Can Non-Abrahamics and Abrahamics be from same God?

[Vinayaka]

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

In your opinion, sure. Is any alternate (non-Baha'i) view inaccurate? Is the only accurate view of the world the Baha'i view?

Edited to add ... here's a quote for you ....
"Attach no importance to self-seeking … Heed them not. Deal in the contrary way."
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Bahá’í World Faith, p. 216)

 

[ManSinha]

There are numerous lines from the Sikh sacred texts that basically have the message "Yes it is a single Universal Lord - different people use different names to refer to Him" - I think that about sums it up

Here is one example - I can provide other examples

 

[Dawnofhope]

If we are trying to answer the question of a common God between the Abrahamics and Dharmic Faiths with reference to either Buddhist and Hindu sacred writings, it is impossible to answer. None of the Buddhist writings can be authenticated as to whether or not they were Buddha's actual words though it seems very likely that at least some of the writings attributed to the Buddha reflect what He actually taught. However we can't definitively distinguish with clarity what Buddha taught. Perhaps the Dharma (meaning Buddha's Teachings) really have been lost.

The problem is only confounded further in regards to the Vedas and other ancient Hindu writings. So if we are trying to ascertain the pure Teachings of Krishna or Buddha, it will be impossible to find agreement.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

In your opinion, sure. Is any alternate (non-Baha'i) view inaccurate? Is the only accurate view of the world the Baha'i view?

Edited to add ... here's a quote for you ....
"Attach no importance to self-seeking … Heed them not. Deal in the contrary way."
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Bahá’í World Faith, p. 216)

And what do you see that means when the full quote is given


"....To the orphans be ye kind fathers, and to the unfortunate a refuge and shelter. To the poor be a treasure of wealth, and to the sick a remedy and healing. Be a helper of every oppressed one, the protector of every destitute one, be ye ever mindful to serve any soul of mankind. Attach no importance to self-seeking, rejection, arrogance, oppression and enmity. Heed them not. Deal in the contrary way. Be kind in truth, not only in appearance and outwardly. Every soul of the friends of God must concentrate his mind on this, that he may manifest the mercy of God and the bounty of the Forgiving One. He must do good to every soul whom he encounters, and render benefit to him, becoming the cause of improving the morals and correcting the thoughts so that the light of guidance may shine forth and the bounty of His Holiness the Merciful One may encompass. Love is light in whatsoever house it may shine and enmity is darkness in whatsoever abode it dwell..."

Regards Tony

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Comment in bracket is by myself.

I very much doubt it since even the Abrahamic religions stand in sharp contrast with each other and hold very fundamentally different viewpoints.

 

[RoaringSilence]

If we are trying to answer the question of a common God between the Abrahamics and Dharmic Faiths with reference to either Buddhist and Hindu sacred writings, it is impossible to answer. None of the Buddhist writings can be authenticated as to whether or not they were Buddha's actual words though it seems very likely that at least some of the writings attributed to the Buddha reflect what He actually taught. However we can't definitively distinguish with clarity what Buddha taught. Perhaps the Dharma (meaning Buddha's Teachings) really have been lost.

The problem is only confounded further in regards to the Vedas and other ancient Hindu writings. So if we are trying to ascertain the pure Teachings of Krishna or Buddha, it will be impossible to find agreement.

Adrian ,
Lets assume that the vedas , the geeta and writtings of buddha were tampered with by humans and since you cannot confirm it so lets assume the worst..

Now based on this assumption , observe the timing of when those books were written and the QUALITY of knowledge in them , even if it came from a human WHO INTENDED TO MANIPULATE ..what exactly was the message and intention that he was trying to convey at those times when the world wasn't even civilized fully.Why is there no land lust or politics in hindu books?? why do they talk about lust anger ego attachment and greed as the fundamental enemies . how genius is a person who manipulates geeta and yet it is a time tested tool for self improvement which worked throughout ages. you will not find a trace of contamination simply coz the quality of the message is pure.

on the other hand you have baha'ullah who took bible torah quran and hindu teachings and made his own new soup. which is further more political ..

one life and eternal punishment is fundamentally wrong if the expected followers have variable opportunity ... its simply unfair.

 

[ManSinha]

I have even pointed out that the SGGS was dictated by the Guru himself and has been authenticated in many ways - given that the Kartarpur Bir still exists and Guru Gobind Singh dictated another one which is the complete collection - the claims of certain individuals on this forum, of exclusivity - simply do not stand - and yet there is Jineh Tohe Dhayiyo

 

[Dawnofhope]

Adrian ,
Lets assume that the vedas , the geeta and writtings of buddha were tampered with by humans and since you cannot confirm it so lets assume the worst..

Now based on this assumption , observe the timing of when those books were written and the QUALITY of knowledge in them , even if it came from a human WHO INTENDED TO MANIPULATE ..what exactly was the message and intention that he was trying to convey at those times when the world wasn't even civilized fully.Why is there no land lust or politics in hindu books?? why do they talk about lust anger ego attachment and greed as the fundamental enemies . how genius is a person who manipulates geeta and yet it is a time tested tool for self improvement which worked throughout ages. you will not find a trace of contamination simply coz the quality of the message is pure.

on the other hand you have baha'ullah who took bible torah quran and hindu teachings and made his own new soup. which is further more political ..

one life and eternal punishment is fundamentally wrong if the expected followers have variable opportunity ... its simply unfair.

Your post raises a number of issues.

1/ In regards who wrote the Bhagavad Gita the short answer is we don't know

Wikipedia states:

In the Indian tradition, the Bhagavad Gita, as well as the epic Mahabharata of which it is a part, is attributed to sage Vyasa, whose full name was Krishna Dvaipayana, also called Veda-Vyasa. Another Hindu legend states that Vyasa narrated it while the elephant-headed deity Ganesha broke one of his tusks and wrote down the Mahabharata along with the Bhagavad Gita.

Scholars consider Vyasa to be a mythical or symbolic author, in part because Vyasa is also the traditional compiler of the Vedas and the Puranas, texts dated to be from different millennia. The word Vyasa literally means "arranger, compiler", and is a surname in India. According to Kashi Nath Upadhyaya, a Gita scholar, it is possible that a number of different individuals with the same name compiled different texts.

Bhagavad Gita - Wikipedia

So as inspiring and profound this text is to many people, we have no way of knowing who wrote it and for what purpose.

2/ The historicity of krishna Himself Wikipedia states:

According to Guy Beck, "most scholars of Hinduism and Indian history accept the historicity of Krishna - that he was a real male person, whether human or divine, who lived on Indian soil by at least 1000 BCE and interacted with many other historical persons within the cycles of the epic and puranic histories." Yet, Beck also notes that there is an "enormous number of contradictions and discrepancies surrounding the chronology of Krishna's life as depicted in the Sanskrit canon."

Lanvanya Vemsani states that Krishna can be inferred to have lived between 3227 BCE - 3102 BCE from the Puranas.[121] A number of scholars, such as A. K. Bansal, B. V. Raman places Krishna's birth year as 3228 BCE.[122][123] A paper presented in a conference in 2004 by a group of archaeologists, religious scholars and astronomers from Somnath Trust of Gujarat, which was organised at Prabhas Patan, the supposed location of the where Krishna spent his last moments, fixes the death of Sri Krishna on 18 February 3102 BC at the age of 125 years and 7 months.

Krishna - Wikipedia

3/ There is no definitive proof that reincarnation to be true. You can provide rationale as to why reincarnation seems logical and true to you but its personal belief.

4/ You presentation of what Baha'u'llah actually taught is false.

 

[RoaringSilence]

Your post raises a number of issues.

1/ In regards who wrote the Bhagavad Gita the short answer is we don't know

Wikipedia states:

In the Indian tradition, the Bhagavad Gita, as well as the epic Mahabharata of which it is a part, is attributed to sage Vyasa, whose full name was Krishna Dvaipayana, also called Veda-Vyasa. Another Hindu legend states that Vyasa narrated it while the elephant-headed deity Ganesha broke one of his tusks and wrote down the Mahabharata along with the Bhagavad Gita.

Scholars consider Vyasa to be a mythical or symbolic author, in part because Vyasa is also the traditional compiler of the Vedas and the Puranas, texts dated to be from different millennia. The word Vyasa literally means "arranger, compiler", and is a surname in India. According to Kashi Nath Upadhyaya, a Gita scholar, it is possible that a number of different individuals with the same name compiled different texts.

Bhagavad Gita - Wikipedia

So as inspiring and profound this text is to many people, we have no way of knowing who wrote it and for what purpose.

2/ The historicity of krishna Himself Wikipedia states:

According to Guy Beck, "most scholars of Hinduism and Indian history accept the historicity of Krishna - that he was a real male person, whether human or divine, who lived on Indian soil by at least 1000 BCE and interacted with many other historical persons within the cycles of the epic and puranic histories." Yet, Beck also notes that there is an "enormous number of contradictions and discrepancies surrounding the chronology of Krishna's life as depicted in the Sanskrit canon."

Lanvanya Vemsani states that Krishna can be inferred to have lived between 3227 BCE - 3102 BCE from the Puranas.[121] A number of scholars, such as A. K. Bansal, B. V. Raman places Krishna's birth year as 3228 BCE.[122][123] A paper presented in a conference in 2004 by a group of archaeologists, religious scholars and astronomers from Somnath Trust of Gujarat, which was organised at Prabhas Patan, the supposed location of the where Krishna spent his last moments, fixes the death of Sri Krishna on 18 February 3102 BC at the age of 125 years and 7 months.

Krishna - Wikipedia

3/ There is no definitive proof that reincarnation to be true. You can provide rationale as to why reincarnation seems logical and true to you but its personal belief.

4/ You presentation of what Baha'u'llah actually taught is false.

Wikipedia is an unreliable source itself. Ved Vyass was an actual rishi not a group of scholars.
your criteria of choosing a religion based on weather or not the documentation being authentic even if the message is defected is questionable as well.

rather than accepting that one life eternal punishment is fundamentally flawed you will keep on pressing your narrative on others because you want paperwork more than what makes sense.

try to look at things with a fresh perspective.

all those dates you gave for krishna cannot be authentic ..since the city of dwarka disovered underwater is carbon dated 12k years +.

THE RIVER SARASVATI mentioned in vedas actually dried 6000 years ago.. so vedas PREDATE THE ARYAN INVAION THEORY as well.
Now there is satellite image of that dried river available and kicks out the aryan invasion theory Which Was believed to be true coz the BRITISHERS couldn't digest that India could be that advanced therefore the vedas come from a western source... THEY LIKED IT SO MUCH that they wanted ownership of that knowledge racially .

if your aim in life is to find the truth then you have to drop this nonsensical notion of authenticity..and experience it first hand. we all know how propaganda works ..hindus have been a target of this for centuries ..

as for proof of reincarnation ... you give me a criteria by which it will become authentic... In all the case studies done by Dr. Ian stevenson He Made sure that a Scientific Method has been applied for proving it .., but people still don't get convinced becoz of VESTED INTERESTS.

When you pick your choice of faith you drop all those assessment tools and accept everything so easily .. that is a deep rooted bias towards abrahamic that you might have subconsciously .


do you personally think that one life eternal punishment is fair to all and everyone is on a LEVEL play field?

 

[Vinayaka]

And what do you see that means when the full quote is given


"....To the orphans be ye kind fathers, and to the unfortunate a refuge and shelter. To the poor be a treasure of wealth, and to the sick a remedy and healing. Be a helper of every oppressed one, the protector of every destitute one, be ye ever mindful to serve any soul of mankind. Attach no importance to self-seeking, rejection, arrogance, oppression and enmity. Heed them not. Deal in the contrary way. Be kind in truth, not only in appearance and outwardly. Every soul of the friends of God must concentrate his mind on this, that he may manifest the mercy of God and the bounty of the Forgiving One. He must do good to every soul whom he encounters, and render benefit to him, becoming the cause of improving the morals and correcting the thoughts so that the light of guidance may shine forth and the bounty of His Holiness the Merciful One may encompass. Love is light in whatsoever house it may shine and enmity is darkness in whatsoever abode it dwell..."

Regards Tony

Yes Tony, I did grab the first quote when I googled Baha'i and self-discovery. It was tough when were there were several thousand hits. But of course the quote, in it's entirety, has a totally different meaning. Self-seeking in your quote refers to selfishness, not self-exploration, like in Hinduism, or any of the dharmic faiths. These are two very separate concepts.

Dharmic adherents are totally free to be without prophets and books, as it's a seeking process, not a following and regurgitating process. That's why you get so many different views on this forum from Hindus and Buddhists, whereas the Baha'i' folks, for the most part, speak of one mind. You've all read the same books, after all.

 

[RoaringSilence]

here is treat for you , also please check the citations underneath.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250396110_Setting_Criteria_for_Ideal_Reincarnation_Research

 

[CG Didymus]

So, God is like a Doctor who prescribes teachings to cure the spiritual as well as other problems of a people. If a doctor, prescribes Antibiotic to a person one day, but he prescribes a different medication to a different person at a different time, would that be contradictory? To Jews, He gave the Laws. To Muslims Quran with different Laws. To Hindus, a different set of teachings. Each is suitable for a specific people at a different time.

Who has God cured with the different things he's prescribed? And, what was the disease he was trying to cure?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Who has God cured with the different things he's prescribed? And, what was the disease he was trying to cure?

The diseases are problems in every age. The person who is sick, is the body of humanity. The remedies are teachings and commandments. What Jesus said about divorce is an example.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Wikipedia is an unreliable source itself.

Wikipedia has its weaknesses but it does make an effort to be scholarly.

Ved Vyass was an actual rishi not a group of scholars.

Ved Vyas is considered to the be the author of the Mahabharata and an incarnation of the God Vishnu.

your criteria of choosing a religion based on weather or not the documentation being authentic even if the message is defected is questionable as well.

I've never said Hinduism isn't authentic. I'm interested to better understand the origins of the Bhagavad Gita though.

rather than accepting that one life eternal punishment is fundamentally flawed you will keep on pressing your narrative on others because you want paperwork more than what makes sense.

Whose talking about a lifetime of eternal punishment? That's a Christian or Islamic belief. I'm a Baha'i.

all those dates you gave for krishna cannot be authentic ..since the city of dwarka disovered underwater is carbon dated 12k years +.

If Arjuna visited Dwarka after the Kurukshetra war and Dwarka is over twelve thousand years old, then how did Ved Vyass come to reliably know of events nearly 10,000 years befoehand?

THE RIVER SARASVATI mentioned in vedas actually dried 6000 years ago.. so vedas PREDATE THE ARYAN INVAION THEORY as well.
Now there is satellite image of that dried river available and kicks out the aryan invasion theory Which Was believed to be true coz the BRITISHERS couldn't digest that India could be that advanced therefore the vedas come from a western source... THEY LIKED IT SO MUCH that they wanted ownership of that knowledge racially .

Apparently there are many contradictions when it comes to estimating when Krishna roamed the earth. That is probably why some Hindus regard his existence as mythological.

Krishna

if your aim in life is to find the truth then you have to drop this nonsensical notion of authenticity..and experience it first hand. we all know how propaganda works ..hindus have been a target of this for centuries ..

I believe Krishna was a Manifestation of God who resided on the Indian subcontinent over 5,000 years ago.

It is fine to consider what we know for certain compared to what we don't. Why feel so threatened by science and archaeology?

as for proof of reincarnation ... you give me a criteria by which it will become authentic... In all the case studies done by Dr. Ian stevenson He Made sure that a Scientific Method has been applied for proving it .., but people still don't get convinced becoz of VESTED INTERESTS.

We can establish apples fall from trees, the sun rises in the morning and human babies result from reproduction between a man and a woman. These are all verifiable facts. Can you show me verifiable evidence that reincarnation is true. No problem if you can't. I'm simply helping you distinguish between fact and faith.

When you pick your choice of faith you drop all those assessment tools and accept everything so easily .. that is a deep rooted bias towards abrahamic that you might have subconsciously .

We all have our biases whether we are Abrahamic or Dharmic.

do you personally think that one life eternal punishment is fair to all and everyone is on a LEVEL play field?

No. That is not my belief.

 

[CG Didymus]

I dont want to start an agrument about reincarnamtion, But can it be that He did not know about reincarnation, or did not understand the concept so he did not teach it? I know that most western religions do not teach reincarnation while most asian religions actually do teach it.
Does a thing not exist because you can not see it or explain it?

Five men with spiritual blinders on go into a room and one man reads a book of Scriptures that says that there is no reincarnation. Another reads some Scriptures that says that there is reincarnation. Another reads some Scriptures that says that Jesus is the only way. I forget what the other two read. But some people were above them watching. One said, "Funny, they all believe the Scriptures they like best.? Another said, "What's really funny is that one reads a little bit of all of them but mostly that new one and he says all the Scriptures are one."
"Ah, how wise." Said the first guy.
"Not really. His Scriptures just delete all the things that don't agree with their new Scriptures."

 

[CG Didymus]

What is religion all about?? Religion, all religions and Holy Books teach and promote love, mercy, compassion, good character, patience, the virtues, respect, tolerance, forgiveness, a sin covering eye, humility, forbearance, caring, courtesy,excellence, devotion, detachment, moderation, kindness,generosity, fairness, meekness, charity, hospitality, friendliness, truthfulness, integrity, uprightness, honesty, wisdom, empathy, cooperation, unity, harmony, oneness, peacefulness. This is what the Holy Books of all Faiths teach.

So are you saying obedience to these teachings of religion is the cause of wars???

How well are those religions getting their people to live by those teachings? How well do the religious leaders live by those things? The "Abrahamics" don't have a very good track record.

 

[CG Didymus]

There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God.(Baha’u’llah)

Buddha mentions God in this passage from Buddhist texts.

There is, O Bhikkhus, an unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed. Were there not, O Bhikkhus, this unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed, there would be no escape from the world of the born, originated, created, formed.

Since, O Bhikkhus, there is an unborn, unoriginated, uncreated, unformed, therefore is there an escape from the born, originated, created, formed.”

(The Udana, translated from the Pali by D.M.Strong, p.112)

Do Baha'is believe that some religions are man made and false? Of course you do. Even some, or maybe all, sects of the major religions, you believe have false and man made doctrines and beliefs. Yet, those "false" religious beliefs, like Jesus rising from the dead, or that people reincarnate, have inspired millions. Then, what about people that follow a certain God in a polytheistic religion? Their inspiration is coming from a God that Baha'is say doesn't exist.

 

[CG Didymus]

Your convictions have no basis in fact but are purely a product of your biases caused by your following of the Bahai path. There simply is no way to consistently read or make sense of either the Gita or the Buddhist Suttas by eliminating the rebirth/reincarnation concept. Anyone who has read either to even a moderate extent will know this.
I am quite happy to debate you on this if your are so willing, if only for increasing your appreciation of how fundamental the rebirth concept is to either of the texts. After that you are free to decide what to do about it.

Unfortunately, there is no debate. They believe Baha'u'llah is right, end of discussion. How that is supposed to bring love and peace and oneness to the different religions, I don't know. That is still saying "my religions is right, because my prophet said so."

Then comes, like Vinayaka says, the "double-speak". They'll say they love Buddhism and Hinduism. They love the Buddha and Krishna. But, since there is no reincarnation, and only one God, then everything they taught which appears to say otherwise is wrong.

 

[loverofhumanity]

How well are those religions getting their people to live by those teachings? How well do the religious leaders live by those things? The "Abrahamics" don't have a very good track record.

Hi CG. I think that each religion has had its spring, summer, autumn and winter where it has had periods of great contributions to humanity. Schools, hospitals, orphanages, charities, humanitarian organisations and also in arts and sciences each I believe has contributed its fair share.

But when a religion declines due to the passage of time and the introduction of man made concepts where the original teachings are watered down, then we see less adherence to these wonderful virtues so God sends another Messenger to renew religion once again.

 

[CG Didymus]

We see religion as basically one that has progressed over time. Similar to the different classes in a school. The religion of God appears in each age with a different name and different name of the Teacher and different teachings to suit the capacity and level of the students of that age and the times.

So we were always meant to be one religion progressing through the ages however men became disunited over their views so the religion of God broke into fragments.

So Jews were supposed to accept Christ and Christians accept Muhammad Hindus accept Buddha, and so on and there would only be one religion as was intended. But clergy once they had tasted power refused to let go of it and so they prevented their followers from progressing and accepting the next Teacher so now humanity is stuck in a mess of disjointed religions that was never meant to be.

Now when we speak of unity after they have had power and position for so long the religious leaders won’t have a bar of it.

But I believe people will eventually see the reality that there is really only one religion handed down through the ages that became fragmented and will become united again as one but gradually.

So everybody should have been Hindus and believe in many gods and reincarnation. Then everybody should have joined Judaism and followed the Laws of Moses and believe in one God. Then, for a short time convert to Zoroastrianism and what they believe. Then become Buddhists. And reinstate the belief in reincarnation. Then the whole world should have accepted Jesus. So back to one God and no reincarnation. Then everybody should have joined up with Muhammad. But clergy, those no good #&*$%'s stopped us all from progressing.

I don't know what's wrong with different people just having different beliefs... other than fighting and arguing with each other over which one is right. But even with the Baha'i Faith, we're still arguing over which is right. And, if mine contradicts yours, you say mine is wrong.