Can Non-Abrahamics and Abrahamics be from same God?

[Vinayaka]

It hasn't. It's just because the religious philosophies of India happen to be your personal favorite. Other peoples aren't less blessed with spiritual insight.

I have tremendous admiration for North American indigenous spirituality.

 

[wandering peacefully]

I have tremendous admiration for North American indigenous spirituality.

Me too. All nature is seen as connected and is respected as if it was family. And it was and stil is family. Loved and never wasted.

 

[Firemorphic]

Yes and no, and yes and no. But it doesn't matter whether they are or aren't.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Sure.

In Hinduism the Baha'i teachings focus on one sect ... Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Hinduism is far larger than Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Many many Hindus like myself don't believe in Kalki at all. So that is cherry picking. Even if the writings about Hinduism by Baha'i authors said, "Some Hindus believe in Kalki, but many don't, it would be accurate. I also don't believe in avatars, or Krishna, and Baha'is make it sound like that's all there is.

I could cherry pick Baha'i writings buy focusing on the writings of Juan Cole.

Hinduism, in particular is easy to cherry pick, because we're so vast. In terms of scripture, Abrahamic religions are religions of the book, whereas Sanatana Dharma is a religion of the library.

I don't know if that can be called cherry picking. The Hindu sects are too many. do you think the Bahai writings should just talk about every single one of them? The Bahai writings seems to suggest, the scriptures of older religions are not preserved, and certain customs and man made teachings were added by people.
The Hindu sects, sometimes have contredictory views and beliefs.

 

[Vinayaka]

I don't know if that can be called cherry picking. The Hindu sects are too many. do you think the Bahai writings should just talk about every single one of them? The Bahai writings seems to suggest, the scriptures of older religions are not preserved, and certain customs and man made teachings were added by people.
The Hindu sects, sometimes have contredictory views and beliefs.

I think the Baha'i shouldn't talk about Hinduism at all. The one main writer, who published 'Baha'i and Hinduism' was one Moojam Momen. He did a horrible job, from my POV, misinterpreting basically the entire faith, viewing it through Baha'i critical eyes. Basically it's fiction. Your prophet, Baha'u'llah said nothing much at all about it. The 'progressive manifestation' is an Abrahamic idea, not a dharmic one.

So I think the Baha'i faith would be better served speaking nothing than demonstrating their ignorance on the subject. As Twain said, "Better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you're a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

Yes, of course the Hindu faith has many contradictions in it. We're a billion people, hundreds of sects, hundreds of Guru teaching lineages. Many of those sects have a similar population to the Baha'i faith. One apt comparison is if you combined the 3 Abrahamic faiths, that diversity still wouldn't reach the diversity of Hinduism. Still we do have a few things in common, like reincarnation, karma, and moksha, of which the Baha'i don't agree with any of them.

And yes, by definition, it is cherry picking.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I don't know if that can be called cherry picking. The Hindu sects are too many. do you think the Bahai writings should just talk about every single one of them? The Bahai writings seems to suggest, the scriptures of older religions are not preserved, and certain customs and man made teachings were added by people.
The Hindu sects, sometimes have contredictory views and beliefs.

It's because Hinduism isn't a single religion. It's basically an umbella term made up by Europeans for different Indian religions that aren't Jainism, Buddhism or Sikhism. Vaishnavism, Shaivism and Shaktism are 3 different religions (with Shaktism being the oldest, stretching back into prehistory). Hinduism is not a religion with "denominations" like Christianity.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Thank you for putting 'I believe' in front of your statement. Makes it far more tolerable.

Thanks for reminding me. Much appreciated.

 

[sayak83]

Thats ok, I am not here to change your mind as what you see contains truth.

I can say that is why I embrace the Baha'i Faith, as it shows to me I can learn from all past Faiths as they are all given by God. If I find something in a Faith that appears to disagree with another aspect of another Faith, I get to explore deeper understandings.

Regards Tony

Cool. Then let us discuss the things that differentiate the religious thoughts of Bahai with the Hindu. It is by learning about the unique and differentiating features of religions (and cultures and customs as well) that one gains new and interesting insight. What is the point of going to an Indian restaurant if it also serves only McDonald type fries and burgers?

 

[Cooky]

Yes, I don't honor the term "abrahamic" as anything meaningful in comparing faiths. I believe all faith comes from God.

 

[sayak83]

I think the Baha'i shouldn't talk about Hinduism at all. The one main writer, who published 'Baha'i and Hinduism' was one Moojam Momen. He did a horrible job, from my POV, misinterpreting basically the entire faith, viewing it through Baha'i critical eyes. Basically it's fiction. Your prophet, Baha'u'llah said nothing much at all about it. The 'progressive manifestation' is an Abrahamic idea, not a dharmic one.

So I think the Baha'i faith would be better served speaking nothing than demonstrating their ignorance on the subject. As Twain said, "Better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you're a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

Yes, of course the Hindu faith has many contradictions in it. We're a billion people, hundreds of sects, hundreds of Guru teaching lineages. Many of those sects have a similar population to the Baha'i faith. One apt comparison is if you combined the 3 Abrahamic faiths, that diversity still wouldn't reach the diversity of Hinduism. Still we do have a few things in common, like reincarnation, karma, and moksha, of which the Baha'i don't agree with any of them.

And yes, by definition, it is cherry picking.

The 3 abrahamic faiths together would not even reach the diversity within Saivism alone!

 

[Vinayaka]

The 3 abrahamic faiths together would not even reach the diversity within Saivism alone!

Diversity is inherent in Hinduism, because one of the main teachings is to 'think for yourself!' often emphatically. Many Gurus have said, "Don't believe me. go discover it for yourself.' So the essential journey is of self-discovery. It's at our very core. That sure helps diversity, on the outside. Maybe not so much at the depths of one's being.

On the other hand, the Abrahamic view (not always) is to pick a guy or a book and then just do what he (or it) tells you to do, believe what he believes, and there is no need for self-discovery. This is right at the very core of the two paradigms. But for individual adherents, both work, just fine.

 

[Desert Snake]

Although the Hindu, Budhism and other Non-Abrahamic Religions seem to be different than the Abrahamics ones, Can they be from the same God, but were revealed or manifested in different ways, based on cultural differences
Could God have spoke dharma, the way He did to Hindus, but in other cultures, He manifested Prophets as seen in Abrahamics.

Would this verse of Quran, explain it?

"To every People have We appointed [different] rites and ceremonies which they must follow: let them not then dispute with thee on the matter, but do thou invite (them) to thy Lord: for thou art assuredly on the Right Way. 2:67

Comment in bracket is by myself.

There really isn't a 'abrahamic' grouping of religions. Different religions.

 

[Desert Snake]

Not the same deity either.

 

[metis]

The 3 abrahamic faiths together would not even reach the diversity within Saivism alone!

And even trying to define Hinduism is fret with difficulty, whereas some just resort to saying that it's a religion that started along in the Hindus River, and then pretty much leave it at that.

A close friend of mine spent a summer in India studying Hinduism, and he said that the variations are astounding.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

always) is to pick a guy or a book and then just do what he (or it) tells you to do, believe what he believes, and there is no need for self-discovery. This is right at the very core of the two paradigms. But for individual adherents, both work, just fine

The remark said in this section of your reply that says; "there is no need for self-discovery" is very very inaccurate.

Faith is all about self discovery and I see a Messenger allows you to do this in a guided Godly way and not as an uncontroled self experience. An experience that may just leed the person, without the pure guidance, to erroneous self motivated conclusions.

Regards Tony

 

[Vinayaka]

The remark said in this section of your reply that says; "there is no need for self-discovery" is very very inaccurate.

My observation has been mostly the opposite. Mostly regurgitation of scripture ... well, that means you let someone else do the discovering for you, I think. But you're free to think you're free to think.

I've talked to several Baha'is on here in depth. It so often feels like I'm talking to the same person.

 

[Vinayaka]

Me too. All nature is seen as connected and is respected as if it was family. And it was and stil is family. Loved and never wasted.

Most certainly they never proselytize or force their view on others.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

My observation has been mostly the opposite. Mostly regurgitation of scripture ... well, that means you let someone else do the discovering for you, I think. But you're free to think you're free to think.

I've talked to several Baha'is on here in depth. It so often feels like I'm talking to the same person.

What you may have not considered is what self discovery is required to submit to the wisdom in those scriptures.

It could be, it is the goal you seek and are yet to realise that.

Regards Tony

 

[Vinayaka]

What you may have not considered is what self discovery is required to submit to the wisdom in those scriptures.

You're preaching to the unconverted, Tony.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You're preaching to the unconverted, Tony.

I am responding to an opinion that stated an innaccurate picture of a personal journey in a Message based Faith.

Regards Tony