|
|
Only Shakti is
entrenched in Bible (Comforter), Koran (Ruh), Vedas, Granth
Sahib
From: "jagbir singh" <www.adishakti.org@gmail.com>
Date: Tue Aug 3, 2004 1:01 pm
Subject: Re: Only Shakti is entrenched in Bible
(Comforter), Koran (Ruh), Vedas, Granth Sahib
|
—- In
shriadishakti@yahoogroups.com,
"jagbir singh"
<adishakti_org@y...> wrote:
>
> Before reading the article, "Proselytization In India:
An Indian
> Christian's Perspective", i just want to remind all of
what Jesus
> declared as he was teaching the multitudes in the
temple in
> Jerusalem. "You will know the truth, and the truth
will set you
> free." (John 8:32)
>
> After reading the article it will be obvious that few,
if any, of
> the religious masses are free to embrace the faithful
of other
> traditions. Except for the tolerant Hindus, nothing
has
> collectively enlightened them over the millennia that
the Divine
> is One. Religion continues to divide humanity and
bring death and
> destruction.
>
> Only the Shakti can reveal the truth that will set
Hindus
> (Sanaatana Dharma), Jews (Messiah), Christians
(Comforter),
> Muslims (Ruh), Buddhists (Maa Treya), and Sikhs (Aykaa
Mayee)
> free. Only those who seek Her are set free from all
that plagues
> the religious masses. That is why She had to incarnate
on Earth in
> the form of Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi. Yes, you will
know the
> truth, and the truth will set you free to
UNCONDITIONALLY embrace
> all His prophets, scriptures and their message.
>
> Jai Shri Mataji,
>
> jagbir
>
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adishakti_sahaja_yoga/message/2254
>
>
"HINDUISM
The gospels are silent about the life of Jesus between
his boyhood visit to the Jerusalem Temple with his
parents, and the beginning of his public ministry at
the age of 30. But in India there is a strong
tradition that the teenage Jesus slipped away from his
parents, journeyed across Southeast Asia learning
yogic meditation and returned home to become a guru to
the Jews. This legend reveals just how easily Hinduism
absorbs any figure whom others worship as divine. To
Hindus, India is the Holy Land, its sacred mountains
and rivers enlivened by more than 300,000 local
deities. It is only natural, then, that Jesus would
come to India to learn the secrets of unlocking his
own inherent divinity.
As Gandhi was, many Hindus are drawn to the figure of
Jesus by his compassion and nonviolence—virtues
taught in their own sacred Scriptures. But also like
Gandhi, Hindus find the notion of a single god
unnecessarily restrictive. In their perspective, all
human beings are sons of God with the innate ability
to become divine themselves. Those Hindus who read the
Gospels are drawn to the passage in John in which
Jesus proclaims that "the Father and I are
one." This confirms the basic Hindu belief that
everyone is capable through rigorous spiritual
practice of realizing his or her own universal
"god-consciousness." The great modern Hindu
saint Ramakrishna recorded that he meditated on a
picture of the Madonna with child and was transported
into a state of samadhi, a consciousness in which the
divine is all that really exists. For that kind of
spiritual experience, appeal to any god will do.
"Christ-consciousness, God-consciousness,
Krishna-consciousness, Buddha-consciousness—it's all
the same thing," says Deepak Chopra, an Indian
popularizer of Hindu philosophy for New Age
Westerners. "Rather than "love thy
neighbor,' this consciousness says, 'You and I are the
same beings.""
The
Other Jesus
Newsweek, March 27, 2000
—————————————————————————————————————————-
India Ascendant by Romesh Diwan
According to B. G. Tilak, a Hindu is defined by the
"acceptance of the Vedas with reverence; recognition of
the fact that the means or ways to salvation are
diverse, and the realization of the truth that the numbers of the gods to be worshiped is large, that
indeed is the distinguishing feature of the Hindu
religion."
Since the RNI are anti-Hindu, their members have gone to
the Supreme
Court, thrice, to get Hindutva banned. It is educative
to learn how the Supreme Court defined it. In fact, the
Supreme Court has defined
Hindutava in three separate judgments: 1966, 1977
and.1995.[xxx] In
all these cases, it accepted Tilak's definition.
The first judgment of the Supreme Court in 1966: [xxxi]
It says, "Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu
religion does not claim any one prophet; it does not
worship any one god; it does not subscribe to any one
dogma, it does not believe in one philosophical concept,
it does not satisfy the narrow traditional features of
any religion." It maintained that constitution makers
were fully conscious of the broad and comprehensive
character of the Hindu religion, which included Sikhs,
Jains and Buddhists within the term "Hinduism ." It
quoted the opinions of (i) S. Radhakrishnan that Hindu
implies residence in a well-defined geographical area,
that is India; (ii) Monier Williams that Hindu religion
is based on the idea of universal receptivity; and (iii)
Arnold Toynbee that Hinduism takes for granted that
there is more than one approach to truth.
The second judgment was delivered in 1977 by five judges
including
Justices M. H. Beg and R. S. Sarkaria—both non-Hindus
. It describes Hindutava as follows: "In principle,
Hinduism incorporates all forms of belief and worship
without necessitating the selection or elimination of
any." "The Hindu is inclined to revere the divine in
every manifestation and is doctrinally tolerant, leaving
others, both Hindus and non Hindus—whatever creed and
worship practices suits them the most." "A Hindu may
embrace a non-Hindu religion without ceasing to be a Hindu." "Hinduism is then both a civilization and
conglomerate of
religions with neither a beginning, a founder, nor a
central authority hierarchy or organization." This
judgment also quoted Encyclopedia Britannica.[xxxii]
The third judgment by the Supreme Court was delivered in
1995 and is
recorded in 1996.[xxxiii] It was given in a case under
the election
law asking the court to disqualify use of Hindutva for
elections because asking votes in the name of Hindutva
was religious appeal. It describes Hindutva as follows.
"Hindutva is indicative more of the way of life of the
Indian people." "It is not Hindu fundamentalism;" "nor
is it to be confined only to the strict Hindu religious
practices;" "[nor is it] unrelated to the culture and
ethos of the people of India, depicting the way of life
of the Indian people." Considering Hindutva as hostile,
inimical, or intolerant of other faiths, or as communal
"proceeds from an improper appreciation of its true
meaning." It quotes Maulana
Wahiuddin Khan [xxxiv] who considers Hindutva synonymous
with Indian; to the Maulana, Indian and Hindu are one
and the same. Recently, even Vasant Sathe, a Congressman
and an RNI, has supported Vir Savarkar's formulation of
Hindutva. [xxxv]
India Ascendant by Romesh Diwan
www.sulekha.com
[xxx] Gurumurthy. 2002a.
[xxxi] All India Reporter [AIR]1977 SC p.1119
[xxxii] AIR 1977 SC p.1119
[xxxiii] AIR 1996 SC p. 1113.
[xxxiv] Indian-Muslims: the need for a positive outlook"
[xxxv] Admiring Savarkar's succinct and scientific
exposition of Hindutva, Mr Vasant Sathe veteran
Congressman asserted that adopting it is the key to
resolution of communal strife in India. Savarkar had
described Hindutva as "Spread between river Indus to the
Ocean is this land of India; whosoever deems it as
fatherland and holy
land is a Hindu ." Punj 2002 c
|
|
If this
page was accessed during a web search you may wish to browse the
websites listed below where this topic titled "Only
Shakti is entrenched in Bible (Comforter), Koran (Ruh),
Vedas, Granth Sahib"
or related issues are discussed, commented, criticized or
researched in detail to promote peace and progress in
religious harmony and spiritual development for all
humanity:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adishakti_sahaja_yoga/message/2261
https://adishakti.org/forum/archives.htm
https://adishakti.org/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|