Ray Lanthier, May 15 2009, Los Angeles, California: Now it all becomes clear – Kshamabuddhi das’s token appeal to objectivity and scholarship serves a vehement anti-Christian agenda (as I had suspected). He hopes with the paper tiger of loaded scholarship to devour what he perceives as a philosophical threat to Vaisnavism. His real reason is that he disputes the apparent exclusivity of Christ’s mediation as savior of mankind. He imputes ignorance and misunderstanding to Srila Prabhupada and by implication, all the Acaryas before him who accepted Jesus as an authentic guru. This is serious stuff that borders on Vaisnava disciplic aparadha.
He has every right and duty to question Christian theology of course. What is interesting is that the Acaryas did not see fit to question it. Well I in like fashion impute ignorance to Kshamabuddhi das.
All Abrahamic religions are exclusivist. The Jews were chosen. Jesus is the sole savior of the world. Muslims reject the ‘infidels’ who are not ‘of the Book’. It is not a question of just Christianity. It has to do with the development of monotheism in the West. Just as Hindus are monists in theory and polytheistic in practice, before Judaism became established, polytheistic cults were rampant. In fact, monotheism did not take root until later. The second Isaiah juxtaposes the great Persian King Cyrus with the first monotheistic declarations in the Bible. So when any of the Abrahamic prophets, seers or messiah speak of Godhead, they always emphasize its unity and singularity. Why else would the first commandment be:
“I am The Lord your God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me.”
Having said that, the principle of guru-tattva applies in every cultural, religious and historical context. In brief, it is universal. One can only approach God through a spiritual master. Only through his pure devotee can he be known in his personal aspect. This is ‘straight up’ Vaisnavism and Jesus was preaching the same. And yes, it is exclusive. There are so many exclusive statements made in Vedanta.
“Devotional service can in fact be attained only through the mercy of a pure devotee. In the Caitanya-caritamrita (Madhya 19.151) it is said, ‘By the mercy of the spiritual master who is a pure devotee and by the mercy of Krsna one can achieve the platform of devotional service. There is no other way.’ ”
So I see no reason for Kshamabuddhi das getting his kaupin in a bunch over what appears to be Jesus’ claim to universal mediation, especially since it didn’t disturb a hair on the sikha of any self-realized non-sectarian Vaisnava acarya.
Speak Your Mind