How are these Great Beings explained?

[Vinayaka]

Slip of the lip, lol

Funny thing is you already perfectly know the answer.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

If you believe the god of christ and muhammad, god doesn't have prophets of a specific time period. The prophets and their teachings are relevant today.

Do you understand that?

I understand that is the view of mainstream Muslims and Christians. Though in Bahai View, the Sources of Islam and Christianity indeed specifies a Time period for their dispensation, meaning those Revelations were not meant to be forever, but are meant only for a certain period of time, after which, another Revelation was to appear. The Bahai Faith is fulfilment of the Prophecies in Islamic and Christian sources. What I mean by Sources, are Quran and recorded Traditions of Islam, and old/new Testament. Perhaps you are not familiar with these Books, and how they promised of future Revelation, right?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I understand that is the view of mainstream Muslims and Christians. Though in Bahai View, the Sources of Islam and Christianity indeed specifies a Time period for their dispensation, meaning those Revelations were not meant to be forever, but are meant only for a certain period of time, after which, another Revelation was to appear

Yes, I know. Do you understand that what you believe is a belief and the only ones who know their own faith are the practitioners who practice it?

The Bahai Faith is fulfilment of the Prophecies in Islamic and Christian sources. What I mean by Sources, are Quran and recorded Traditions of Islam, and old/new Testament. Perhaps you are not familiar with these Books, and how they promised of future Revelation, right?

I read the Bible. Bahaullah has nothing to do with the bible and the prophecies have nothing to do with Bahaullah and anything Bahai.

I tried to explain this to Loverofhumanity for thousands of pages. Since you are not christian and identify as Bahai and not christian, whatever you say I can't take as spiritual knowledge of a christian just intellectual from a Bahai.

If you asked me about the Bahai faith, I bet I can quote and tell you all about it based on this thread. However, I wouldn't expect anyone to ask me about the Bahai faith and I would not explain to others as if I were Bahai (nor have morals explaining Bahai faith that is not my right to explain).

Even if it were god telling me to explain it, I would not. That's the difference between you and I. I can't think of another way to go about it.

 

[loverofhumanity]

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!

Thanks very much. There's a lot to take in. I'll have to read it a few more times to understand it. Do you have a link and chapter number? I found a copy of this Book but don't know where to find this section. Also which translation is this one? Many thanks.

 

[sayak83]

Thanks very much. There's a lot to take in. I'll have to read it a few more times to understand it. Do you have a link and chapter number? I found a copy of this Book but don't know where to find this section. Also which translation is this one? Many thanks.

Brihadaranyaka 4.4.6 onwards approximately. This is a translation by Patrick olevelle
Upanisads (Oxford World's Classics): Patrick Olivelle: 9780199540259: Amazon.com: Books
But whatever translation you have will do fine as well. Archaic English puts me off, so I like this translation.

 

[loverofhumanity]

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.

My understanding is the soul is able to know God's attributes and be in a state of oneness with the Divine consciousness but I think how we live and act is crucial.

My understanding is then that we could slip in and out of Moksha depending on the life we lead.

I'm wondering if we're all not speaking about the same thing here. For a Buddhist it's Nirvana, for a Christian its Salvation and for Baha'is its Cerititude.

 

[loverofhumanity]

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??????

No one is being judged. The system is what Bahaullah sees as defective so He has brought a new system, eliminated clergy and all forms of rituals and man made dogmas and set up things so we don't have another Crusades or terorism or Holy Wars.

This is a good thing I believe, to have a system that doesn't create wars over theology.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Brihadaranyaka 4.4.6 onwards approximately. This is a translation by Patrick olevelle
Upanisads (Oxford World's Classics): Patrick Olivelle: 9780199540259: Amazon.com: Books
But whatever translation you have will do fine as well. Archaic English puts me off, so I like this translation.

Thank you very much. I found a very good version which had a lot of commentary in it. As well I found the passages you posted.

The translation is excellent. Very nice! Thank you Sayak for sharing this.

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad - Shankara Bhashya translated by Swami Madhavananda : Swami Madhavananda : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

 

[loverofhumanity]

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.

Of course we believe it is what humanity needs today but that is more to do with relevance for this age and not egotistical claims of superiority which we reject.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Also, you don't need to be Bahai to do this. Why not follow no religion?

Everyone follows some path or ideology. They just don't call it religion but they still have beliefs.

In my original post I was trying to point out the unique power that the Great Teachers have to transform individuals and civilisations and that I believe that this is what we need now more than ever - a spiritual revival.

 

[loverofhumanity]

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.

I said that the spiritual teachings are always relevant. But each religion brings something specific for the age He appears.

So new Manifestations will always be relevant for their age.

 

[loverofhumanity]

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?

As humanity progress new paradigms arise. As the need arises we are given guidance from a Teacher to assist us to advance.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

No one is being judged. The system is what Bahaullah sees as defective so He has brought a new system, eliminated clergy and all forms of rituals and man made dogmas and set up things so we don't have another Crusades or terorism or Holy Wars.

It is not a good thing. If I were Catholic and I valued clergy, rituals, and teachings (another word for dogma) I would still be spiritual minded and not tempted to go to war.

Do you actually believe I will be more tempted to war because I follow clergy, rituals, and sacred teachings (dogma)?​

Bahaullah cares less for the people and sees its history as backbone for individual change. That is wrong morally.

This is a good thing I believe, to have a system that doesn't create wars over theology.

If you believe individual spirituality that comes together in like-minded worship, that's your beliefs. There does not need to be a change from an outside party. Let religions find their change. Catholics have been trying steadily for years. That is, if you know the people and not church politics.

Do you actually think the theology I would have believed in causes wars rather than help me and millions of people in our spiritual well-being?​

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Everyone follows some path or ideology. They just don't call it religion but they still have beliefs.

In my original post I was trying to point out the unique power that the Great Teachers have to transform individuals and civilisations and that I believe that this is what we need now more than ever - a spiritual revival.

Do you need Bahaullah for all this?

This sounds like a social reformation with an outside party (Say Americans trying to fix other country's problems) not religious and definitely not spiritual.

Do you feel these teachers are relevant for today just as their religious do?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I said that the spiritual teachings are always relevant. But each religion brings something specific for the age He appears.

So new Manifestations will always be relevant for their age.

This is a contradiction to this statement:

No one is being judged. The system is what Bahaullah sees as defective so He has brought a new system, eliminated clergy and all forms of rituals and man made dogmas and set up things so we don't have another Crusades or terorism or Holy Wars.​

Spiritual teachings (dogma-Bahaullah's teachings are dogma too) you said are defective and there needs to be a new system. Therefore, according to Bahaullah, they wouldn't be relevant for today.

If Bahaullah takes aware rituals, traditios, and dogma, how are these religions he is tearing a part relevant for today?​

You are specifically disregarding other religious teachings and traditions with whom religious deem sacred and relevant for today for a new system they do not agree with. That is wrong.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

As humanity progress new paradigms arise. As the need arises we are given guidance from a Teacher to assist us to advance.

No. We need guidance from teachers of individual faiths. Hindu gets guidance of peace through Brahma and wisdom by a guru. Christians find guidance though Christ. Muslims Muhammad. Lukumi Olorin and the Orishas. You need guidance from Bahaullah. You need more than one teacher for this time period.

Do you actually believe that these teachers are irrelevant for today and only one teacher is needed; on that note, if so, why have other teachers in your faith if their teachings aren't relevant for today-their teachings: tradition, dogma, and rituals?​

Saying one teacher is limiting other faiths to arrive at world-peace for the sake of your new system. That's fine you believe this.

To me it's total disrespect for other people's rituals, traditions, and dogma. They value this and carry these traditions and practices through the next generations. You don't respect this practice. I see that as immoral regardless of what Bahaullah wants to do and why.

How is it an advance to the religious when you take out the heart of religions: their teachings, dogma, and practices?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

In my original post I was trying to point out the unique power that the Great Teachers have to transform individuals and civilisations and that I believe that this is what we need now more than ever - a spiritual revival.

No. You said we need one teacher. Which is it?

I said that the spiritual teachings are always relevant. But each religion brings something specific for the age He appears.

No. One said that the teachings (rituals, traditions, and dogma) are not relevant and needed to be disgarded.

No. Each religion brings spiritual teachings for this day as well.

So new Manifestations will always be relevant for their age.

No. They are relevant for all ages.

As humanity progress new paradigms arise. As the need arises we are given guidance from a Teacher to assist us to advance.

No. This contradicts your first statement of needing teachers. No. We need more than one teacher for guidance for this age as well as the next and in the past.

The sooner you understand this, the closer we get to world peace without domination (well intentioned, forceful, or not) of a one-sided party.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Yes, I know. Do you understand that what you believe is a belief and the only ones who know their own faith are the practitioners who practice it?



I read the Bible. Bahaullah has nothing to do with the bible and the prophecies have nothing to do with Bahaullah and anything Bahai.

I tried to explain this to Loverofhumanity for thousands of pages. Since you are not christian and identify as Bahai and not christian, whatever you say I can't take as spiritual knowledge of a christian just intellectual from a Bahai.

If you asked me about the Bahai faith, I bet I can quote and tell you all about it based on this thread. However, I wouldn't expect anyone to ask me about the Bahai faith and I would not explain to others as if I were Bahai (nor have morals explaining Bahai faith that is not my right to explain).

Even if it were god telling me to explain it, I would not. That's the difference between you and I. I can't think of another way to go about it.

I think you should read the Book, 'Some Answered Question', then you know what i am talking about, regarding fulfilment of Biblical Prophecies.
Look at 2300 days prophecies, and also, 1260, 1290 days prophecies.

 

[loverofhumanity]

It is not a good thing. If I were Catholic and I valued clergy, rituals, and teachings (another word for dogma) I would still be spiritual minded and not tempted to go to war.

Do you actually believe I will be more tempted to war because I follow clergy, rituals, and sacred teachings (dogma)?​

Bahaullah cares less for the people and sees its history as backbone for individual change. That is wrong morally.



If you believe individual spirituality that comes together in like-minded worship, that's your beliefs. There does not need to be a change from an outside party. Let religions find their change. Catholics have been trying steadily for years. That is, if you know the people and not church politics.

Do you actually think the theology I would have believed in causes wars rather than help me and millions of people in our spiritual well-being?​

It's only that in our system we don't have clergy. Other Faiths are free to do as they please.

Our system is based on democratic elections and there is no individual with authority in our religion. Authority rests with elected groups and only authoritative interpretations are used.

 

[Vinayaka]

My understanding is the soul is able to know God's attributes and be in a state of oneness with the Divine consciousness but I think how we live and act is crucial.

My understanding is then that we could slip in and out of Moksha depending on the life we lead.

I'm wondering if we're all not speaking about the same thing here. For a Buddhist it's Nirvana, for a Christian its Salvation and for Baha'is its Cerititude.

Of course you would suggest it's the same thing, That's the history of Baha'i' looking at any other system of philosophy. You overlook any differences and qualities to get to the point of it's the same. No, we are definitely not speaking about the same thing. You have misunderstood on two main counts. Firstly, it is the soul, not the person, and there really is nothing to know in the sense that you are using it. This stuff is inner, not intellectual.

How we live and act is crucial on the way there, yes, but it's nowhere near the concept itself. The path at the bottom of the mountain isn't the top of the mountain.

Moksha is an end point, and one cannot go in and out of moksha, like you can go in and out of water. Once moksha is there it remains. Moksha cannot exist without the concept of reincarnation, and since Baha'i's do not believe in reincarnation, it follows you can't believe in moksha. It's as illogical as swimming in a dry lake. You can't swim without water. You can't have moksha without reincarnation.