You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : February 1995

Re: hindu philosophy of conduct: Prof M.Rangacharya

From: Krishna Kalale (
Date: Mon Feb 27 1995 - 10:21:18 PST

I did read some portions of intial verses of 7th chapter.  I feel he is
very good and a true visistadvaitin. but like most pre-independence 
writers, writes questionably when comparing to other religions
.  HIs one paragraph on page 12 , vol II sort of 
bothered me - 

All great inspired religions in the world bear testimony to their faith
in God, whatever may be the way and means that made their God vision
an accomplished fact to them.  We may take Sri-Krishna, Moses, Jesus
and Mohammed as notable examples to illustrate this point; and
an appreciative and impartial study of their lives and teachings cannot
fail to show to us that none of them had any doubts or uncertainty
or suspicion of incompleteness in relation to his knowledge of God.
In the case of all great seers, their knowledge of God is direct and
therefore, both full and undoubted.
Here Sri-Krishna is referred to as a seer and world-teacher and a seeker
of God.  This aspect
is totally unacceptable to Sri Ramanujacharya and to even the words of 
Bhagawadgita itself!.  Ramajujacharya's 
introduction to Gitabhasya identifies Sri Krishna with the absolute
God undoubtedly.  
Moreover, no where in the whole of bhagawadgita, Lord
krishna has ever referred to himself as just a seer! and a seeker of God!
.  Sri Krishna
is probably only character among all the religions in the world,
who has blatantly identified himself with
the absolute God all over his teachings in Bhagawadgita.  According to 
Lord Krishna, He never underwent the process of perfection and became
God but always was GOD all the time....never was different and never will be!

To my knowledge none of the prophets - Jesus, Moses, Mohammed identified 
themselves with God, but were God seekers.

Atleast according to the original verses of Gita, bible, Qoran, this statement
of Rangacharya seems questionable.  Probably one has to ignore this
since in other places his explanation of some verse are EXCELLENT.
Also we have to give credence to the times since he was in, pre-
independence era where there was certain discretion maintained regarding
christianity etc. (to the extent of untrue representation).