How are these Great Beings explained?

[Vinayaka]

But, since not too many people from other religions are even posting here, do they even care about the Baha'i Faith and what it is saying and offering to the world? They pretty much ignore it, believing it to be a false religion.

Except for a couple of suckers. lol.
Certainly I've seen a lot of 'delusions of grandeur' about the Bahai by the Bahai. Overall, it's a small and minor faith but really disproportionately represented on sites like this because of the insatiable drive to spread the teachings, which has still been largely unsuccessful. Still its far better than most of the individual messiah claimants who often don't get a single follower.

There are 7 or 8 relatively active Bahai on this site. Each of Islam, Christianity, and Hinduism have 100 times as many followers. If it was proportionate to real life population, there's be around 700 active people for each of those faiths.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I don't think it's a problem of people not speaking, but rather a problem of people not listening, My Guru spoke at the United Nations in 2001. His talk was about if you want to end the violence in the world, you have to end it in the home. Beaters become beaters. It starts with corporal punishment, the making of a fist, the increase in volume of voice to increase the sense of having power over another individual.

All true. We just have to keep trying. Spiritual education doesn't happen overnight and unfortunately often it takes a tragedy before we make real progress.

But the thing is, people need help and encouragement to find ways of getting away from aggression to solve disputes. People need to be taught how to consult in a living manner. Politicians are just confrontational instead of reconciliatory and they need to learn too how to come together in spiritual consultation.

It's not good this gunboat diplomacy where they point a gun or nuke at each other. One day they'll pull the trigger.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I don't think it's a problem of people not speaking, but rather a problem of people not listening, My Guru spoke at the United Nations in 2001. His talk was about if you want to end the violence in the world, you have to end it in the home. Beaters become beaters. It starts with corporal punishment, the making of a fist, the increase in volume of voice to increase the sense of having power over another individual.

Your Guru sounds like a nice person. What's his name and Teachings?

 

[Vinayaka]

All true. We just have to keep trying. Spiritual education doesn't happen overnight and unfortunately often it takes a tragedy before we make real progress.

But the thing is, people need help and encouragement to find ways of getting away from aggression to solve disputes. People need to be taught how to consult in a living manner. Politicians are just confrontational instead of reconciliatory and they need to learn too how to come together in spiritual consultation.

It's not good this gunboat diplomacy where they point a gun or nuke at each other. One day they'll pull the trigger.

It's far more than saying 'no'. I dealt with kids going angry out to playgrounds. We taught strategies to diffuse your own anger, like deep breathing, enough to consider, 'How is my violence going to help this situation?' In 30 years where I taught, the fights on the playground got reduced from about 1 a week to basically none.

So you're right. It's about strategy. Though, again, if you've ever been around an angry person or group, the emotion is so high that any amount of reasoning is pointless. I watched a person break another person's arm by stomping on it, in a bar fight. All he could say when he finally calmed down was , 'Well, a fight's a fight."

 

[Vinayaka]

Your Guru sounds like a nice person. What's his name and Teachings?

Sivaya Subramuniyaswami ... google it.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Is it burial, cremation, or a choice?

Burial

 

[loverofhumanity]

It's far more than saying 'no'. I dealt with kids going angry out to playgrounds. We taught strategies to diffuse your own anger, like deep breathing, enough to consider, 'How is my violence going to help this situation?' In 30 years where I taught, the fights on the playground got reduced from about 1 a week to basically none.

So you're right. It's about strategy. Though, again, if you've ever been around an angry person or group, the emotion is so high that any amount of reasoning is pointless. I watched a person break another person's arm by stomping on it, in a bar fight. All he could say when he finally calmed down was , 'Well, a fight's a fight."

This is where things like meditation needs to be taught in all schools but a lot of violence and wars also arise from prejudices whether religious, political, national or racial.

While religious leaders teach their people that they are superior it creates tension. Anytime people are taught their race or religion or nationality are superior that can cause prejudice and eventually violence to break out. Even in Buddhist Myanmar we have the Rohinga problem. In America violence between black and white and we already know there are problems with the ways some Muslims societies are taught to view other religions.

We bekieve only education can eventually overcome this problem so that from an early age all children are taught the equality of all humanity that all races, religions, nationalities are just one human family. That doesn't mean not appreciating diversity but what we want is for people to respect everyone for who they are and not judge them as inferior because of religious or racial differences.

 

[paarsurrey]

I feel this is just an ethnocentric view. Everyone says that all the other religions except their own were warmongers. Clearly and undeniably some of the adherents of Islam were warmongers, The same can be said for Christians. The further back you go, it's harder to tell. For example, some folks interpret the Bhagavad Gita as entirely metaphorical, while other see it as literal history. Pretty hard to say that the Islamic invasions of India, or the Christian crusades were metaphorical.

Whether of not the books or founders themselves promoted it is another story. The fact of the matter is that they were left open to interpretation, and violence remained a possibility.

Of course, defense, and aggression are two different things, like in boxing, punching and blocking are two different things.

What is the Ahmadiyya view on self-defense?

I don't believe that. All revealed religions are peaceful, except some minority individuals who show extremism and cannot grasp the moderation, for that they are accountable in the hereafter.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

In Islam, verses of Quran needs to be interpreted correctly, without error. Ordinary believers are not infallible and could misinterpret the verses. They could make mistake. Sometimes, a word can have several meanings. Different people may usually have different opinions which meaning was intended. Therefore, in Islam, the only people who could interpret verses free from error, are Prophet Muhammad, and His people of Household, who according to Quran, God made Them clean from everything. Which means Imam Ali, Hassan, Hussein....until Imam Askari.
So, if we want to Quote a verse from Quran, and explain what that verse means really, we should see How Prophet Muhammad and People of Household explained and interpreted. We cannot make up, or invent our own interpretations.

This again is not mentioned in Quran, the first and the foremost source of guidance of Islam, whatever the denomination. If I am wrong please quote from Quran.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

According to the explanation given in page 8 and 9 of Baha'u'llah: The Great Announcement of the Qur'an in the Arabic orginal of surah 55:1-4 the word "bayan' is in the Quran, and if it were correctly translated, would appear in the translation as Bayan - the name of the Bab's holy book.
Kind regards

Please quote the text of the verse with the verses in the context, some preceding and some following verses and then make up one's point of view.
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

This is where things like meditation needs to be taught in all schools but a lot of violence and wars also arise from prejudices whether religious, political, national or racial.

While religious leaders teach their people that they are superior it creates tension. Anytime people are taught their race or religion or nationality are superior that can cause prejudice and eventually violence to break out. Even in Buddhist Myanmar we have the Rohinga problem. In America violence between black and white and we already know there are problems with the ways some Muslims societies are taught to view other religions.
.

I believe that the Bahai, perhaps unknowingly, also contribute to the problem. I view proselytizing as himsa, violence, because of the pain it may cause in families that get broken up because of it. There are many examples of the harm it can cause. Suppose a young man goes off to university away from his home, encounters a new religion like Christianity or Bahai, and secretly converts, without telling his family. Then one weekend he returns home, and 'comes out' religiously. This is not the same as coming out as a gay person, because it could have easily been prevented, had not those aggressive proselytizing religions been doing what they did, encouraging, befriending, all in the search for new converts. So the person goes home, and the family is just devastated at the situation. Mother is all sad, Father gets angry, they blame themselves, and why? Because their son needed friends, yes, but there needn't be any religion in that.

My neighbour house is a Mormon missionary house. I really enjoy chatting with the young missionaries from far off lands. They will shovel the walk, help move something in the garden, and the topic of religion never comes up, other than to say I'm a Hindu. That always just gets smiles, because they have the education to know that Hinduism has family and peaceful values. In other words, we pose no threat to each other at all.

 

[Vinayaka]

I don't believe that. All revealed religions are peaceful, except some minority individuals who show extremism and cannot grasp the moderation, for that they are accountable in the hereafter.

Regards

Hinduism isn't a revealed religion, so I guess we're not peaceful.

 

[Vinayaka]

That doesn't mean not appreciating diversity but what we want is for people to respect everyone for who they are and not judge them as inferior because of religious or racial differences.

If this were true, the International House of Justice would immediately ban conversions.

 

[paarsurrey]

Hinduism isn't a revealed religion, so I guess we're not peaceful.

I didn't say it.
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

I didn't say it.
Regards

You said "All revealed religions are peaceful," implying that if a religion isn't revealed, then its not peaceful.

If the scriptures of the warmongering faiths didn't have as much ambiguity about violence as they do, they couldn't so easily be interpreted by some as being a call to violence. On other places on RF, I've read direct quotes about killing the infidels and all that. Certainly many individuals have interpreted it that way.

But I'm still glad that isn't your interpretation, and Ammadiya, remains, at least for now, a peace loving branch of Islam.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Sivaya Subramuniyaswami ... google it.

Many thanks. Much appreciated.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

This again is not mentioned in Quran, the first and the foremost source of guidance of Islam, whatever the denomination. If I am wrong please quote from Quran.
Regards

It is in Hadithes and Quran. Quoting from Al-Kafi, Book 1, chapters 22 and 23:

H 554, Ch. 22, h 1
A number of our people has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from al-Husayn ibn Sa‘id from an-Nadr ibn Suwayd from Ayyub ibn Hurr and ‘Imran ibn Ali from abu Basir from abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) who has said the following. "We are the people well-grounded in knowledge and we are the ones who know how to interpret it."

H 555, Ch. 22, h 2
Ali ibn Muhammad has narrated from ‘Abdallah ibn Ali from Ibrahim ibn Ishaq from ‘Adallah ibn Hammad from Burayd ibn Mu‘awiya who has narrated the following from either one of the Imams (a.s.) about the words of Allah, Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most gracious. "No one knows its true interpretations except God and those who have a firm grounding in knowledge . . ." (3:7). The Holy Prophet is the best among the people well-grounded in knowledge. Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most gracious, taught him all that He had revealed to him in the form of original text and in the form of interpretations. Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most gracious, would not reveal anything to him that he would not know the meaning thereof. The successors of the Holy Prophet (s.a.) after him knew all revelations.
As for those who do not know the interpretations thereof, when the scholar speaks to them with knowledge, they say, "We believe in it, for all of this is from our Lord." The Holy Quran consists of specific, general, clear, not so clear, abrogating and abrogated statements. The people who are well-grounded in knowledge know all of the Holy Quran."

H 556ch22, h 3
Al-Husayn ibn Muhammad has narrated from MuAlia ibn Muhammad from Muhammad ibn ’Uwarma from Ali ibn Hassan from ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Kathir from abu ‘bdallah (a.s.) who has said the following. "People well grounded in Knowledge stands for Amir alMu’minin Ali (a.s.) and the Imams after him."

H 557, Ch. 23, h 1
Ahmad ibn Mahran has narrated from Muhammad ibn Ali from Hammed ibn 'Isa from al-Husayn ibn al-Mukhtar from abu Basir who has said that he heard abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) say the following about this verse of the Holy Quran. "In fact, the Quran consists of illustrious verses that exist in the hearts of those who have knowledge. . . ." (29:49) The Imams (a.s.) pointed to his own hear."

H 558, Ch. 23, h 2
It is narrated from him from Muhammad ibn Ali from ibn Mahbub from ‘Abd al-‘Aziz al-‘Abdi from abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) who has said the following about the words of Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High. "In fact, the Quran consists of illustrious verses that exist in the hearts of those who have knowledge. . . ." (29:49) ‘They are the Imams (a.s.)’.

H 559, Ch. 23, h 3
It is narrated from him from Muhammad ibn Ali from 'Uthman ibn ‘Isa from Sama‘a from abu Basir from abu Ja‘far (a.s.) who has said the following about this verse of the Holy Quran. "In fact, the Quran consists of illustrious verses that exist in the hearts of those who have knowledge. . . ." (29:49) The Imams (a.s.) then said, "O abu Muhammad, for the sake of Allah, be the judge and tell, of who it is spoken (so often) between the two covers of the Holy Quran?" I then asked, "Who are they, "May Allah take my soul in service for your cause. The Imams (a.s.) said, "Who else can they be other than ourselves?"

H 560, Ch. 23, h 4
Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Muhammad ibn al-Husayn from Yazid Sha‘ar from Harun ibn Hamza who has said that he hear abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) say who has said the following. "In fact, the Quran consists of illustrious verses that exist in the hearts of those
who have knowledge. . . ." (29:49) ‘They are the Imams (a.s.) exclusive of all others.’"


So, according to these verses and Hadithes, only the Prophet and the Successors (Shia imams) are well-grounded in knowledge and know all its interpretation. Allah said, He only purified people of the Household. So, their Heart is pure and clean, and they would have a perfect understanding, because according to Quran, with Heart we understand, and when they were purified, and had a pure heart, they had perfect understanding.

 

[loverofhumanity]

If this were true, the International House of Justice would immediately ban conversions.

I cant see any problem with people choosing their own beliefs as long as it's of their own choosing through independent investigation and not forced on them.

 

[Vinayaka]

I cant see any problem with people choosing their own beliefs as long as it's of their own choosing through independent investigation and not forced on them.

I agree. But proselytizing can be subtle, without the proselytizer being aware of the harm its causing. Flirt to convert, helping with strings attached, friendship evangelism, and all the more subtle forms of attempting to sway others to your view are all very vague, and as to the harm it causes in others, that can easily be swept under the carpet, and denied. Many simply don't see the long term effects of a conversion on a family. How many divorces are there, for example, in interfaith marriages. Most certainly the rate is higher than in the average population.

No family needs some wild enthusiastic younger brother or sister preaching to them about their new found religion. It's painful.

As Hindus, we love all peace abiding people of all faiths. But we leave them alone religiously, unless questioned. The ONLY reason I gave you the name of my Guru was you asked me directly. The primary reason I won't go to an evangelical chursh, the local Bahai center, or a couple of particular Hinduish temples here in my city, even for interfaith, or a friendly gesture, is I know darn well I'll be stalked by the people there thinking i need to convert to their way.

These days, the internet is the main source for asking questions, many people have access, and any seeker can go out and find almost anything they want about any religion they want to without being pestered.

Knowing this though, the evangelical faiths are no seeing the 'ripe for the picking' communities as the poorest ones on the planet that have no access to the internet. A place where they don't have access to both sides of the coin.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I believe that the Bahai, perhaps unknowingly, also contribute to the problem. I view proselytizing as himsa, violence, because of the pain it may cause in families that get broken up because of it. There are many examples of the harm it can cause. Suppose a young man goes off to university away from his home, encounters a new religion like Christianity or Bahai, and secretly converts, without telling his family. Then one weekend he returns home, and 'comes out' religiously. This is not the same as coming out as a gay person, because it could have easily been prevented, had not those aggressive proselytizing religions been doing what they did, encouraging, befriending, all in the search for new converts. So the person goes home, and the family is just devastated at the situation. Mother is all sad, Father gets angry, they blame themselves, and why? Because their son needed friends, yes, but there needn't be any religion in that.

My neighbour house is a Mormon missionary house. I really enjoy chatting with the young missionaries from far off lands. They will shovel the walk, help move something in the garden, and the topic of religion never comes up, other than to say I'm a Hindu. That always just gets smiles, because they have the education to know that Hinduism has family and peaceful values. In other words, we pose no threat to each other at all.

But why shouldn't each adult have the freedom to choose his own religion? If the parents become angry and upset I think that the problem is with them not respecting freedom of thought and belief.

If a member of a family embraces truth we should rejoice not be distressed!! If a person turns away from sinfulness and ungodliness towards a life of virtue and service to humanity what is to grieve?

When my mother saw that by my becoming a Baha'i I stopped taking alcohol completely and stopped gambling she rejoiced and became a Baha'i too.