Avatar and Jesus ||The Incarnation of Jesus is a Unique Event in the History ||

Avatar and Jesus ||The Incarnation of Jesus is a Unique Event in the History ||

Writer:Kevin Shrestha, BCE.

Avatar and Jesus

Here, Christians who convert from Hindu to Christ, they often use the term "avatar" to explain Jesus. Well, I can understand it’s the very term by which a Hindu can perceive god descending as a human form. In Hinduism, this is nothing astonishing. We know about dash avatar of Lord Vishnu. And similarly, even Shiva, Ganesh, Devis, and other gods have many avatars. But can this term be used for Jesus?

If I said now where this term is in the bible, you may object me to answer where trinity term is in the bible or I might be guilty of Biblicism. But I am not talking about the term in a way of biblicism. I am talking from viewpoint of its intended meaning. In use, it may seem fitting on Jesus Christ but in its intended definition, there's Achilles heel.

Avatar vs God manifestation in Jesus:

First, let us know just by basic, how the term avatar is understood in Hinduism.

At the core of Hinduism, God is the only one who is called Brahman in Upanishads. Brahman is beyond name and form, all-pervading, all-encompassing, and all-knowing. Everything living and non-living are verily different expressions of Brahman. The entire cosmos is an expression of Brahman. Brahman is smaller than the atom and yet bigger than the cosmos. Since Brahman encompasses everything, any concept of God with name and form is also within the scope of Brahman only. In Hinduism God with name and form is also real and such a God is known as Ishwara.

Main God in Hinduism is Supreme Brahman/Para Brahman/Paramatma. The Trinity/Trimurti (Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva) & their avatars are the manifestation of one Supreme Brahman. Even though Trinity & their Avatars have different divine bodies but they have the same single Atman/Soul (innermost core/root and essence) that is Supreme Brahman. Trinity and their Avatars are not different from each other. They are one but have manifested in different divine bodies. Normal human being considers divine bodies as Supreme God because they wrongly identify divine bodies of Trinity and their avatars with spiritual body/space consciousness of Supreme Brahman which pervades & resides in (not diametrically but as a level of reality and real consciousness) divine body of Trinity as Atman/Soul.

There is no such concept as 330 million gods. There are only 33 Koti/types (Literal meaning of Koti is a type) of gods/Devas whose function is to sustain the world (12 Adityas, 11 Rudras, 8 Vasus and 2 Ashvins). Each living being consist of a fraction of Devas. They are not able to give any living being Moksha/Nirvana (freedom from Samsara/cycle of death & birth) so they are not be worshiped. They are just the creation of Supreme Brahman. In the Vedic period, Devas were only worshiped only to get temporary heaven/Swarg. One who seeks liberation & freedom from Samsara/cycle of birth of death they should not worship them. They should be revered only by considering the presence of Supreme Brahman within them in the form of Atman/soul/Root consciousness.

In Sanskrit, Avatar means to descend or to manifest. This term is generally in association with Lord Vishnu regardless of numerous avatars even of other gods. An avatar means either complete or partial form of a deity in any kind such as human, animal or mixture in order to carry out a specific mission. An avatar is not mere materialization or appearance of God in physical form for the sake of his devotees. It is neither a disguise nor a trick played upon our senses.

Interestingly, in the four Vedas inclusive of Vedanta (Upanishads) which are the earliest sources of spiritual scriptures, there is no concept of Avatar being mentioned! The concept of Avatars came into vogue only in later historic periods of Itihas and Puranas (scriptural mythologies). The term was also used to dedicate different gods but in the 6th century AD, its usage emphasized more to manifestation of Vishnu. Despite the absence of the term even in the Bhagavad Gita, its concept has been mentioned. There is another term called vibhuti which teaches that God can manifest in different forms of humans and nature.

On the other hand, in Hinduism, the incarnation is different which requires the birth of God in physical form, through the natural process. His existence upon the earth in physical form, that can be a human, animal or semi-human, or even mythical form, undergoing the same experiences as living beings. The incarnation may exist for a brief period of time or for a lifetime. The incarnation may have all the powers and awareness of God in His absolute aspect or only a necessary portion of it. It is essentially an interference in the affairs and progression of the manifested worlds. It is an intervention that becomes necessary due to the activity of beings endowed with free will. The law of karma makes each individual being responsible for its action.

Incarnation is supported by Vaishnavas whereas Shaivism oppose. God is the knower of past, present, and future, and controller of all. Everything happens according to his will and even evil cannot act itself out unless he wills. So, what needs to be accomplished can be accomplished through the will of Siva without the need for a separate incarnation. If at all there is a need to interfere as per his will, Siva would manifest Himself directly and take necessary action. So, Siva would only manifest or act through his agencies such as a Guru or an aspect or emanation but would not incarnate. However, not all followers of Siva would agree with this argument.

Now, the doctrine of the Incarnation (God became man in Jesus of Nazareth) lies at the heart of Christianity; it’s a truth-claim celebrated all over the world at Christmastime. Historic Christianity affirms that Jesus Christ is a single person with both a fully divine nature and a fully human nature. As C. S. Lewis aptly put it, “The Son of God became a man to enable men to become sons of God.”

Here are four biblical passages that testify to the truth of Jesus Christ’s Incarnation:

“The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.” (John 1:14)
“Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.” (Philippians 2:5–7)
“For in Christ, all the fullness of Deity lives in bodily form.” (Colossians 2:9)
“This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God.” (1 John 4:2)

The incarnation of God in Jesus Christ is a unique event in the history of the world and cannot be compared to the innumerable avatars of Hindu gods and goddesses. There are three main reasons why a Hindu avatar cannot be compared with the Christian proclamation of the incarnation.

First, an incarnation is a unique event and, by definition, can never be repeated. The Scripture declares that “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14). The doctrine of the incarnation insists that in Jesus Christ God became a man without ceasing to be God. Jesus Christ is forever the God-Man. Even now, He sits on the right hand of the Father in heaven as the God-Man. After Jesus was resurrected, He did not cease to be the God-Man, it is an everlasting reality. In contrast, avatars are temporary manifestations of the divine and once the mission of the avatar is completed, the humanity of the avatar ceases to exist. This allows for multiple avatars from time to time in accordance with the Bhagavad-Gita which declares, “whenever there is the decay of righteousness, O Bharata, and there is the exaltation of unrighteousness, then I Myself come forth. For the protection of the good, for the sake of firmly establishing righteousness, I am born from age to age” (Gita 4:7,8). In Christianity, the incarnation of Jesus Christ is a one-time event in human history.
Second, an avatar is different from the incarnation in that an avatar is only a partial manifestation of the divine. Avatars represent only several of the attributes of deity, whereas the incarnation is a full and complete union of the fullness of deity with the fullness of humanity. The Bible says “in Christ, all the fullness of the deity lives in bodily form” (Colossians 2:9). When we meet Christ, we do not meet only a few of the attributes of deity, but the fullness of God Himself who has come to save and redeem us.
Third, an avatar is a partial mingling between the divine nature of a so-called Hindu god such as Vishnu with human nature as seen in such figures as Rama or Krishna. Christians do not believe it is possible for the divine and human natures to mingle or coalesce into one another. We believe that the two natures – divine and human – remain distinct even though they were united in the person of Jesus Christ. Christians believe that Jesus Christ has two natures – one divine and one human – but the two natures were united in one person, Jesus Christ i.e. hypostatic union. When Jesus came, he died on the cross for our sins and completed once and for all everything that is necessary for our salvation. There is no need, nor any benefit from a second or third visit of God to the human race. By dying on the cross for our sins, Jesus has paid the penalty once and for all.

The belief in Hindu avatars is somehow similar to the Christian heresy of Docetism, which is a belief that Jesus Christ only appeared to be a human. Docetism teaches that Jesus’ body was spiritual, rather than physical; thus, He was unable to suffer physical pain. Jesus is not an avatar but both fully human and fully God. He lived a sinless life, died on the cross for our sins, and was bodily raised to life on the third day. He ascended back to heaven and will one day return.

Even within Hinduism, one of the greatest Sanskrit and Vedas Scholar - Swami Dayanand Sarasvati in his book Satyarth Prakash (Light of Truth) he has written: (Page - 219)

"Does God incarnate or not?

A.- No; because it is said in the Yajur Veda. "He is unborn." Again "He overspreads all." He is pure, is never born and never takes on a human form." It is clear from these quotations that God is never born.

Q. But Krishna says in the Gita, "Whenever there is the decay of virtue, I take on a human form." GITA 4:7. What is your answer to this?

A.- Being opposed to the Veda (divinely revealed most highly revered Hindu scriptures) it (Geta) cannot be held to be an authority............................

Krishna could never be God."

A Bird’s Eye View Chart:

(Taken from different resources and some points might have been repeated but in a different aspect)

Hindu Avatar in general understanding	God’s incarnation in Jesus
In Hinduism, an avatar restores righteousness, or dharma, to the cosmic or social order, including duty, ritual, law, morality, ethics, good deeds, and such.	Jesus' mission was higher—He came to restore a relationship between God and people (John 3:16–18). The right living, the behavior, and the morals are a result of that relationship being made right (Ephesians 2:8–10).
The Puranas, state that the god Vishnu causes a cyclic manifestation and dissolution of the world. Each cosmic cycle (mahayuga) has four ages (Yuga). Krita Yuga – 1,728,000 years, Treta Yuga – 1,296,000 years, Dvapara Yuga – 864,000 years and Kali Yuga – 432,000 years This cycle is repeated 994 times, forming a period called kalpa, and then a dissolution (pralaya) 36,000 kalpas and pralayas make the lifespan of Brahma, the creator god.	According to Christianity, the world was created by one act of God not as manifestation and dissolution and was created as ex nihilo (out of nothing), and it is not out of necessity that God created the world but He created because He wanted too by His sovereign and free will. Moreover, the world became corrupted by sin (free choice of humans) and not through pralaya. It will not follow a repeated cycle of manifestation and dissolution. God is Eternal and Immutable and does not have any life span.
This is followed by a total dissolution (mahapralaya) when all worlds, time, and space return into Brahman, and the whole cycle starts again in an endless process of manifestation (Kalpa) and dissolution (Pralaya).	The "new heaven and a new earth" in Revelation (21:1) is not a new creation similar to the one presented in Genesis. Rather, the "new heaven and a new earth" is an everlasting world where sin is eradicated and there will be "no more death or mourning or crying or pain" (Revelation 21,4). It will belong to those who accepted the saving work of Christ and will never have a pralaya to end it.
The number of his avatars varies from one Hindu writing to another. The Markandeya Purana 4, 44-58 lists 12 avatars of Vishnu The Garuda Purana list 19, The Matsya Purana 47, 32-52 lists 22.	The number of incarnations of Christ is one and does not change.
In Hinduism, none of the avatars has a perfect union of the two natures. Rather, they have divine nature combined with the physical one (animal or human).	The unique incarnation of God the Son, become 100% God and 100% Man, perfect in both his divine and human nature. This is theologically Hypostatic Union.
In an avatar, the physical body is a mere garment that is put on and off (according to Bhagavad Gita 2.22), there cannot be any real association of Vishnu with a physical body.	Christ’s association with his physical body was real and he came also to redeem our physical body by taking a real physical body, that is why there is so much stress on his physical resurrection, which isn’t a case in Hindu belief.
Avatar do not and need not have any historical basis.	The incarnation of Christ is Historical and is meaningless if it's not historical.
In the avatar, there is no aspect of taking away of sin rather only destroying the evil person.	Jesus Christ as "the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29) has no parallel element. Jesus Christ prayed for his killers saying, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” Luke 23:34
Various forms of avatar are taken and after the mission, the form of the avatar is shed and removed like changing clothes.	Christ retains the Incarnate physical state even after the resurrection.
The god can become incarnate in one place at a time as a full avatar or in many places simultaneously through partial avatars called amshas, such that the main form of the god can still communicate with the partial materializations.	God the Son incarnated but not God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.
Avatar is repeating in nature. Vishnu said "Whenever evil will increase. I will come back to earth."	But Jesus' case was different. He ultimately came as a sacrifice once only. He won't be coming back in any form now except as the King.
Work of avatar is only temporal.	Work of Jesus is eternal.
After a specific mission, avatars again go away. Avatars are taken with more varieties of purposes.	Jesus came once and fully completed his task
Avatar were working on their authority (you might need to check this).	God the Son willingly chose to be a Savior but subjected to God the Father.
Its concept depends upon systems of aastika philosophies.	Its concept depends upon doctrine of the trinity.
Not necessarily to reveal God, to mediate and to be an example for humanity.	To reveal God, to mediate between God and Man and to be an example for humanity.
To carry out specific mission of guidance and protection.	To reclaim the authority and the destination that humanity lost in garden of Eden.
To enlighten humanity and to guide them in right direction.	To be the first born out of dead ones in resurrection and starting new generation of restored humanity.
To restore the dharma.	To establish the God’s kingdom.
Not needed to learn human life.	To learn human life by experiencing every temptation and be fit for Savior.
Existence of different belief about God and human relationship.	To grant us the right to become God’s children.

We use "avatar" because for a Hindu mindset it hits some idea of God descending to earth for a specific task. When we totally use the term avatar, a Hindu might then understand even God's theophany or even Holy Spirit descending as a dove as avatars. They aren't wrong however as per their belief! Hence, by definition, avatar is a hazardous term for a biblical worldview and theology. The concept of God is different, understanding is different and so avatar is a different term.

I have often seen this term used in worship songs. Some might say its contextualization. Well that's fine! But again, there is high chance of synchronization! we may use avatar term to define Jesus but we cannot apply this term in totality on Jesus. For a Hindu worldview, God can take any avatars in any forms. Hence, we use "avatar" only in a limited circle within the meaning of "to descend" when we talk about Christ. But the complete understanding of avatar can affect Biblical understanding of God's manifestation in person of Jesus. However, we can simply make them understand that God took on human form which they can/might understand easily.

References: