How are these Great Beings explained?

[Vinayaka]

Thank you for your unrelenting efforts to keep the Baha'is here, myself included, honest and calling us to account.

Just how successful that has been is up for debate. When we notice less of the condescending approach, I suppose it's a sign. But there is a time to fold 'em, as well.

 

[Vinayaka]

For what thou has done, thy kingdom shall be thrown into confusion, and thine empire shall pass from thine hands, as a punishment for that which thou has wrought. Then wilt thou know how thou has plainly erred. Commotions shall seize all the people in that land, unless thou arisest to held this Cause, and followest Him Who is the Spirit of God (Jesus Christ) in this, the Straight Path. Hath thy pomp made thee proud? By My Life! It shall not endure; nay, it shall soon pass away, unless thou holdest fast by this firm Cord. We see abasement hastening after thee, whilst thou art of the heedless.

I think lots of people can see the downfall of despots happening. Napolean most likely got such warnings from some of his own advisors and people. Many people thought it, but in wisdom, held back, fully knowing some letter wouldn't do any good.

Do you really think a letter from a vaguely known religious leader from some far off place would help Donald Trump or the North Korea guy stop their rhetoric?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Having sight or blindness is a metaphor for having perfect spiritual perception and insight compared to being bereft of any such qualities. Most of us here have degrees of spiritual insight. We are all insightful and all blind to some degree, atheists included. The one who imagines himself to have more than others, simply has his own form of blindness as we all do. It was certainly not my intention to claim anyone here has any more or any less spiritual than anyone else, or to claim that the Baha'is are more enlightened.

I hate to interrupt but I figure you a handle it.

"Baha'is believe the appearance of a new spiritual teacher is always a spiritual test for us all. His appearance is obvious for those with eyes to sees, as opposed by the spiritually blind."​

The clear and honest implication here is "Bahai believe a new spiritual teacher is the test for all and [each teacher's?] appearance is obvious for those with eyes to see as opposed to being spiritually blind.

In other words, those who recognize the new spiritual teacher can spiritually see while those who do not are spiritually blind. In a nutshell.

While Bahai, Christians, and Muslims have this viewpoint other religions do not. That is okay.

The issue isn't your stance on who is spiritually blind and who isn't based on one's recognition of a new teacher's teachings. It's how one presents these viewpoints whether they express it passively as to not offend people or aggressively to the point of proselytizing.

I think that is what @Vinayaka is saying.

In Buddhism, the four noble truths kind of helps with this. First you admit and acknowledge the issue (as how it affects you and/or others), the cause of the issue, acknowledging there is a way to resolve the issue, and finding the steps to resolve it.

However, if one doesn't recognize and/or acknowledge the issue, then it's hard to see the cause of the problem, acknowledge the solution, and make steps to resolve it.

Hence why this thread goes in circles. Some Bahai (and maybe others not Bahai, don't know), don't acknowledge or know there is a problem because their belief (or bias) blinds them to how it affects others. Also, many get to the cause stage but don't want to take steps to solve it unless it affects them personally.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Well, they do, in my opinion. They're contradictory at times. But you're free to disagree, obviously. You say you respect all religions, and then tell us we're wrong. You won't see that as a contradiction, but I do.

We say the core of all religions teach good. We are saying we agree that your religion teaches good.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Yes, that is the Baha'i belief. Not fact. Not one I share.

Yes that’s only what we believe not others.

 

[loverofhumanity]

No, it is not clear. The Lion of Judah and the Lamb sound like the same being. The one on the throne sounds like God, and God is never the one that unseals the the book.

It’s very clear. John had two visions. One of the Lion and another of the Lamb - two Manifestations of God. The Bab and Baha’u’llah. The Lamb was not Christ as Christ was crucified not slain. And the word used for Lamb in Revelation ‘arnion’ appears nowhere in the Gospels clearly indicating it wasn’t Jesus. Jesus was always referred to as the ‘pascall’ Lamb.

The vision goes on to say that only one new song was sung by Two Figures again indicating They both brought one Faith.

This is what we believe and others are free to disagree.

 

[loverofhumanity]

How would you define advancement?

I was reading about different ways different cultures view life when it comes to life and death. Some see life as linear. We go from point A to point B. and we reached our goal. Others see the goal as circular. The journey is the goal. Life is circular. So, how does one advance (or come to an end/be limitless/perfect) when life's cycle does not end just because we die?



What is perfection to the universe, though?

To me, if it's not applicable to the universe (to the laws of nature in which I am a part of), it's, how do they say, an illusion. For example, killing and not killing as bad and good are illusions. To the universe, they mean nothing in and of themselves. That is why it's a human moral rather than a universal fact.

So, I see imperfection the same way, an illusion. We suffer, yes. That's the point of life. We put limits on ourselves,

but how do you define perfection if you (humanity, no pun) is stuck in thinking they are born edit imperfect?

I have a lot of think-out-loud questions.

I read something the other day about that. Never ending perfections exist in both man and the universe according to limits.

No matter how knowledgeable a person may be sooner or later a more knowledgeable person will appear. So perfection is limitless. Science was imperfect 1,000 years ago compared to today but today’s science is imperfect compared to the future. So imperfection is lack of perfection or a lower level of perfection.

But there are limits. A human being cannot progress in perfection to bec9me a deity because his/her condition is human. This is just my very limited and very imperfect understanding of perfection (pun intended) lol.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I read something the other day about that. Never ending perfections exist in both man and the universe according to limits.

No matter how knowledgeable a person may be sooner or later a more knowledgeable person will appear. So perfection is limitless. Science was imperfect 1,000 years ago compared to today but today’s science is imperfect compared to the future. So imperfection is lack of perfection or a lower level of perfection.

But there are limits. A human being cannot progress in perfection to bec9me a deity because his/her condition is human. This is just my very limited and very imperfect understanding of perfection (pun intended) lol.

I'm still lost to the answer to my question. For example, in America and probably other American-like countries, we have the view of "going up" as advancing, going towards god, gaining the gold medal, etc.

Yet, even though I'm in that culture and embedded in that thinking, when I reflect on it, just because the stairs are going up does not mean we are advancing. The best to describe it is we are on a floored escalator going in a circle. Maybe humans don't like living without "advancing."

But what exactly does that mean?

It's kind of like looking at a emulation of a growing earth and we think that the earth has "advanced" from a rock to what we have today. Yet, to the earth, it is born, it lives, it dies, and will do the same again. So, these things run in a cycle with no advancement in the universe.

I mean, I understand advancement as we define it as humans. If looking at it outside of our views (not limited just different) I can't see the universe advancing but changing and evolving.

 

[Vinayaka]

g.

I think that is what @Vinayaka is saying.

In Buddhism, the four noble truths kind of helps with this. First you admit and acknowledge the issue (as how it affects you and/or others), the cause of the issue, acknowledging there is a way to resolve the issue, and finding the steps to resolve it.

However, if one doesn't recognize and/or acknowledge the issue, then it's hard to see the cause of the problem, acknowledge the solution, and make steps to resolve it.

Hence why this thread goes in circles. Some Bahai (and maybe others not Bahai, don't know), don't acknowledge or know there is a problem because their belief (or bias) blinds them to how it affects others. Also, many get to the cause stage but don't want to take steps to solve it unless it affects them personally.

Yes, Carlita, this is what I am saying, and I'll reiterate that it is a very fundamental difference in paradigms. In another post, I was asked whether or not I even occasionally felt I had a superior belief. I had to think about it, and yes, I do have a superior belief ... for me. It works for me, but I actually don't think it would work at all for other people. In fact, it would most likely do more harm than good because it would wreak havoc on a comfortable mindset.

Abrahamics actually do think their personal belief is better for all of mankind, even though sometimes they say they don't. This is a fundamental difference, and the proof in in the action of proselytizing. Hindus simply do not proselytize. In fact, we often say . "Go away!" Non Hindus aren't allowed in quite a few Hindu temples. There are many reasons for this, but one is to protect that individual from confusion.
Abrahamics, on the other hand, reach out for people who will listen. The Baha'i' here are quite proud of how widespread their faith is on this planet. Well, sorry to break the news, but that's only because of the missionary zeal, not because of the natural greatness of the faith. All proselytizing faiths get widespread. It's a natural outcome, not anything special. People hear about stuff because someone tells them. Same principle for news, gossip, etc. Without an open line of communication, and a willingness for the sender to send out his message, there is no spreading.

Buddhist are like Hindus. When we went out to the meditation retreat center an hour's drive away, what we got was a beautiful inner smile, not an invitation to return, not a bunch of pamphlets, not notices of upcoming events.

So it is a fundamental and key difference that goes right down to the psyche of the individuals.

 

[Vinayaka]

We say the core of all religions teach good. We are saying we agree that your religion teaches good.

Yes, but the adherents are blind to your much better faith, the only one that can save the world. It's not enough to see good, you need to see equality.

 

[Vinayaka]

Yes that’s only what we believe not others.

Yes, and LH, you have a stronger habit of occasionally prefacing your statements with that idea. Thank you for that. Still, I felt the need for a reminder. I think we all need it occasionally.

 

[Vinayaka]

But there are limits. A human being cannot progress in perfection to bec9me a deity because his/her condition is human. This is just my very limited and very imperfect understanding of perfection (pun intended) lol.

In Hinduism, it would depend on what you view as a person. If you're viewing yourself as a soul with a body, if you're inner enough to have that perspective, then you understand that the essence of that, called Atman in Sanskrit, is indeed perfect, and identical in essence to God.

But if you identify yourself as a person, as the ego, personality, culture, religion, labels, physical body, and all that, then yes, you're imperfect, in that it's all temporary, subject to change, and clouded buy ignorance.

So, in Hinduism, it can be both, depending on perspective.

 

[loverofhumanity]

In Hinduism, it would depend on what you view as a person. If you're viewing yourself as a soul with a body, if you're inner enough to have that perspective, then you understand that the essence of that, called Atman in Sanskrit, is indeed perfect, and identical in essence to God.

But if you identify yourself as a person, as the ego, personality, culture, religion, labels, physical body, and all that, then yes, you're imperfect, in that it's all temporary, subject to change, and clouded buy ignorance.

So, in Hinduism, it can be both, depending on perspective.

We also see that there are both a higher and lower nature in humans. The lower nature is to service the bodily needs while the higher nature is our spiritual nature or soul. So we have both an ego and a soul is how we understand our nature,

 

[Sundance]

In my view, it's not the cultural superiority that's the problem; it's the religious superiority. It's the fundamental and basic instinctive mind attitude that my religion, my belief is superior to yours. To have this basic drive sees other people as something that needs changing. Yes, there are a few people, who, in my view, do need changing. But to go out and try to change people who DON"T NEED CHANGING, to me, is fundamentally flawed thinking. It's not wrong, it's just immature.

I'm doing it here though. I think the Baha'i' do need changing. I think they need to have a harder look at their own intolerance, their evangelical missionary zeal, and all that. I'm hoping it would d be a better world if true tolerance of all mankind was more evident, not just a political pretending for the sake of finding converts.

My apologies for the late reply, Vinayaka. I will only speak for me here, not my co-religionists.

To start, I will say that I do agree with your first paragraph. That mindset is, indeed, a huge problem which all people should work to dismantle.

As for me, one thing I've always understood (even as a Christian) is that every person has their own ways of understanding life. This is why different religions exists in the first place. Me, I'm perfectly accepting of the differences between religions. In fact, those are wonderful to me. They make the world colorful! I'm also OK with the fact that they disagree; this is perfectly natural. I am also a firm believer that the manifold cloths of religious beliefs are parts of the same monumental and ever-expanding Quilt. That's my understanding of it all, anyway.

I, myself, am not honestly concerned (at all) with whether people adopt my religion or not. I will teach people about it if they have questions or misconceptions, but I do not care too much about having people convert. If people choose to, then so be it. If not, then so be it. I leave it be, and that's that. In any case, I firmly believe that goodness, truth, and beauty can be found in every religion, whether it's the Bahá’í Faith, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, Pagan religions, Native American religions, African religions, or any other. (That's why I love to read and ask questions about other religions! ) I don't let my disagreements blind me to that. I look for the positives in all religions. Period.


Though, I do think the fact that people argue and fuss and fight over religious differences is, quite frankly, childish. That's what this world needs to lose. More so, that is why this thread IMO needs to die, because everyone here could continue to go back and forth arguing about different understandings of things (as has been done for almost 600 pages), but what exactly would that solve? What does it serve to prove? Truthfully, it serves only to prove that people will pointlessly argue with each other over things that they may never agree on. Again, disagreement is cool, all well and fine, but arguing is not. Never. In the end, you'll still have your religion; @Carlita hers; @loverofhumanity, Adrian, Tony, and myself, we'll still have ours.

With all of this said, I'm done with this thread. If people desire to continue with the pointless back-and-forth, then y'all go ahead, man. I'm through with it, and debating religion period. I hate it in general. This thread really solidifies my deep hatred.

 

[Vinayaka]

We also see that there are both a higher and lower nature in humans. The lower nature is to service the bodily needs while the higher nature is our spiritual nature or soul. So we have both an ego and a soul is how we understand our nature,

That's a simplistic summary, but yes, although I personally am not keen on 'higher' and 'lower' as words. Too many other connotations can come from that. I prefer instinctive, and intuitive. For us, it's the soul that reincarnates.

The Hindu view is that we have 5 bodies. From the gross to the refined, it goes physical, pranic, astral, intellectual, and then soul. The soul body has two components, its essence, and its form.

 

[Vinayaka]

With all of this said, I'm done with this thread. If people desire to continue with the pointless back-and-forth, then y'all go ahead, man. I'm through with it, and debating religion period. I hate it in general. This thread really solidifies my deep hatred.

I'm sorry you have hatred in there somewhere. It's a very strong word ... about anything.

I do believe I have seen progress in this thread, and that it has been fairly civil, all things considered.

On a personal note, having observed and read your posts for the last while, I admit I was somewhat surprised at your recent decision. But hey, what do I know?

I wish you the best, your thoughtfulness is appreciated, and you're another example of how there is a wide variety of takes within the Baha'i' faith. Maybe we'll have an interchange in some other thread.

 

[oldbadger]

Hindus simply do not proselytize. In fact, we often say . "Go away!"

He he.....
Do you remember that thread about JWs calling at homes?
I was insisting that you let them in and make them a hot drink. .... ?
I'll bet that you never did......

The Baha'i' here are quite proud of how widespread their faith is on this planet.

Bahai claims to have about 7 million followers, a bit less than the JWs, but I perceive that Bahai is losing ground to the JWs.
I remember back in the early 70's when Bahai missionaries (cannot remember that word! Yes I can! Pioneer!!!)) went out to countries such as Chad, converting whole villages to Bahai. One Bahai married a young man from Chad and brought him to the UK (SM).

Well, at about the same time an acquaintance of mine went on holiday to Ghana and took with him ten whole sets of football team uniforms because he had heard that you get a very good reception wherever you go if you hand out football team uniforms.
He was very well received, and some village heads asked him what his religion was because they wanted to convert to his God.

And so...... Vinayaka, on behalf of the StuddHill Full Moon Frolickers we are taking a collection in order to send to you a bunch of games uniforms, its now just a matter of discovering what particular sport you are crazy keen about. We may get you dancing in the moonlight yet!!

 

[loverofhumanity]

Yes, and LH, you have a stronger habit of occasionally prefacing your statements with that idea. Thank you for that. Still, I felt the need for a reminder. I think we all need it occasionally.

Everybody has truth in them. No one person possesses it all. We Baha’is are no better than anyone else, not Hindus, Buddhists or aetheists. We just have a different perspective that’s all

But as you can see, we Baha’is have a lot to learn. Above all we need to be humble and lowly. We are told that the higher the spiritual station of a person is, the more humbly they are.

 

[Vinayaka]

UK (SM).

What's the SM mean? I'm on the JW 'do not ring' list. The Ganesha picture at the door scares them away. That's the good thing about dealing with fear based religions ... very easy to use it against them.

My ancestors came from Britain. I hear it's not such a bad place.

 

[loverofhumanity]

That's a simplistic summary, but yes, although I personally am not keen on 'higher' and 'lower' as words. Too many other connotations can come from that. I prefer instinctive, and intuitive. For us, it's the soul that reincarnates.

The Hindu view is that we have 5 bodies. From the gross to the refined, it goes physical, pranic, astral, intellectual, and then soul. The soul body has two components, its essence, and its form.

This saying of Baha’u’llah might or might not mean anything to you it’s God speaking to humanity directly.

“Turn thy sight unto thyself, that thou mayest find Me standing within thee, mighty, powerful and self-subsisting.” (Hidden Words)