Hindu-Bahai Gita Discussion

[spooklorepedia]

Krishna is one of the ten avatars of Vishnu, known as Dashavatara, where Vishnu descends to earth to restore cosmic order. As an avatar, Krishna’s life and actions are seen as divine interventions to protect the righteous, destroy evil, and reestablish dharma. His life story, filled with both human and divine qualities, exemplifies the complex interplay between destiny, divine will, and human actions in Hindu cosmology.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Baha’is believe in Krishna as an Avatar. In all our Houses of Worship throughout the world in our services we include readings from the Bhagavad-Gita as well as the Hindu symbol is part of the architecture of every Baha’i Temple.

 

[Truthseeker]

Krishna is one of the ten avatars of Vishnu, known as Dashavatara, where Vishnu descends to earth to restore cosmic order. As an avatar, Krishna’s life and actions are seen as divine interventions to protect the righteous, destroy evil, and reestablish dharma. His life story, filled with both human and divine qualities, exemplifies the complex interplay between destiny, divine will, and human actions in Hindu cosmology.

Just wondering if you are among those that believe Buddha is one of the avatars of Vishnu. I know about Rama before Krishna, but of the rest unfortunately I know nothing. I'm agnostic about Rama. I don't know if he even existed or not, but then I haven't examined the evidence on that or if he did exist whether he was divine source of truth. The rest are like that too. The Buddha we believe is a source of spiritual truth.

Of course Baha'is have a different take on Krishna Himself, on what He said means, and whether what He said was reported correctly, but I don't intend to impose on Hindus how I see it. I hope all other Baha'is are like that. We're not supposed to do that.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Just wondering if you are among those that believe Buddha is one of the avatars of Vishnu. I know about Rama before Krishna, but of the rest unfortunately I know nothing. I'm agnostic about Rama. I don't know if he even existed or not, but then I haven't examined the evidence on that or if he did exist whether he was divine source of truth. The rest are like that too. The Buddha we believe is a source of spiritual truth.

Of course Baha'is have a different take on Krishna Himself, on what He said means, and whether what He said was reported correctly, but I don't intend to impose on Hindus how I see it. I hope all other Baha'is are like that. We're not supposed to do that.

We have a most delightful Hindu lady who visits us regularly and chants Bhajans and I love it that feeling that we are all one and she loves visiting. She likes Baha’i very much and talks about it a lot to her friends and she is such a beautiful example of a true Hindu. She visits a lot on Thursdays and gives us gifts of milk which she said is a Hindu tradition.

I would like to know which tradition this is so if anyone here knows can you please kindly provide me with a link or some information about it?

 

[SalixIncendium]

So now, as an outsider, you have the knowledge to say just who is a true Hindu or not? I don't study the Gita, so does that make me a non-Hindu?

Of course not. True Baha'is accept the Upanishads and Vedas as valid scripture and Siva as as a Messenger of God.

 

[Truthseeker]

Of the hundreds of available Hindu symbols, which one did the Baha'i pick? Why choose the Bhagavad-Gita, a sectarian scripture, over the Vedas or Upanishads, which are for all Hindus?

The only source we know for sure as Baha'is for truth is Krishna, and the Bhagavad-Gita among what Krishna said and did stands out to most Baha'is. As far as I know no where in the authoritative Writings is the Bhagavad-Gita recommended to us. Generally speaking for the rest, the Vedas or Upanishads, we take it or leave it depending on the individual Baha'i. That is just our take. It shouldn't affect how you see it. If any Baha'i tries to impose how they see it on Hindus, that would be wrong. Hindus have individual favorites among all of this, which is their right. I respect the Hindus tolerance of other Hindus to see this as an individual, and still have unity.

 

[Truthseeker]

So now, as an outsider, you have the knowledge to say just who is a true Hindu or not? I don't study the Gita, so does that make me a non-Hindu?

Of course not. Hindus have their own preferences, and having their own preferences does not make them not a Hindu. Unity in diversity.

 

[Truthseeker]

Of course not. True Baha'is accept the Upanishads and Vedas as valid scripture and Siva as as a Messenger of God.

We have the right to see to see it as we want to individually, just as you do. We do have sources in the Baha'i Faith that we explicitly look to to give some guidance on this, but very little is given on Hindu. We have a different perspective than Hindus do generally on our scripture. We see it as infallibly from God, and we each have different understandings of those, though. It is different from the Hindu perspective on their scripture, as far as I can tell, but we should all strive to respect these different perspectives without antagonism.

 

[George-ananda]

I have been very interested in my life with Baha'i and Advaita Vedanta Hinduism.

I would say they are not ultimately compatible as Baha'i is a dualist philosophy (God and creation are two). Advaita Vedanta Hinduism is nondualist saying 'God and creation are not two'.

An example is the statement 'I am God' would be true in Advaita Vedanta Hinduism but blasphemous to Baha'i beliefs.

 

[Truthseeker]

I have been very interested in my life with Baha'i and Advaita Vedanta Hinduism.

I would say they are not ultimately compatible as Baha'i is a dualist philosophy (God and creation are two). Advaita Vedanta Hinduism is nondualist saying 'God and creation are not two'.

An example is the statement 'I am God' would be true in Advaita Vedanta Hinduism but blasphemous to Baha'i beliefs.

That's okay if we see this differently as far as I'm concerned. We could still be friends. Unity in diversity is a Baha'i principle.

 

[George-ananda]

That's okay if we see this differently as far as I'm concerned. We could still be friends. Unity in diversity is a Baha'i principle.

I love your attitude and agree with it. Both approaches can work well for different people and bring them to the same summit.

 

[SalixIncendium]

We have the right to see to see it as we want to individually, just as you do. We do have sources in the Baha'i Faith that we explicitly look to to give some guidance on this, but very little is given on Hindu. We have a different perspective than Hindus do generally on our scripture. We see it as infallibly from God, and we each have different understandings of those, though. It is different from the Hindu perspective on their scripture, as far as I can tell, but we should all strive to respect these different perspectives without antagonism.

It's not so fun, though, when it comes in the other direction, is it?

 

[Truthseeker]

As for imposing, it's sadly kind of an outcome of the Baha'i philosophy of progressive manifestation. Whereas other religions generally don't speak within their own religion about other faiths, (Nothing in the Bible about Hinduism, for example) for your faith it's an essential component. Of course we're free to ignore it, just as a person in France can ignore an American's comment about the nature of France.

That's a misunderstanding on your part. The New Testament may be part of the same Bible, but it speaks of a previous Dispensation, the Moses Dispensation. The Qur'an refers to Christian and Jewish beliefs. Apparently because we refer to Hinduism and they don't that makes us different in your eyes. Hinduism is the oldest religion in the world, so how on earth could it refer to previous religions? That doesn't make your religion not commenting and interpreting other religions virtuous, it makes it a religion that couldn't have interpreted other religion in it's scriptures.

 

[Truthseeker]

It's not so fun, though, when it comes in the other direction, is it?

It doesn't matter to me that you have a different perspective. I'm not stressed out by that. If you attack our perspective, however, that would be different. I'm not attacking yours. I hope you don't attack ours. I am only human and can get upset about that. I'm sure you've seen that.

 

[SalixIncendium]

If you attack our perspective, however, that would be different. I'm not attacking yours. I hope you don't attack ours. I am only human and can get upset about that. I'm sure you've seen that.

It's not about "attacking" one's perspective. It's about attempting to publicly invalidate it.

Another Baha'i suggested that a woman friend is a "true Hindu," suggesting that other Hindu beliefs are false. Would you appreciate that if this was suggested about your Baha'i beliefs?

 

[Truthseeker]

I said that generally religions other than Baha'i don't have it in their scriptures commentary on other faiths, whereas that is central in Baha'i teaching.

It is not central to our teachings. There is some commentary, but I don't consider it central. That is my perspective, other Baha'is may disagree. It may look that way here because this is a forum with many religions here who discuss issues with people of other religions. The Christian and Muslim faiths do have some commentary about other religions. If I don't understand what you are saying, say it more clearly to me.

There is very little commentary from authoritative sources about the Hindu religion, but we do recognize the Hindu faith, and we can make mistakes about Hindu. It is not bad that we recognize Hindu, though in our own way. Our understanding is different from probably all Hindus, and each Baha'i is on their own to come up with our own understanding.

'Attack' is different then 'disagree with'.

Yes, it is. Disagree means you disagree with respect. Attack means disagree while condemning the others position. I hope I am not sometimes mistaking the one for the other. I may do that.

But from your POV, it is a misunderstanding, because anything other than Baha'i teachings is a misunderstanding. I've also been told that I don't understand Hinduism. I mean, how could I? I'm not a Baha'i.

It means we disagree, and that's all. Some Baha'i or Baha'is must have said that to you, but that is arrogant. I hope you are not lumping us all in in one heap. That would be reducing us to a stereotype.

Frankly, I have not liked interacting with you. I hope we can improve that.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I've also been told that I don't understand Hinduism. I mean, how could I? I'm not a Baha'i.

I would offer no Baha'i has done that and it would be more than ludicrous for any Baha'i to do that.

What has been and would still be offered is that some teachings, that some Hindu may embrace, have been given a different understanding in the Baha'i Writings.

Regards Tony

 

[Truthseeker]

I would offer no Baha'i has done that and it would be more than ludicrous for any Baha'i to do that.

What has been and would still be offered is that some teachings, that some Hindu may embrace, have been given a different understanding in the Baha'i Writings.

Regards Tony

I have not been in position to know for sure if any Baha'i said that to him. It could be a misunderstanding by him of what someone was implying. We do need to make clear that we are not saying that a person doesn't understand his religion.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Sometimes its hard to understand why Hindus struggle with the Baha'i Faith. Hinduism is an independent world religion as the Baha'i Faith is.

Hinduism is a diverse religion with belief in God, gods or no god. The Baha'i Faith is monotheistic.

The Baha'i Faith has extensive commentary on religions that have emerged earlier, particularly Islam and Christianity. There is very little in our writings about Hinduism.

Individual Hindus may comment on other religions but there is little if anything in recognized sacred Hindu scriptures that mentions other religions.

The Baha'i Faith recognizes Hinduism as being a religion of Divine origins and sees Krishna as a historical character and Manifestation of God.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Sometimes its hard to understand why Hindus struggle with the Baha'i Faith.

It's quite simple, really. The struggle I and other Hindus I've encountered have with the Baha'i Faith is with those that identify as Baha'i tell Hindus what is correct and incorrect about Hinduism or attempt to imply Abrahamic origin, such as in the comment below.

The Baha'i Faith recognizes Hinduism as being a religion of Divine origins and sees Krishna as a historical character and Manifestation of God.

A Manifestation of what God?

As I understand it, Baha'i Faith is an Abrahamic religion, and a statement such as the one above implies that Krishna is a manifestation of the God of Abraham. Why is it difficult to understand why Hindus might have a problem with this?

If you and other Baha'is want to believe this, I personally have no problem with this (I can't speak for other Hindus), but I will take exception to a Baha'i wanting me to believe this.