Bahaism, Buddhism and Islam, conflict or one?

[CG Didymus]

Forget about what Muhammed would have understood. The Bahai's believe that the Quran is Gods word. If God did not understand that his messengers were not everyday humans but manifestations of himself, then God is not God.

Its an oxymoron.

I'm okay with Muhammad and the Buddha being ordinary men. One became enlightened and the other received a vision. I have lots of problems with the Baha'i concept of a "manifestation" of God. The main one being that some of them were far from being a "perfect" reflection of God.

 

[Pete in Panama]

As I have told you in the past, if Baha'u'llah was whom he claims to be, he needs the Bible to show that it prophesies about him...

Interesting statement. I could present the passages that make sense to me (starting w/ what we were chatting about on the JW thread) but everyone has their own path.

Pse let me know if you're interested.

 

[CG Didymus]

Why would God care? What people believe has no effect upon God, God is transcendent...
Besides, God gave man free will to figure things out on his own, and besides that, God knew He would be sending Baha'u'llah in the future and and Baha'u'llah would clear everything up.

Here's what I said...

God in his infinite wisdom didn't want them to reveal such a profound concept until he sent Baha'u'llah? But, God didn't have a problem with the people believing that some were incarnations of a God or the Son of a God?

So God didn't care to give accurate information? He let people believe in incarnations of a God. Or, with Jesus, let the people come to the conclusion that Jesus is part of a Trinity? Because people weren't ready to know that these people were a close to being Gods, but not quite?

The reason the previous Manifestations of God did not know how to write and did not write anything themselves was because humanity was not yet ready, not spiritually evolved enough to understand the straight dope, nor did humanity need it at that time, because they got along just fine with what they had.

And this is a Baha'i teaching? Again, God preferred to have others write the stories about these people? That I assume you're saying, was not the "straight" dope? So it had things in it that were wrong? And God knew these things were wrong, and he knew that people, with their "free will" would mangle the interpretations of these wrong writings... But God wasn't concerned, knowing that thousands of years later he would send Baha'u'llah to clear all the wrong beliefs and doctrines up? Yeah okay. I guess.

 

[CG Didymus]

It is that and most of those whom Baha'i claim to be Manifestations of God did not see themselves as that, but only as men.

Along with the Buddha and Muhammad, who saw themselves as a "manifestation"? I ask this of Baha'is all the time, with Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses, do the Jews make them into anything more than ordinary, fallible men? But then, as with the case of Adam and Noah, I don't think Baha'is even go by the Bible accounts of their lives.

 

[CG Didymus]

We do not need any of those to know the Baha'i Faith is true and they don't match up because they are different religions. Thus trying to use those other scriptures to prove that Baha'i Faith is true is an exercise in futility.

Maybe you do not really understand what the Baha'i Faith is claiming and how it is related to the older religions.

One of the first things I was told at a Baha'i fireside meeting was that Baha'u'llah fulfilled all the prophecies of all religions. Next... was that each religion was like the grades in school. Each religion prepares people for the next. To bad I was given such false information.

 

[Trailblazer]

So God didn't care to give accurate information? He let people believe in incarnations of a God. Or, with Jesus, let the people come to the conclusion that Jesus is part of a Trinity? Because people weren't ready to know that these people were a close to being Gods, but not quite?

I cannot say what God cares about, I can only surmise based upon what actually happens in this world. The information was provided through the scriptures and since people have free will they were allowed to figure out what those scriptures meant. Maybe centuries ago it was made sense to believe Jesus was God or that God was a Trinity but now people are more intellectually advanced so they are starting to question these beliefs. Maybe that is what God was expecting and hoping for.

And this is a Baha'i teaching? Again, God preferred to have others write the stories about these people? That I assume you're saying, was not the "straight" dope? So it had things in it that were wrong? And God knew these things were wrong, and he knew that people, with their "free will" would mangle the interpretations of these wrong writings... But God wasn't concerned, knowing that thousands of years later he would send Baha'u'llah to clear all the wrong beliefs and doctrines up? Yeah okay. I guess.

I cannot say what God preferred, I can only say what God allowed. God allowed men to write these scriptures the way they were written and I can only surmise that it was in accordance with God's overall plan because He knew that in the future he would send Baha'u'llah to set things straight.

 

[Trailblazer]

One of the first things I was told at a Baha'i fireside meeting was that Baha'u'llah fulfilled all the prophecies of all religions. Next... was that each religion was like the grades in school. Each religion prepares people for the next. To bad I was given such false information.

No, you were not given false information but how does that relate to what I said?

Trailblazer said: We do not need any of those to know the Baha'i Faith is true and they don't match up because they are different religions. Thus trying to use those other scriptures to prove that Baha'i Faith is true is an exercise in futility.

Maybe you do not really understand what the Baha'i Faith is claiming and how it is related to the older religions.

What you said is not related to what I said. Very broadly speaking, each religion is preparing humanity as a collective whole for what will be revealed in the next religion, so it is like grades in a school that prepare children to go on to the next grade.

But we are now living in this new age, and we do not need to go back to the older religions and look at them in order to know if the Baha'i Faith is true. If we needed to do that Baha'u'llah would have told us to do it, but He didn't.

Also, we would not be expecting the older religions to "match up" with each other or with the Baha'i Faith because they are different religions. Thus trying to use those "other religious scriptures" to prove that the Baha'i Faith is true or false is an exercise in futility.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The Bahai's claim that Bahaullah is the return of Christ, the advent of the Islamic Mahdi, the advent of the Buddhist Maithri, among others of course but this thread focuses on the topic above.

Muhammed, the Buddha, Bahaullah were all manifestations of God. Not just prophets, messengers, philosophers or anything like that but manifestations of God. The Quran, nor the Thripitaka teaches anything of the sort. So where is this belief coming from? It comes from their own teachings of course but that is in question today.

Since they base the coming of Metteya or Maithri as the eschatological figure was Bahaullah which they have taken loosely from the Buddhist scripture, vis a vis the Sutta Pitaka in which a tiny portion has been taken, they should either adopt the whole scripture or have a mechanism of criticism to pick which part is absolutely true and/or which part is false. I would like to know, other than saying "Bahaullah or our teachers said so", what is the methodology of deriving which is which? There is zero about the Buddha being a manifestation of God in it. None.

Bahai's claim the Quran is Gods inerrant word, etc etc, but there is nothing in the Quran that says Muhammed was a manifestation of God. None. The Bahai website is a corpus of apologetics and it may have some explanation to this, but what is the Quranic explanation presented in these websites, other than saying "because Bahaullah or our teachers said so"? If you claim the Quran was Gods word, it should say so.

Is not this a questionable theology which claims all the prophets including Moses, Muhammed, Buddha etc etc were all "manifestations of God" while the Quran nor the Tipitaka has nothing to support that theology?

Peace.

The Buddha does not make a claim to be a manifestation of God. The Buddha was completely silent about whether God even existed or not. Although Buddhist folk religions exist, Buddhism at its core is really more of a philosophy. It is not at all like the monotheistic religions.

 

[Marcion]

What you said is not related to what I said. Very broadly speaking, each religion is preparing humanity as a collective whole for what will be revealed in the next religion, so it is like grades in a school that prepare children to go on to the next grade.

I like the general idea of the progress of humanity through time in their understanding and increased practice of spirituality.
However, I don't believe at all in the succession of Abrahamic religions starting with Jewish monotheism as the main global line of development. The Abrahamics are in a sense more marginal (not in a negative sense) just like the more "primitive" religions of the America's, Africa, Australia and the heathen Arians were.

Rather I'm convinced that Lord Shiva was the one who kick-started the advanced and more systematic practice and understanding of spirituality (Tantra) when He travelled around the globe about 7000 years ago.
His important successor was Lord Krishna around 3500 years ago and later came some intermediary spiritual teachers with much less impact.
The third global Sadguru lived more recently than Bahaullah, so Bahaullah cannot be the one with the most universal vision in this regard.

So why was India thrice so central in this kick-starting of the human dharma? India is like the spiritual navel point of this planet because so many different human cultures (also having moved along large rivers flowing into India) merged in India and the climatic circumstances were more ideal for human cultural development than in the rest of the world for thousands of years.

Of course as a follower of Lord Rama or Ganesha, you will not prefer to recognize that particular succession of great spiritual Teachers nor will you do so as an Abrahamic type of follower.

But that is exactly my point, such ideas cannot be imposed outside your own path.
Especially in India the Abrahamic-centric frame will never be accepted and not only because of geo-sentimental reasons but mainly for ideological (philosophical) reasons. Yoga and meditation have already spread around the globe. And even the Abrahamics and other religions owe a very lot to Tantra, whether they are aware of it or not.

 

[firedragon]

I'm okay with Muhammad and the Buddha being ordinary men. One became enlightened and the other received a vision. I have lots of problems with the Baha'i concept of a "manifestation" of God. The main one being that some of them were far from being a "perfect" reflection of God.

The problem I am bringing up is the fact that the Bahai's acknowledge the Quran is Gods word (be one in reality or not), while it never says anything about anyone being the manifestation of God but rather speak to the contrary.

No bahai has addressed this question objectively. All they have done is just brush it off with some other words.

 

[firedragon]

The Buddha does not make a claim to be a manifestation of God. The Buddha was completely silent about whether God even existed or not. Although Buddhist folk religions exist, Buddhism at its core is really more of a philosophy. It is not at all like the monotheistic religions.

About this "God" and the Buddha, it would depend on what you mean by God, and which literature you are reading. If you read the pansiya panas jathaka, you would note them having many Gods, demons etc. Yet it would all depend on the distance between the Buddha and these writings. Buddhism, predominantly, all over the world is having various forms of worship to the buddha, venerating him to a Godly status. This is fact. Both Mahayana and hinayana both. Poojayani namo dhassa. This is worshiping deity. Its deification. In any kind of Buddhism, the pujya paksha is the clergy. Pujya is not like Christian priests who are Pujaka meaning "those who worship". Pujya means "to be worshiped". Thus, in Buddhism generally the priests are considered "to be worshiped". Its deification.

Of course Buddhism is not like monotheistic religions. Hindus believe Buddhism is a strand of Hinduism, and if you go by the idea of Hinduism it is true.

Forget about what the Buddha claimed or not. None of the literature claims it. The Bahai's pick Metteya from the literature, but they ignore the fact that none of the literature claim that he was or will be a manifestation of God. They have blindly embraced what their leaders taught them with no analysis. Sorry to say that, but that's the truth. That is why no one will objectively respond with anything but "my leader said so".

 

[Spirit of Light]

The Bahai's claim that Bahaullah is the return of Christ, the advent of the Islamic Mahdi, the advent of the Buddhist Maithri, among others of course but this thread focuses on the topic above.

Muhammed, the Buddha, Bahaullah were all manifestations of God. Not just prophets, messengers, philosophers or anything like that but manifestations of God. The Quran, nor the Thripitaka teaches anything of the sort. So where is this belief coming from? It comes from their own teachings of course but that is in question today.

Since they base the coming of Metteya or Maithri as the eschatological figure was Bahaullah which they have taken loosely from the Buddhist scripture, vis a vis the Sutta Pitaka in which a tiny portion has been taken, they should either adopt the whole scripture or have a mechanism of criticism to pick which part is absolutely true and/or which part is false. I would like to know, other than saying "Bahaullah or our teachers said so", what is the methodology of deriving which is which? There is zero about the Buddha being a manifestation of God in it. None.

Bahai's claim the Quran is Gods inerrant word, etc etc, but there is nothing in the Quran that says Muhammed was a manifestation of God. None. The Bahai website is a corpus of apologetics and it may have some explanation to this, but what is the Quranic explanation presented in these websites, other than saying "because Bahaullah or our teachers said so"? If you claim the Quran was Gods word, it should say so.

Is not this a questionable theology which claims all the prophets including Moses, Muhammed, Buddha etc etc were all "manifestations of God" while the Quran nor the Tipitaka has nothing to support that theology?

Peace.

Honestly, it does not bother me at all what Baha`i followers belive. It is their belief and their teahing. so worry about it so much? Just because it is different in many aspects than what i my self belief does not mean others can believe what Baha`i do

 

[firedragon]

Honestly, it does not bother me at all what Baha`i followers belive. It is their belief and their teahing. so worry about it so much? Just because it is different in many aspects than what i my self belief does not mean others can believe what Baha`i do

Honestly, it doesnt bother me at all what you believe about the Bahai's and what they can or cannot believe brother. Not at all.

Threads are not always opened because something is bothering you. Some people ask why some people do studies in theology as in "why bother about other peoples beliefs"? Similar questions are asked from those who study philosophy.

Hope you understand.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Honestly, it doesnt bother me at all what you believe about the Bahai's and what they can or cannot believe brother. Not at all.

Threads are not always opened because something is bothering you. Some people ask why some people do studies in theology as in "why bother about other peoples beliefs"? Similar questions are asked from those who study philosophy.

Hope you understand.

Not sure i said your OP was opend because it bothers you what Baha`i believe And many OPs are opend because we want to learn about what others belief without a wish to correct them in what they do believe in.

 

[firedragon]

Not sure i said your OP was opend because it bothers you what Baha`i believe And many OPs are opend because we want to learn about what others belief without a wish to correct them in what they do believe in.

Do you think the prophet Muhammed was a manifestation of Allah himself?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Do you think the prophet Muhammed was a manifestation of Allah himself?

No that is not my belief.

 

[firedragon]

No that is not my belief.

What would you say if I told you that the Quran proves this case that Muhammed was a manifestation of God?

 

[Spirit of Light]

What would you say if I told you that the Quran proves this case that Muhammed was a manifestation of God?

In my understanding the Wisdom and teaching that Muhammad recieved was from Allah, But he was a prophet not a God. But of course my understanding may be limited, and there can be many things i do not know.

 

[firedragon]

In my understanding the Wisdom and teaching that Muhammad recieved was from Allah, But he was a prophet not a God. But of course my understanding may be limited, and there can be many things i do not know.

Thanks brother. Cheers.

 

[Trailblazer]

I like the general idea of the progress of humanity through time in their understanding and increased practice of spirituality.
However, I don't believe at all in the succession of Abrahamic religions starting with Jewish monotheism as the main global line of development. The Abrahamics are in a sense more marginal (not in a negative sense) just like the more "primitive" religions of the America's, Africa, Australia and the heathen Arians were.

Rather I'm convinced that Lord Shiva was the one who kick-started the advanced and more systematic practice and understanding of spirituality (Tantra) when He travelled around the globe about 7000 years ago.
His important successor was Lord Krishna around 3500 years ago and later came some intermediary spiritual teachers with much less impact.

The main global line of development of spirituality may well have started with Hinduism given that Hinduism is the oldest religion in the world.

The third global Sadguru lived more recently than Bahaullah, so Bahaullah cannot be the one with the most universal vision in this regard.

Firstly, I do not understand what a Sadguru is and secondly I do not know what you mean by universal vision.
Thirdly, I do not understand why you think that who has the most universal vision is related to who lived more recently.

So why was India thrice so central in this kick-starting of the human dharma? India is like the spiritual navel point of this planet because so many different human cultures (also having moved along large rivers flowing into India) merged in India and the climatic circumstances were more ideal for human cultural development than in the rest of the world for thousands of years.

Of course as a follower of Lord Rama or Ganesha, you will not prefer to recognize that particular succession of great spiritual Teachers nor will you do so as an Abrahamic type of follower.

But that is exactly my point, such ideas cannot be imposed outside your own path.
Especially in India the Abrahamic-centric frame will never be accepted and not only because of geo-sentimental reasons but mainly for ideological (philosophical) reasons. Yoga and meditation have already spread around the globe. And even the Abrahamics and other religions owe a very lot to Tantra, whether they are aware of it or not.

I do not believe that any religious ideas should ever be imposed upon anyone.

I will be the first to say that I know next to nothing about Hinduism and none of the central figures of the Baha'i Faith, including Baha'u'llah, Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi wrote anything about Hinduism. All I know is the it is a widely accepted Baha'i belief that Hinduism is one of the major religions and Krishna ts considered a Manifestation of God. I cannot say where that belief originated, I would have to do some digging to find out.

You might be interested in this article written by a Baha'i who is familiar with Hinduism. It is an attempt to explore the relationship between Hinduism and the Baha'i Faith and to explain the Baha'i Faith to those who are from a Hindu background.

Hinduism and the Bahá'í Faith