It's the exact same God except the time hasn't come to intervene. But he's not going to allow us to completely destroy each other. He might intervene eventually.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How are these Great Beings explained?
- Thread starter loverofhumanity
- Start date
It's the exact same God except the time hasn't come to intervene. But he's not going to allow us to completely destroy each other. He might intervene eventually.
Is this definition correct?
Moksha has been defined not merely as absence of suffering and release from bondage to saṃsāra, various schools of Hinduism also explain the concept as presence of the state of paripurna-brahmanubhava (the experience of oneness with Brahman, the One Supreme Self), a state of knowledge, peace and bliss
I thought he did intervene already, according to Abrahamism. Of course in Hinduism, there is no need to intervene, as it's all part of His dance. Ultimately He's not separate from his emanation, so there is nothing separate to intervene.
It varies slightly, but yes. Talking about the soul, not the physical body. No more returning.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
What????
There is no progression from Christianity to Islam. They are totally different religions. For one thing Christians put Jesus as a mirror of his father. Muslims do not put anyone not even Muhammad as the same level as their father/creator.
You're finding similarities again. Can you see the core and greater spiritual differences?
Last edited:
Definitely not!
Beware, O believers in the Unity of God, lest ye be tempted to make any distinction between any of the Manifestations of His Cause, -Baha'u'llah
The remedy for past ills is different to today because the illness is not the same. So God has sent us a Divine Teacher with healing medicine for this age.
Our aim is the well being of humanity not the superiority of the doctor.
How does one achieve moksha?
How does one know one has achieved moksha?
Thank you again for sharing with me something about your beliefs .
By sending the Manifestations that's one way He intervenes.
I'm talking about their religions lack of ability to prevent their followers from going to war. History shows both Christians and Muslims have failed to stem wars between themselves and between each other.
How does one achieve moksha.
This section from Brihadaranyaka upanisad is instructive
On this point there is the following verse:-
A man who's attached goes with his action,
to that very place to which
his mind and character cling.
Reaching the end of his action,
of whatever he has done in this world—
From that world he returns
back to this world,
back to action.
"That is the course of a man who desires.
"Now, a man who does not desire—who is without desires, who is freed from desires, whose desires are fulfilled, whose only desire is his self—-his vital functions(prana) do not depart. Brahman he is, and to brahman he goes. On this point there
is the following verse:-
When they are all banished,
those desires lurking in one's heart;
Then a mortal becomes immortal,
and attains brahman in this world.
There is an ancient path
extremely fine and extending far;
It has touched me, I've discovered it!
By it they go up to the heavenly world
released from here,
wise men, knowers of brahman.
By brahman was this path discovered;
By it goes the knower of brahman,
the doer of good, the man of light.
11 'Joyless' are those regions called,
in blind darkness they are cloaked;
Into them after death they go,
men who are not learned or wise.
12 If a person truly perceives the self,
knowing 'I am he';
What possibly could he want,
Whom possibly could he love,
that he should worry about his body?
13 The self has entered this body, this dense jumble;
if a man finds him,
recognizes him,
He's the maker of everything—the author of all!
The world is his—he's the world itself!
14 While we are still here, we have come to know it.
If you've not known it, great is your destruction.
Those who have known it—they become immortal.
As for the rest—only suffering awaits them.
15 When a man clearly sees this self as god,
the lord of what was
and of what will be,
He will not seek to hide from him.
16 Beneath which the year revolves
together with its days,
That the gods venerate
as the light of lights,
as life immortal.
17 In which are established
the various groups of five, (5 elements, 5 senses etc.)
together with space;
I take that to be the self—
The I who have the knowledge,
The I who am immortal,
I take that to be—
the brahman,
the immortal.
18 The breathing behind breathing, the sight behind sight,
the hearing behind hearing, the thinking behind thinking—
Those who know this perceive brahman,
the first,
the ancient.
19 With the mind alone must one behold it—
there is here nothing diverse at all!
From death to death he goes, who sees
here any kind of diversity.
20 As just singular must one behold it—
immeasurable and immovable.
The self is spotless and beyond space,
unborn, immense, immovable.
21 By knowing that very one a wise Brahmin (a knower of Brahman)
should obtain insight for himself.
Let him not ponder over a lot of words;
it just tires the voice!
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
You are judging individual people's spirituality based on history????
That is exactly like saying that if I practiced Catholicism it would not prevent me from going to war with someone else beside me.
Is that how you judge someone's spiritual growth and differences in each person by their religious denominational history??????
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
There can't be someone who intervenes, prophet, manifestation, or otherwise, when there is no need for it by the definition of that said faith.
How do you fill a gap you see in a bridge when the person who made the bridge knows and built it without a gap?
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
There are two contradiction in one post.
By Bahaullah being the doctor of this age and no one else makes him superior for this age while you say that other doctors are only superior to their age.
Unfortunately, that is not true. All the prophets are "doctors" for this age. If you don't agree with the followers of these religions and their text, you're not believing in the actual Christ, Muhammad, The Buddha, and Brahma of these religions. You're believing in something else and calling it Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism.
By Bahaullah being the doctor of this age and no one else makes him superior for this age while you say that other doctors are only superior to their age.
Unfortunately, that is not true. All the prophets are "doctors" for this age. If you don't agree with the followers of these religions and their text, you're not believing in the actual Christ, Muhammad, The Buddha, and Brahma of these religions. You're believing in something else and calling it Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Also, you don't need to be Bahai to do this. Why not follow no religion?
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
Let me say it this way,
.If you don't agree with their text, you're not believing in the actual Christ, Muhammad, The Buddha, and Brahma of these religions. You're believing in something else and calling it Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism
What you are assuming, is, all the followers of religions are a true representation of the Text, and teachings of the Prophet founder.
Why do you think so?
Which Christian denomination is the true representation of Christ? We have to agree with which denomination of Hinduism, or which sect of Islam, so you can say we are believing in their Prophet?
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. I have no reason to see otherwise.
It's all about experience and practice. When you have those two, the text, regardless of how much I disagree, links with the intimacy of practice. It makes sense.
For example, Christianity (say Catholicism) says that the Church was built on the apostles and the apostles came from the words of christ. Fine. People agree or disagree.
But when you experience the word of the apostles, the teachings of christ, and what The Church means (not symbolism) then, yes, Jesus is the founder of the Church... Bahaullah is not the Eucharist today Christ is.
The Buddha (I've practiced) is the founder of Buddhism. Bahaullah is not a buddha. Buddha does not believe in god as his enlightenment. Enlightenment in Buddhism doesn't involve god. The Buddha says the Dharma is present in the past, future, and present. Bahaullah may be practicing as if a Bodhisattva like many of us are. But he is not enlightened. As long as he believes in god, he is not.
Muhammad and Zoroaster I can't speak for. Just Islam doesn't put anyone side by side with the creator (I gave links, quotes and all of that. Don't think you guys read it. I have to read it in sections or I'll get lost and can't reply well). Hindu has corrected Bahai here so many times I could probably speak for them and be alright.
Why would I assume and have the right to assume these religions are not correct in their teachings from their own founders?
What gives me the right to speak for other religions I am not a part of in practice?
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
You are correct. No body has the right to tell others their Religion has become distorted. But Bahais believe, there is an All-knowing God, who has the right to say so.
I understand that you do not believe in God, but that does not mean there is no Living Truth. The fact is, the founders of World Religions had said that, their religion will become misinterpreted, and its Truth will be forgotten. So to me, what Bahais believe is consistent with what the Founders of Religions had said. If you say, No, these religions of the past had not been changed or misinterpreted, to me, that is ignoring what the Founders of Religions had said. If you say, for example, No, a particular Hindu or Budhist sect does not have any prophecy regarding the distortion in their sect, then I have to ask you, what proof is there, that those other sects that have prophecies about future Manifestation, are false?
You don't understand this one, that's obvious. I'll try once again. People of ALL FAITHS believe that their faith is the best. Otherwise there is just no point sticking to one faith. It's not a criticism, it's just a simple logical observation.
There is only one notable difference about people in this regard. Some people believe their faith is the best one for them, (That's how I see it.) whereas other people believe their faith is the best for all of humanity. (fundamentalist Christians, many Moslems). But top claim that Bahai isn't the chosen faith for you when YOU ARE A BAHAI is just contradiction at it's silliest level. But then as many of us recognise, silly contradictions seem to be part and parcel of your faith.
Not an intellectual concept. But I suppose when the divine consciousness in the soul is between births, and has no desire to come back, I would imagine that would indicate it. So this 'know' thing is on two levels as well. You say you just knew Baha'u'llah was your prophet. So it's intuitive, not book knowledge.
Moksha is very very deep though.
Yes that's what I meant. According to Abrahamism, God has intervened already. Of course since I'm not an Abrahamic, I don't believe that.