Bahaism, Buddhism and Islam, conflict or one?

[InvestigateTruth]

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


Yes, in Bahai view there are verses in Quran that 'in principle' mean exactly what Bahai Faith means, by the term Manifestation of God. One of these verses is the following:

"Ye did not slay them, but it was God who slew them; nor didst thou shoot when thou didst shoot, but God did shoot, to try the believers from Himself with a goodly trial; verily, God both hears and knows" 8:17



Does God shoot??!!!

"Lo! those who disbelieve in Allah and His messengers, and seek to make distinction between Allah and His messengers, and say: We believe in some and disbelieve in others, and seek to choose a way in between; these are really unbelievers: And we have prepared for the unbelievers an ignominious punishment" 4:150-151

verse 8:17, is about when Muhammad shot at enemies in a war. It says, it was not Muhammad, even though it was physically Him, but it was Allah!

Does God shoot?!!!!!

In 4:150, 151, it says true believers must not make any distinction between Allah and His messengers.

That is exactly what Bahai Scriptures mean, by a Manifestation of God.

 

[firedragon]

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

Thats not a great assumption. Because there are other religions that came from remote areas completely detached from the rest of the world which maybe even older if you believe ancestry, or the assumed dating of documents determines the oldest religion.

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.

All of them are sis. All of them are manifestations of the one being, the brahman. Even the mystical syllable OM is considered an audible manifestation of the Brahman. If you read the mahabharatha you would note that it uses the word pradurbava and names six manifestations of Vishnu. Later, the word Avatara began to be used. There is a lot in this.

 

[Trailblazer]

Thats not a great assumption. Because there are other religions that came from remote areas completely detached from the rest of the world which maybe even older if you believe ancestry, or the assumed dating of documents determines the oldest religion.

When I said that Hinduism is the oldest religion on the world I was referring to religions for which we have records.
Baha'is believe that there were previous universal cycles of religion that predated the present universal cycle in which we now live, but there are no records of those religions. There might also have been religions in the present universal cycle older than Hinduism that came from remote areas as you said.

“And now regarding thy question, “How is it that no records are to be found concerning the Prophets that have preceded Adam, the Father of Mankind, or of the kings that lived in the days of those Prophets?” Know thou that the absence of any reference to them is no proof that they did not actually exist. That no records concerning them are now available, should be attributed to their extreme remoteness, as well as to the vast changes which the earth hath undergone since their time.

Moreover such forms and modes of writing as are now current amongst men were unknown to the generations that were before Adam. There was even a time when men were wholly ignorant of the art of writing, and had adopted a system entirely different from the one which they now use. For a proper exposition of this an elaborate explanation would be required.”
Gleanings, pp. 172-173

 

[Marcion]

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

Lord Shiva was not a Hindu, he was a tantric Guru who came to help the whole of humanity advance speedier, only later was He also adopted as a divine personality by Vedic type of priests.

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.

A Sadguru is a very great personality/spiritual teacher who fulfills a long list of requirements.
I could try to look up the list of the requirements.
The Sadguru comes only to a planet very rarely when many people yearn deeply for His coming.
Tantra is a universal type of practice which is not limited to any particular group of people. Anyone who performs a practical type of spiritual sadhana or does something practical for society is a practitioner of Tantra. Religions try to box people in but Tantra never does so.

The Sadguru always has a tantric personality rather than a religious one.
By universal vision I mean that the vision or ideology does not further any type of groupism such as in religion.
The third Sadguru lived after Bahaullah did and He also did not start a new religion, but rather modernized Tantra for the present era and did so for the whole of humanity and not within a religious context.

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

Thank you kindly for the link to the article.
I also know very little about Hinduism. Lord Krishna was a tantric Guru and not a religious personality. Of course He was born in India, but as far as I know He promoted Yoga and Tantra rather than any type of religion.
Which of course does not mean that religions do not have tantric elements in them also.

 

[Vinayaka]

Lord Shiva was not a Hindu, he was a tantric Guru who came to help the whole of humanity advance speedier, only later was He also adopted as a divine personality by Vedic type of priests.

A Sadguru is a very great personality/spiritual teacher who fulfills a long list of requirements.
I could try to look up the list of the requirements.
The Sadguru comes only to a planet very rarely when many people yearn deeply for His coming.
Tantra is a universal type of practice which is not limited to any particular group of people. Anyone who performs a practical type of spiritual sadhana or does something practical for society is a practitioner of Tantra. Religions try to box people in but Tantra never does so.

The Sadguru always has a tantric personality rather than a religious one.
By universal vision I mean that the vision or ideology does not further any type of groupism such as in religion.
The third Sadguru lived after Bahaullah did and He also did not start a new religion, but rather modernized Tantra for the present era and did so for the whole of humanity and not within a religious context.

Thank you kindly for the link to the article.
I also know very little about Hinduism. Lord Krishna was a tantric Guru and not a religious personality. Of course He was born in India, but as far as I know He promoted Yoga and Tantra rather than any type of religion.
Which of course does not mean that religions do not have tantric elements in them also.

I sure hope you don't think you're representative of Hindus. Some of this approaches the degree of other western faiths as to misrepresentation.

For Saivite Hindus like me, Siva is God. Period. I believe it would be helpful for readers if you prefaced your views with 'in my opinion'. Speaking as thought you're stating facts about faiths which you also claim to know little about could be misconstrued by anyone reading, and perhaps insulting to some.

Views of Krishna vary widely within Hinduism itself, but for sure Vaishnavites believe He was also God. Period. The historicity is always up for debate.

 

[Vinayaka]

Well, RF has a whole forum for it. Unfortunately, it is a bit dormant these days.

Non-proselytising religions don't generally have much to say. I do wish more Buddhists would drop by occasionally, if for nothing else than to stop the spreading of misinformation about their religion, and offer takes on Buddhism from a Buddhist POV.

 

[Vinayaka]

No, Bahais accept only Buddha as a manifestation of Allah. Their scheme is simple accept one from al the major religions of the world and then say that their man inherits the mantle. The only exception is Zoroaster as Zoroastrian is not a major religion in the world today. Why that - because their man was from Iran and Zoroastrianism is important in history of Iran and it is a monotheistic religion. It does not matter if Buddha did not accept the existence of a Supreme God or a God of creation. They have to play their tune.

More to it than that, as Baha'is also throw the Bab in there as a manifestation, and Babism was most certainly not a major religion, much like it's descendent.

 

[CG Didymus]

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.

I was only saying it because if the prophecies of all the major religions tell of the coming of Baha'u'llah, which are within the Scriptures of all these religions, then it should not be an exercise in futility. And it's not for some people that have become Baha'is. They've checked out those prophecies and do believe they are pointing to Baha'u'llah. Then, if the religions were like the grades of school, they shouldn't be so different. That's all I was trying to say.

 

[firedragon]

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

This article is quite bad really. How else could I put it without offending you?

Maybe I should say thet because it is so concise it cannot do justice. Maybe if the author gets more time and room it would better.

 

[Aupmanyav]

More to it than that, as Baha'is also throw the Bab in there as a manifestation, and Babism was most certainly not a major religion, much like it's descendent.

What is a major religion? Is Bahaism a major religion? Far from it, even Ahmadiyyas (20 million) have some three times larger numbers than Bahaism (7 million).

 

[Aupmanyav]

They've checked out those prophecies and do believe they are pointing to Baha'u'llah. Then, if the religions were like the grades of school, they shouldn't be so different. That's all I was trying to say.

In case of Hinduism it is very clear. Even if one believes in the tenth avatara of Vishnu (Kalki) to come, it will come at the end of this eon (Kaliyuga), 425,000 years from now. Any one who claims to be Kalki before this time is an imposter. If Bahais have this claim, then I would consider Bahaollah as an imposter and a charlatan.

Though being an atheist Hindu, I do not bvelieve in prophecies, but Bhavishya Purana does mention the name of Kalki's parents, the name of the city, the date and the time of his birth and the position of celestial bodies at that time (Moon, Zodiac, Asterisms, etc.).

 

[Aupmanyav]

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

That is how a person from Abrahamic religions who does not know anything about Hinduism will write. For me, Brahman is not a deity, it is the stuff that things in the universe are made of. For more Hindus, Brahman is not a God which will interfere in worldly affairs.

But Goebbels said 'if you speak a lie hundred times, it becomes the truth'.

 

[Trailblazer]

I was only saying it because if the prophecies of all the major religions tell of the coming of Baha'u'llah, which are within the Scriptures of all these religions, then it should not be an exercise in futility. And it's not for some people that have become Baha'is. They've checked out those prophecies and do believe they are pointing to Baha'u'llah.

I did not mean that checking out the prophecies is an exercise in futility as that can be useful as you said. I meant that trying to use "other religious scriptures" and comparing them with the Baha'i Writings to try to prove that the Baha'i Faith is false is an exercise in futility. In other words, if we see something in the Bible or the Qur'an seems to conflict with the Baha'i Writings, that does not prove the Baha'i Faith is false.

Then, if the religions were like the grades of school, they shouldn't be so different. That's all I was trying to say.

Why don't you think that grades in a school are different? What they have in common is that they are all a school just as religions are all religions, but what we learn in each grade is different and each successive grade is more challenging and more advanced than the previous grade.

 

[Trailblazer]

This article is quite bad really. How else could I put it without offending you?

Maybe I should say thet because it is so concise it cannot do justice. Maybe if the author gets more time and room it would better.

Why would it offend me? I did not write the article. Thanks for your feedback.

 

[Trailblazer]

What is a major religion? Is Bahaism a major religion? Far from it, even Ahmadiyyas (20 million) have some three times larger numbers than Bahaism (7 million).

A major religion is a religion that was revealed by a Manifestation of God, it has nothing to do with the size of the religion. Religions are generally small in the early centuries and grow slowly over time.

“Just how small was the Christian movement in the first century is clear from the calculations of the sociologist R Stark (1996:5-7; so too Hopkins 1998:192-193).Stark begins his analysis with a rough estimation of six million Christians in the Roman Empire (or about ten percent of the total population) at the start of the fourth century... There were 1,000 Christians in the year 40, 1,400 Christians in 50, 1,960 Christians in 60, 2,744 Christians in 70, 3,842 Christians in 80, 5,378 Christians in 90 and 7,530 Christians at the end of the first century.

These figures are very suggestive, and reinforce the point that in its initial decades the Christian movement represented a tiny fraction of the ancient world.”

How many Jews became Christians in the first century?

Islam grew faster than Christianity because the Muslim community spread through the Middle East through conquest, and the resulting growth of the Muslim state provided the ground in which the recently revealed faith could take root and flourish.

The size of the religion also has no bearing on whether it is true or not. To say that is committing the fallacy of argumentum ad populum

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."

This type of argument is known by several names,[1] including appeal to the masses, appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity, argument by consensus, consensus fallacy, authority of the many, bandwagon fallacy, voxpopuli,[2] and in Latin as argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), fickle crowd syndrome, and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect. The Chinese proverb "three men make a tiger" concerns the same idea. Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

The converse of this is that if many or most people do not believe it, it cannot be so, and that is fallacious.

 

[CG Didymus]

In case of Hinduism it is very clear. Even if one believes in the tenth avatara of Vishnu (Kalki) to come, it will come at the end of this eon (Kaliyuga), 425,000 years from now. Any one who claims to be Kalki before this time is an imposter. If Bahais have this claim, then I would consider Bahaollah as an imposter and a charlatan.

Though being an atheist Hindu, I do not bvelieve in prophecies, but Bhavishya Purana does mention the name of Kalki's parents, the name of the city, the date and the time of his birth and the position of celestial bodies at that time (Moon, Zodiac, Asterisms, etc.).

You'd think that a new religion that had the prophet/manifestation write down the exact things God wanted us to know would have explained things better. But instead, he has created even more confusion. As you know, Baha'u'llah said very little, maybe nothing about Hinduism. Except that Hinduism is a true religion from God and Krishna is a manifestation of God. But where does that leave you and Vinayaka? There is no way they tell you all religions are true, and then tell you that your religion is wrong.

 

[CG Didymus]

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.

I always appreciate your threads, especially the ones that challenge the Baha'is to back up some of their claims and beliefs. There is a lot I like about the Baha'i Faith. But when it comes to fulfilling all the prophecies of all the major religions... I don't see it. They try to explain it, but sometimes it's more like explain it away. To many things do end up being... "Because Baha'u'llah said so. So it must be true." For a religion that supports a personal investigation of truth and not following a religion blindly, that does not cut it. Thanks for what you bring to this forum.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The converse of this is that if many or most people do not believe it, it cannot be so, and that is fallacious.

Good. Fallacy of numbers. If you are small, what the majority says may not be true. If you are large, what the minority says must be false.

 

[CG Didymus]

A major religion is a religion that was revealed by a Manifestation of God

The problem I have with this thing "revealed" religion is... What religion did Adam start? Then Noah? Then Abraham? Then Moses? Even Jesus? Did he start a new religion or did his followers break away from the religion of Jesus, Judaism? Then there's Hinduism. Who is the manifestation that started Hinduism? Baha'is recognizes Krishna as a manifestation, but did he found the religion of Hinduism? No. What religion did he start? But why doesn't mention any of the other incarnations that came before Krishna? It's not like they were unknown.

I understand what you're trying to say when you say, "why does any of that matter. It's in the past." But the Baha'i Faith makes it part of their past. If what they say about their past doesn't make sense, then what? It is important to verify if what Baha'u'llah has said is the truth.

 

[Aupmanyav]

But where does that leave you and Vinayaka?

I cannot speak for Vinayaka. My contention is simple. All who claim or are claimed to be prophets /sons / messengers / manifestations / mahdis from any God or Allah are false, all prophecies are false, since there is no God, and what will happen in future cannot be known. These are just tricks to fool people, tricks to sell snake-oil. Try to frighten them, offer them promises. That is what charlatans do.