are same concepts.

[TRANSPONDER]

There is another version that Jesus did not die on the cross due to His miraculous power. Written records mention that when Jesus was thought to be dead on the cross, a Roman soldier pierced a spear into His side, to confirm that He was dead. Since Jesus did not react in pain, He was believed to be dead, after which He was brought down from the cross and moved to the cave. But it is also mentioned that blood gushed out from the injury made by the spear. Blood does not gush out from a dead body, when it is pierced, as per medical science. Hence, some people believe that He was not dead when He was brought down from the cross.

I don't think that Jesus died on that cross, and I don't think that Pilate wanted him to die, so the above paragraph is interesting.
The lungs can fill with fluids and cause the condemned to 'drown', but a spear thrust in to the lower lung might clear blood and fluids so as to allow some breathing. I've seen a doctor in an emergency ward 'lance' a boy's lower lung to clear it of bloody fluids...saved his life.
And so...yes.... I don't think that Jesus died.

But....... I've been hoping that you can provide sources about Jesus in India. Are you saying that any sources about this are only through Oral Tradition?
Yes? No?

Thank you; Aside from tossing a cat in amongst the pigeons, I have no dog to add to this particular conflict. For my money, if there was a real Jesus put to death by the Romans, he was dead and stayed dead, and wasn't going anywhere.

[JehovahsWitness]

Jesus Christ came to India and He was honoured by Indians.

Sounds like the kind of tall tale Western missionaries spun to convince the natives to embrace Christanity. Or avoid being killed by them for introducing foreign gods.

[TRANSPONDER]

Jesus Christ came to India and He was honoured by Indians.

Sounds like the kind of tall tale Western missionaries spun to convince the natives to embrace Christanity. Or avoid being killed by them for introducing foreign gods.

Oh, I don't know. I never heard of western missionaries to China ever telling them some tale about Jesus travelling to China or anywhere else. Rather it is the sort of story that the locals (when converted) would make up to try to forge some connection between themselves and their adopted religion. Rather like that nonsense about Joseph of Arimathea travelling to Britain and planting a bit of the true cross. or Jews sailing to America and being the origin of the natives.