How are these Great Beings explained?

[loverofhumanity]

Trust me. You are most definitely not Hindu. I say this because of belief. For two starters, Bahai don't believe in reincarnation, and feel the need for prophets or manifestations. Those are far far away from Hindu beliefs.

And if you were in a desert dying of thirst and I came along with an icy cold drink you would refuse it on theological grounds? I'm not your enemy just because we think differently. I still strongly agree with Ahimsa and would love to see it all over the world.

 

[Vinayaka]

We don't believe in reincarnation into another physical body but do believe we receive a new spiritual body in the next world.

But doesn't Vaisnavism believe in Avatars and are waiting for Kalki? To us Avatar is the same as Prophet just different terminology.

On reincarnation, its very different. Not sure about the avatara versus manifestation stuff, as I'm not familiar with either on any personal meditative level.

There are tons of other major differences as well. Those two were just starters. Our takes on proselytising are very different. Hindus (with one notable exception) rarely proselytise at all. Of course you will say Bahais are forbidden to proselytise, but as with a lot of other stuff, we disagree on the definition of proselytise. I view knocking on doors, distribution of literature etc. as proselytising, whereas you'll call it 'sharing', or some other deflective term.

Karma is another one we'd differ on, as well as evolution of the soul, as both of those are dependent on reincarnation, the Hindu version.

I like differences. It adds to the diversity of the planet, and I see them as a boon, more ways for people to find a place to call home.

 

[Fire_Monkey]

How do we explain these Great Beings: Buddha, Moses, Krishna, Christ, Zoroaster, Muhammad, the Bab & Bahaullah? They are somewhat unique and unparalleled in human history and were clearly not ordinary people.

There are famous people in history, famous artists, musicians and scientists but none can compare to the influence of the Educator, Teacher, Messiah or Prophet.

But Who were they? And why were they and still are so influential throughout history? Why did they inspire civilizations? Why have their scriptures become patterns of life followed daily by billions of people for thousands of years?

What gift did they possess to be able to be persecuted, oppressed, tortured, exiled and crucified by the most despotic and powerful leaders of their age with but a handful of followers and yet eventually triumph over adversity and establish Their Cause all over the world?

Statues, Churches, Temples, Pagodas, Mosques and Synagogues are built all over the world to pay tribute to these Great Souls.

Are they from another world? Did they pre exist? Without a special power how could they have accomplished what they did and who is their equal in influence?

And aren't we in dire need of another Great Spiritual Teacher to revive us spiritually?

Nothing to explain about those people, really. They--just like Jesus--were simply enlightened human teachers. Spiritual leaders. Fully mortal and human, that began movements with students of their own special brand of philosophy and spiritualism.

What IS a bit intriguing to me is that many of those guys came along during the same era, which was around 5th Century BC. Buddha, Lao Tze, and Confucius all did. they all preceded Jesus by several centuries.

In fact, in my opinion Jesus really brought nothing all that new to the table. An awful lot of his ethos can be found i the earlier teachings of Siddartha Gautama, the Buddha. Whom I have always felt was a superior philosopher. He was not a rabble rouser and political insurrectionist as much as Yeshua was.

We reall don't need any more spiritual leaders. Everything you need has already been put out there for you. What we need to do is contemplate more, meditate, and seek Enlightenment, as my religion teaches. We need to get of this hamster wheel of desire and material obsession.

The young people are dying spiritually with their lack of human interface and their absurd addiction to social media. As well as their love affairs with celebrity.
Most celebrities are horrible people inside, and no kind of role model, and will not ever come close to Enlightenment.

Hope this helps!

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You got me confused

Again. Whoever said belief in God was a prerequisite to peace? There is no such law.

The word 'Say' means God is telling Baha'u'llah to say that He, God, is the One that does whatever He wants with His creation and He direst want war anymore but peace.

If god isnt a prerequiste for peace, what type of peace you describing if the foundation is not god?

Whose peace are you looking for and can you personally define it without god?

I have to reread your post later to reply

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The Baha'i is only telling the Christian that Christ has returned, information they will unlikely get from their leaders.

I investigated for myself and found it the be true.

Scripture says christ was born, christ lived, christ died, christ resurrected, christ will return.

Scripture isnt hard just people make it more mystical than what it is.

 

[Vinayaka]

Thanks to you purely I'm getting it drummed into me. I really owe you much thanks for helping me to learn more and especially for your awesome patience.

I'm still grappling with Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. They are all gods to Hindus right? Or gods of each sect? So you would believe in Shiva but not Vishnu right? What about Brahma which some believe is a personal God right? And Brahman is the power behind the universe? We would term it all as just -God.

The entire idea of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva is really rare in Hindu scripture. It came into encyclopedias because the writers of encyclopedias came from the western paradigm. They were looking for parallels, much like you do. They were specifically looking for something resembling the Trinity in Christianity, and stumbles upon the Trimurthi in some vague place in Hinduism. The only thing in common is the first syllable 'tri' meaning 3. Other than that, there is no parallel. I would advise against reading encyclopedias about Hinduism because they get it all wrong. They didn't consult Hindus at all, and just make stuff up that suits their preconceived notions.

To answer your question, they are all names of God, although Brahma isn't worshiped these days. Shiva and Vishnu are both names of God, and are God to Hindus. Those that call God Vishnu are called Vaishnavite, and those that call God Shiva are Shaivite.

Non Hindus see them as representing Creation, Preservation, and Destruction. We Hindus see it as extension, sustaining, and dissolution. So the translation is poor, again, to suit the ideas of the translator. In the reality of the Hindu world, each God would have all 3 of these powers, (because its actually the same God) or acts and more. In Saivism, for example, Nataraja's Drum is for creation, the ring of fire is dissolution, and is upright right hand is for sustaining. He has two more acts, or graces called revealing grace, and concealing grace.

Brahma and Brahman are two entirely different things.

Much better than any encyclopedia or wikipedia is this site: Hindupedia, the Hindu Encyclopedia It is at least written by Hindus.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Our aims are service to humanity and bringing peace to the world. That makes us Hindus just like you.

Without the traditions, language, culture (Their TLC) and belief you are not hindu. Having the same goals does not make me any more bahai than you any more, say, pagan.

This is my overall point. Actually that IS the point of what Im saying. By equating yourself to people who are not you without their agreement is total disrespectful. It's called cultural appropriation.

We can go back and forth with sacred scripture but I cant ask bahaullah if he was actually believes what you say anymore than christ because they are not living. No verification just personal opinion.

But this is like my going into a Cherokee reservation during their public pow wow. I went to a festival with different tribes years ago and talked with chief (which I have in real off-line life), and asked him about native american blood percentages.

He says, "I dont know why Americans who think they have Cherokee blood think they are part of our tribe (he paused) we live in such poor housing [the our sower system isn't good. We only get allowances but not enough to pay for our families so that's why we have these public pow wows to take back to our reservations)". He was in the reservation that hadn't signed that treaty to be part of United States.

What you are saying is like my, as a Cherokee and Blackfoot African American coming in and saying "Because I have Cherokee, Blackfoot, and African blood, I'm just like you." We have the same goals of peace and we even look alike, see!

It isn't an exaggeration. People actually do these things.

A Bahai Christian is an Ex-Christian who is Bahai.
A Bahai Muslim is an Ex-Muslim who is Bahai.

It has to work both ways or you are disrespecting the other side and you just don't see it. But this quote was a perfect example.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Nothing to explain about those people, really. They--just like Jesus--were simply enlightened human teachers. Spiritual leaders. Fully mortal and human, that began movements with students of their own special brand of philosophy and spiritualism.

What IS a bit intriguing to me is that many of those guys came along during the same era, which was around 5th Century BC. Buddha, Lao Tze, and Confucius all did. they all preceded Jesus by several centuries.

In fact, in my opinion Jesus really brought nothing all that new to the table. An awful lot of his ethos can be found i the earlier teachings of Siddartha Gautama, the Buddha. Whom I have always felt was a superior philosopher. He was not a rabble rouser and political insurrectionist as much as Yeshua was.

We reall don't need any more spiritual leaders. Everything you need has already been put out there for you. What we need to do is contemplate more, meditate, and seek Enlightenment, as my religion teaches. We need to get of this hamster wheel of desire and material obsession.

The young people are dying spiritually with their lack of human interface and their absurd addiction to social media. As well as their love affairs with celebrity.
Most celebrities are horrible people inside, and no kind of role model, and will not ever come close to Enlightenment.

Hope this helps!

I like your attitude towards youth because they're the next generation so we want a more spiritual and wise next gen not another world war. Another thing you mentioned is that we need to get away from material obsession. Love the way you put that.
I know here in Australia they are beginning to teach meditation in schools which I think is a good thing but I also think you need to teach a religion to help,them become detached and not so dependent on worldly things for happiness. So you are Buddhist?

 

[loverofhumanity]

Without the traditions, language, culture (Their TLC) and belief you are not hindu. Having the same goals does not make me any more bahai than you any more, say, pagan.

This is my overall point. Actually that IS the point of what Im saying. By equating yourself to people who are not you without their agreement is total disrespectful. It's called cultural appropriation.

We can go back and forth with sacred scripture but I cant ask bahaullah if he was actually believes what you say anymore than christ because they are not living. No verification just personal opinion.

But this is like my going into a Cherokee reservation during their public pow wow. I went to a festival with different tribes years ago and talked with chief (which I have in real off-line life), and asked him about native american blood percentages.

He says, "I dont know why Americans who think they have Cherokee blood think they are part of our tribe (he paused) we live in such poor housing [the our sower system isn't good. We only get allowances but not enough to pay for our families so that's why we have these public pow wows to take back to our reservations)". He was in the reservation that hadn't signed that treaty to be part of United States.

What you are saying is like my, as a Cherokee and Blackfoot African American coming in and saying "Because I have Cherokee, Blackfoot, and African blood, I'm just like you." We have the same goals of peace and we even look alike, see!

It isn't an exaggeration. People actually do these things.

A Bahai Christian is an Ex-Christian who is Bahai.
A Bahai Muslim is an Ex-Muslim who is Bahai.

It has to work both ways or you are disrespecting the other side and you just don't see it. But this quote was a perfect example.

I'm not saying we are not diverse just that we are one in essence. The barriers that divide us we erect ourselves and they are really non existent, only mental barriers.

All people on this planet can be as one family if they take down their barriers. I can say you are pagan and I am Bahá'í or I can say 'we are fellow humans'. We can see either division or unity, it's up to us.

Cleanse ye your eyes, so that ye behold no man as different from yourselves. See ye no strangers; rather see all men as friends, for love and unity come hard when ye fix your gaze on otherness. -Abdul-Baha

 

[loverofhumanity]

The entire idea of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva is really rare in Hindu scripture. It came into encyclopedias because the writers of encyclopedias came from the western paradigm. They were looking for parallels, much like you do. They were specifically looking for something resembling the Trinity in Christianity, and stumbles upon the Trimurthi in some vague place in Hinduism. The only thing in common is the first syllable 'tri' meaning 3. Other than that, there is no parallel. I would advise against reading encyclopedias about Hinduism because they get it all wrong. They didn't consult Hindus at all, and just make stuff up that suits their preconceived notions.

To answer your question, they are all names of God, although Brahma isn't worshiped these days. Shiva and Vishnu are both names of God, and are God to Hindus. Those that call God Vishnu are called Vaishnavite, and those that call God Shiva are Shaivite.

Non Hindus see them as representing Creation, Preservation, and Destruction. We Hindus see it as extension, sustaining, and dissolution. So the translation is poor, again, to suit the ideas of the translator. In the reality of the Hindu world, each God would have all 3 of these powers, (because its actually the same God) or acts and more. In Saivism, for example, Nataraja's Drum is for creation, the ring of fire is dissolution, and is upright right hand is for sustaining. He has two more acts, or graces called revealing grace, and concealing grace.

Brahma and Brahman are two entirely different things.

Much better than any encyclopedia or wikipedia is this site: Hindupedia, the Hindu Encyclopedia It is at least written by Hindus.

Thanks for clearing that up and especially for the link. I'm very ignorant about a lot of these concepts but at least now have a Hindu source to refer to. Much appreciated.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm not saying we are not diverse just that we are one in essence. The barriers that divide us we erect ourselves and they are really non existent, only mental barriers.

All people on this planet can be as one family if they take down their barriers. I can say you are pagan and I am Bahá'í or I can say 'we are fellow humans'. We can see either division or unity, it's up to us.

Cleanse ye your eyes, so that ye behold no man as different from yourselves. See ye no strangers; rather see all men as friends, for love and unity come hard when ye fix your gaze on otherness. -Abdul-Baha

Its not division. Its diversity. Not everyone wants unity defined by bahai. That doesnt cause division. You are not hindu And that is okay. There are ways to associate with others without having them into your belief system. People have done it for years.

Just because you and hindu share the same goals and you put a hindu god in your faith does not make you a hindu anymore can a hindu give up his TLC to be bahai.

There is a lot involve in religion. Its not just "being humans" that make us unified. Its being diverse. But reread my post so you get the concept between what you call division I call respesting boundaries.

 

[Vinayaka]

The barriers that divide us we erect ourselves

Exactly. When a non adherent starts spouting false stuff about a religion they don't know, its definitely sets up barriers. Best to say nothing. Like Twain said, 'Better to say nothing at all and have people think you're a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." Something like that anyway.

 

[Dawnofhope]

It gets a lot of tourists too I'm sure. But it's also a large proclamation that 'I'm here' much like how the Catholic Church in South India likes to erect huge crosses on every building they can.

I see it more as an opportunity to provide a different spiritual experience to those that are interested. That's why I have attended meetings of different faith communities.

Many religions besides Bahai have a 'unity in diversity' theology rregarding mankind and peace. The problem with prophet based religions, as I see it anyway, is that without said 'prophet' the religion actually falls apart. There can be no Christianity without Christ, Islam without Muhammad, or Bahai without Bahalullah.

As far as the 'unity in diversity' theme, the other Abrahamic Faiths other struggle in this area. I don't know how motivated the Dharmic religionists are to mix with other faiths. Its heartening to see groups like these provide an opportunity for dialogue between diverse peoples. We have a regular interfaith group where I live.

It is true that the Abrahamic faiths are dependant on their founder, but on the other hand they have certainly flourished if numbers of adherents worldwide are anything to go by. I like the Abrahamic faiths because I believe in God and the paradigm makes sense. There will certainly be a cultural bias having grown up with Christianity.

It is for each one of us to read the reality of our own lives and find the path that works the best. You have clearly found your way with Hinduism, as I have found my way with the Baha'i Faith.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Its not division. Its diversity. Not everyone wants unity defined by bahai. That doesnt cause division. You are not hindu And that is okay. There are ways to associate with others without having them into your belief system. People have done it for years.

Just because you and hindu share the same goals and you put a hindu god in your faith does not make you a hindu anymore can a hindu give up his TLC to be bahai.

There is a lot involve in religion. Its not just "being humans" that make us unified. Its being diverse. But reread my post so you get the concept between what you call division I call respesting boundaries.

No problems with unity in diversity at all but I'm against things like labelling each other infidel and then killing and oppressing one another. That's using diversity to hate and is plainly wrong.

 

[loverofhumanity]

You got me confused




If god isnt a prerequiste for peace, what type of peace you describing if the foundation is not god?

Whose peace are you looking for and can you personally define it without god?

I have to reread your post later to reply

Peace based upon the oneness of humankind. This includes atheists, pagans, basically everyone.

If we say people must believe in God to have world peace then it will never happen.

World peace is for all humanity not just religious people. All are included. None are rejected.

 

[Vinayaka]

As far as the 'unity in diversity' theme, the other Abrahamic Faiths other struggle in this area. I don't know how motivated the Dharmic religionists are to mix with other faiths. Its heartening to see groups like these provide an opportunity for dialogue between diverse peoples. We have a regular interfaith group where I live.th.

I've always found interfaith admirable, but very challenging at the same time. Often the people who
really need to go just don't, so it's preaching to the converted. On a personal note, I often feel 'ganged up on' because the dharmics get outnumbered, and unless we succumb to the western paradigm in several ways, we feel so out of place that is just doesn't work. The joint action things like working together for housing initiatives, and that sort of thing are fine.

Here the Hindus and Jews got the entire thing going.

 

[loverofhumanity]

The entire idea of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva is really rare in Hindu scripture. It came into encyclopedias because the writers of encyclopedias came from the western paradigm. They were looking for parallels, much like you do. They were specifically looking for something resembling the Trinity in Christianity, and stumbles upon the Trimurthi in some vague place in Hinduism. The only thing in common is the first syllable 'tri' meaning 3. Other than that, there is no parallel. I would advise against reading encyclopedias about Hinduism because they get it all wrong. They didn't consult Hindus at all, and just make stuff up that suits their preconceived notions.

To answer your question, they are all names of God, although Brahma isn't worshiped these days. Shiva and Vishnu are both names of God, and are God to Hindus. Those that call God Vishnu are called Vaishnavite, and those that call God Shiva are Shaivite.

Non Hindus see them as representing Creation, Preservation, and Destruction. We Hindus see it as extension, sustaining, and dissolution. So the translation is poor, again, to suit the ideas of the translator. In the reality of the Hindu world, each God would have all 3 of these powers, (because its actually the same God) or acts and more. In Saivism, for example, Nataraja's Drum is for creation, the ring of fire is dissolution, and is upright right hand is for sustaining. He has two more acts, or graces called revealing grace, and concealing grace.

Brahma and Brahman are two entirely different things.

Much better than any encyclopedia or wikipedia is this site: Hindupedia, the Hindu Encyclopedia It is at least written by Hindus.

Any other books written by Hindus that I could possibly buy on Amazon for my kindle app? Much appreciated.

 

[Vinayaka]

No problems with unity in diversity at all but I'm against things like labelling each other infidel and then killing and oppressing one another. That's using diversity to hate and is plainly wrong.

Sounds like you're pointing fingers at just 2 of the world's main faiths, and then only the more conservative radical elements of them.

 

[Vinayaka]

Any other books written by Hindus that I could possibly buy on Amazon for my kindle app? Much appreciated.

I could recommend some in a few days maybe. Like I said before, its all out there with google search. There are several free ones. My own sampradaya has all their stuff free on line. But first I have to believe that you actually have read any of it. In the past, on this thread, it's been pretty clear to me that you haven't read my or Carlita's words, although perhaps you just didn't understand, I'm not really sure. No point giving someone a book they aren't going to read anyway.

The Hindu scriptural library is incredibly vast. At least 100 times the size of any Abrahamic single book.

 

[Vinayaka]

I see it more as an opportunity to provide a different spiritual experience to those that are interested. That's why I have attended meetings of different faith communities.

Hindus rarely have meetings. We just all go to temples and worship God. The only meetings are by temple management boards or committees. We just don't sit around and talk religion, lol.

But I project my Hindu nature into other faiths. I've sat and reflected in gurdwaras, Buddhist temples, even a couple of cathedrals. I would go anywhere where the threat of being proselytized to isn't there, just to get the feel of the place. yet to do a synagogue, Bahai center, or mosque though.

I really like the gurdwara, and the Buddhist temple. They left me alone.