Only Shakti is entrenched in Bible (Comforter), Koran (Ruh), Vedas, Granth Sahib

From:  "jagbir singh" <>
Date:  Tue Aug 3, 2004  1:01 pm
Subject:  Re: Only Shakti is entrenched in Bible (Comforter), Koran (Ruh), Vedas, Granth Sahib

—- In, "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


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

[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: