How are these Great Beings explained?

[loverofhumanity]

But that's not karma in any traditional sense. In any traditional sense it is intricately connected to the reincarnation process. Why do you keep inventing things like this? I don't understand your purpose at all.

This is like me saying, "Oh yeah, I know Bahaullah. He's that friend of Donald Trump." It is plain irrational and goes against all previous knowledge.

I was thinking of 'that which Ye sow, that also shall Ye reap'.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It was just figuratively speaking. We do believe in karma though just that it will effect our spiritual development in both this world and worlds hereafter.

There is no figuratively speaking. Either you believe in the Hindu view of karma or you dont. Since you do not, it is not karma and not Hindu (nor Buddhist for that matter) interpretation of it. There is no afterlife in Buddhism, for example, as abrahamics see it in any definition of the word.

Dont call it karma when it does not relate to any version of karma Practiced Not believed by Hindu.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@adrian009

Was trying to figure an example of cultural appropriation (CA) and why its offensive.

It is like if I were married (and assuming you are straight and dont believe in same-sex marriage personally) and my spouse and I had our wedding rings.

Pagan/Catholic CA is when a person comes to us as a married couple, snatches our hands apart, steal our rings, and throws it in the trash. Then later, adopt the color and shape of the ring but put a different meaning behind it hat wasnt originally meant for that symbol of our love intontheir culture, and redefine our marriage.

Bahai is more

Someone coming to us, have a good conversation with us, the say we believe in the Same marriage you believe but we dont have outward symbols to show the same definition by different name. However, throughout the years many people has defined what you two have as a marriage, and whats more, its defined by god. You dont have to agree with us but this is what we believe.

Problem

The problem with number one is simple. It is violent and stealing. Roman catholics acknowledge they have roman culture in their traditions and its not all jewish. Theyd never all it Pagan though. With that acknowledgement, the only thing that needs to be settled really is an apology and letting Pagans believe as they will without violence and stealing.

The problem with Bahai has more of an undertone. What is more interesting is unlike above, you guys dont see it.

Bahai has redefined and even invented our definition of marriage that doesnt exist in it, isnt a foundation of it, or added to it to make your view of marriage (or peace) the same as ours. You ask us our beliefs but you still insist by saying what you believe that what we have is founded on X no matter how many times we say its founded on Y.

Then you say its the "essense" or meaning that counts.

We tell you who is wearing the ring?
Do you know us as a couple and being part of our marriage?
Did you say to us you love us to understand the love we share?

I mean killing and stealing are wrong but at least the abuser recognize her wrongs after awhile. When someone else is oblivious to it then there is a much deeper problem. It doesnt evolve violence but inner respect of another persons or couples being.

Your belief (bahai religion) deprives people of this. Whether individual Bahais agree completely depends. You have more understanding than @loverofhumanity And you are still bahai.

Take your time and read this. Took me awhile to figure a good example.

 

[Vinayaka]

I was thinking of 'that which Ye sow, that also shall Ye reap'.

Yes I realised that. But in Abrahamic religion, as far as I understand your quote, (and I may not understand it) it's like the golden rule, and determines (in some cases) whether or not you go to hell.

In Hinduism karma means action. The weight of actions in past lives, and sometimes in this life, come as karma, or consequences. It isn't an eye for an eye, but more complicated than that. It can be circular like A impacts B, B impacts C, C impacts D, then D impacts A. The circle can be as many as 1000 souls, but the force of the action, when returned is the same as when given. It can also be distributed out, like a $100 bill being the equivalent of 100 $1 bills.

The karmas we carry from past lives come in this or future lives, depending on how hard we work on it, or on how much we can handle, similarly to carrying a weight on your shoulders.

But ... simultaneously we are creating new karmas, new actions to come back in future lives, not in some afterworld like heaven because we don't believe in that. So the law of karma in this way, is the perfect reason for Hindus to adhere to dharma, (another principle that is misunderstood by Abrahamics) because all your actions are returned. So the very idea that I am having patience explaining this to you means in some future life some person will take the time to explain some deeper concepts to me. (Whenever I use the pronouns 'I' and 'me' it refers to the soul nature, not the individual ego of this single lifetime.

So Hindus see life over several lifetimes as a continuum. Birth and death, birth and death, birth and death, are no different than changing your clothes. It is the primary belief behind our patience. There really is no hurry, as we get second, third, fourth chances etc. to get all this figured out. Mistakes are boons, little tests to help us create intelligence, or rather get closer to the natural intelligence residing within the soul nature.

Sorry for the long explanation. I hope you do read it.

 

[loverofhumanity]

There is no figuratively speaking. Either you believe in the Hindu view of karma or you dont. Since you do not, it is not karma and not Hindu (nor Buddhist for that matter) interpretation of it. There is no afterlife in Buddhism, for example, as abrahamics see it in any definition of the word.

Dont call it karma when it does not relate to any version of karma Practiced Not believed by Hindu.

Thanks for pointing that out. Today however it's a term used all across the globe by non Hindus.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Yes I realised that. But in Abrahamic religion, as far as I understand your quote, (and I may not understand it) it's like the golden rule, and determines (in some cases) whether or not you go to hell.

In Hinduism karma means action. The weight of actions in past lives, and sometimes in this life, come as karma, or consequences. It isn't an eye for an eye, but more complicated than that. It can be circular like A impacts B, B impacts C, C impacts D, then D impacts A. The circle can be as many as 1000 souls, but the force of the action, when returned is the same as when given. It can also be distributed out, like a $100 bill being the equivalent of 100 $1 bills.

The karmas we carry from past lives come in this or future lives, depending on how hard we work on it, or on how much we can handle, similarly to carrying a weight on your shoulders.

But ... simultaneously we are creating new karmas, new actions to come back in future lives, not in some afterworld like heaven because we don't believe in that. So the law of karma in this way, is the perfect reason for Hindus to adhere to dharma, (another principle that is misunderstood by Abrahamics) because all your actions are returned. So the very idea that I am having patience explaining this to you means in some future life some person will take the time to explain some deeper concepts to me. (Whenever I use the pronouns 'I' and 'me' it refers to the soul nature, not the individual ego of this single lifetime.

So Hindus see life over several lifetimes as a continuum. Birth and death, birth and death, birth and death, are no different than changing your clothes. It is the primary belief behind our patience. There really is no hurry, as we get second, third, fourth chances etc. to get all this figured out. Mistakes are boons, little tests to help us create intelligence, or rather get closer to the natural intelligence residing within the soul nature.

Sorry for the long explanation. I hope you do read it.

Yes I read it all with interest. I'm happy to read more.

 

[Vinayaka]

Thanks for pointing that out. Today however it's a term used all across the globe by non Hindus.

Many of them understand it quite well too. Not all though. There are lots of words that get distorted by non-Hindu paradigms, like 'yoga', as another example. That's why Rajiv Malhotra, a Hindu scholar who writes extensively about such things, suggests a list of 100 untranslatable words.

I'm beginning to sense you are getting a feeling for the vastly different paradigms we live in.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Thanks for pointing that out. Today however it's a term used all across the globe by non Hindus.

Remember, though, you can't say "this is Hindu" without incorporating what Hinduis think not just interpreting their scripture without any Hindu interpretation and correction. I mean, Karma, I read, was simple laws action and consequence. Then I read Buddhist scripture and found it's a bit more complicated than just throwing a pencil at someone and getting "your consequence in return." Karma (the laws of rebirth/cause and affect/life and death) is a part of everything. It helps a Buddhists understand things are not "everlasting" and permanent. You believe another Buddha will return. Not all Buddhist hold that understanding because that's comparing it to christian "Return" and The Buddha taught the return of himself is through his Dharma. Each bohisattva (Maitreya is a Bodhisattva) has a specific meaning, some compassion, (none of which says love), some names and personalities even meaning the negative side of human nature. His coming isn't like Christ as a messiah. Like other bodhisattvas, it's more the coming of compassion, of enlightenment when we see it in ourselves-the end of rebirth, the understanding of change, and so on. It's not metaphorical but not incarnations from a theravada perspective. So it just depends.

However, you cannot at all no exception separate the practitioner, the TLC, from his or her belief and sacred scripture. They all go together.

Without that understanding, loverofhumanity, then you can be Hindu, Christian, Bahai, Pagan, or whatever name you want to put that has gods and messiahs and teachings of unity and love, but it's all an illusion (according to Buddhism). Without practice and culture, you are Bahai plain and simple. Any other relation has to be

in union

with people who have practiced that faith for years. One Body. One Sangha. and so forth. These are religions of practice not ideas and theology. They are religions of actions not based on organizational principles. The former can't survive without TLC. Bahai, as so understanding so far, can survive without the teachings of Bahaullah because you guys have told me repeatedly that his teachings exist in life and people even without them knowing it.

So why even be Bahai?

I mean, I see some loopholes, I just don't like any religion incorporating founders and religious practices in their religion whether it be Bahai, Christianity (not specifically Catholicism), Santeria, and so forth.

Just don't like it.

 

[Vinayaka]

Just don't like it.

That's funny. I laughed. I've never 'liked' it either. It seem necessary, however, for those who still need guidance from something, or someone to lean on. "______________ will take care of me." "Let's see what __________ had to say about that." etc. (I'm preaching to the converted here, I know)

One of my Guru's more memorable quotes for me was 'Don't lean on me! Go lean on your own spine."

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

My whole point is that a global society that has democracy and the equality of women is something new.

And investigation is showing that Baha'i has no hand in this endeavor's global adoption. Nations were doing it before Baha'i, so what is Baha'i adding to the point that it's a global necessity? And before it's said that it's not a necessity, by having the goal of globalization, you are saying - even without "saying" - that Baha'i is a necessity for the world.

Of course the Baha'i Faith brings something new to the table as it is a world wide community that is established in practically every land

Like Christianity?

Our faith's democratically elected institutions are the basis of decision making locally, nationally, and internationally. They are well represented by women.

Is it equal, though? Looking into this, it is not. Women cannot serve on the Universal House of Justice, you have no female "prophets", and girls are given preference for education over boys. You can't claim equality, but then accelerate the advancement of only one gender. Women are also barred from military service and endeavors under Baha'i ideology, whereas men are not. (And as an aside, why would a religion that is so dedicated to peace have anything in allowance for war and military?)

More than this, the only reason that you have gender "equality" - and I say it as so because it's not equality, and in some instances the biases of the past are simply reversed - is because the writings of Baha'u'llah; it does not exist as an intrinsic truth.

We need less mythology in religion, not more because of how it contributes to widespread confusion and misunderstanding.

Those will happen regardless. Mythology, on the other hand, frames the culture of a peoples, and quite often teaches very valuable lessons that can easily be passed down through generations. I absolutely disagree that mythology needs to be scrapped from religion, and in doing so you would effectively offend many religions and cultures. Counter-productive to world peace and unity.

Women are leaders are present in most of our communities.

You've got a lot of women in the Hands of the Cause, who's goal was not leadership but propagation. That's no different than having women missionaries for Christian churches.

There's also mention of the International Bahá'í Council, who served as a precursor to the Universal House of Justice - one must wonder why women could be on the IBC, but not the UHJ. Yet the IBC never came to fruition; the nominations were in name only, and they never had an opportunity to carry out Effendi's goals for his "Ten Year Crusade". They became the aforementioned Hands of the Cause (who are not leaders,) while the UHJ was formed when five male members of the IBC were elected, effectively dissolving the UHJ.

Counsellors, missionaries and administrative roles aren't leadership. There are women in such roles throughout much of Christian history - Mother Superiors of convents, missionaries, etc - yet there are also women military leaders (such as Jeanne d'Arc) and even women priests in several Christian sects. So again, nothing new is being introduced. It's all good, make no mistake, but it's nothing that can't be found elsewhere.

The references to the Scandinavian women in your link were in foreign languages

No it was not. It was a Wikipedia link; yet the point has been re-hashed to the point of glue.

The point of the peace index is to encourage us all to look at the multifaceted components that make up peace.

No, the point of the peace index is to catalogue how free of political corruption a nation is. Yet even significantly "corrupt" nations can be "at peace."

Of course there will always be corruption, but like democracy and the equality of the sexes, it is an issue of degrees.

Several issues here. If there "will always be corruption," then why make the claim that this coming "global community united under god" will be totally uncorrupt? Secondly, equality is not an issue of degrees--it is equal, or it is not. Justice is an issue of degrees, but that's not what you - or society at large - have been stating as the goal over the past several years or decades.

Pagan/Catholic CA is when a person comes to us as a married couple, snatches our hands apart, steal our rings, and throws it in the trash. Then later, adopt the color and shape of the ring but put a different meaning behind it hat wasnt originally meant for that symbol of our love intontheir culture, and redefine our marriage.

I've got one better for you. What Baha'i is doing is a softer version of like when the Catholics came to Ireland, saw the worship of the goddess Brighid, and co-opted her image and being, and claimed her to be a saintly "Mother Superior", and her nine priestesses "nuns".

Thanks for pointing that out. Today however it's a term used all across the globe by non Hindus.

A term used all across the globe incorrectly is still incorrect.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

That's funny. I laughed. I've never 'liked' it either. It seem necessary, however, for those who still need guidance from something, or someone to lean on. "______________ will take care of me." "Let's see what __________ had to say about that." etc. (I'm preaching to the converted here, I know)

One of my Guru's more memorable quotes for me was 'Don't lean on me! Go lean on your own spine."

Haha. I remember reading a famous book Zen Mind Beginners Mind during my Zen days. It said we need to "kill The Buddha." Basically, take off our depenency on the teacher and put more focus on practicing the teaching. Always stuck with me.

One common suttra told pratitioners to test The Buddha. The Buddha says even my words can be false but you will only know if you test them out for yourself. A lot of reflection on people outside themselves instead of looking in the mirror from time to time.

What can I say haha

 

[loverofhumanity]

Many of them understand it quite well too. Not all though. There are lots of words that get distorted by non-Hindu paradigms, like 'yoga', as another example. That's why Rajiv Malhotra, a Hindu scholar who writes extensively about such things, suggests a list of 100 untranslatable words.

I'm beginning to sense you are getting a feeling for the vastly different paradigms we live in.

When confronted with my own ignorance the only real choice for me is to try and learn. I'm trying to learn from both you and Carlita.

You probably think I'm a proud Baha'i sitting here passing judgement but you can't see how often I despair at my own ignorance.

 

[Vinayaka]

When confronted with my own ignorance the only real choice for me is to try and learn. I'm trying to learn from both you and Carlita.

You probably think I'm a proud Baha'i sitting here passing judgement but you can't see how often I despair at my own ignorance.

No I just think you figure you have knowledge about stuff other than Bahai, when you don't. But that's common. You (or anyone) read from your stuff about other religions, and what else are you supposed to do but believe what others have written.

So if blame is to fall anywhere, its on the people who wrote the false stuff, misinterpreting through an Abrahamic lens. Like I said before, it would have been better for all around if they had said nothing. So things like leaving Krishna off that list or just not commenting about karma at all is a good start.

 

[Vaderecta]

Yes I realised that. But in Abrahamic religion, as far as I understand your quote, (and I may not understand it) it's like the golden rule, and determines (in some cases) whether or not you go to hell.

In Hinduism karma means action. The weight of actions in past lives, and sometimes in this life, come as karma, or consequences. It isn't an eye for an eye, but more complicated than that. It can be circular like A impacts B, B impacts C, C impacts D, then D impacts A. The circle can be as many as 1000 souls, but the force of the action, when returned is the same as when given. It can also be distributed out, like a $100 bill being the equivalent of 100 $1 bills.

The karmas we carry from past lives come in this or future lives, depending on how hard we work on it, or on how much we can handle, similarly to carrying a weight on your shoulders.

But ... simultaneously we are creating new karmas, new actions to come back in future lives, not in some afterworld like heaven because we don't believe in that. So the law of karma in this way, is the perfect reason for Hindus to adhere to dharma, (another principle that is misunderstood by Abrahamics) because all your actions are returned. So the very idea that I am having patience explaining this to you means in some future life some person will take the time to explain some deeper concepts to me. (Whenever I use the pronouns 'I' and 'me' it refers to the soul nature, not the individual ego of this single lifetime.

So Hindus see life over several lifetimes as a continuum. Birth and death, birth and death, birth and death, are no different than changing your clothes. It is the primary belief behind our patience. There really is no hurry, as we get second, third, fourth chances etc. to get all this figured out. Mistakes are boons, little tests to help us create intelligence, or rather get closer to the natural intelligence residing within the soul nature.

Sorry for the long explanation. I hope you do read it.

I did enjoy it and I did read it. It is completely lacking of any evidence whatsoever but I understand how if someone explained to you this is how life is you could use it as a crutch to explain the vastly more successful and at the same time the vastly more unsuccessful people that happened to by fate cross your path.

It's completely without evidence and impossible to defend and is a really selfish and either self-deprecating or an obnoxious point of view.

The idea that you're rich and successful therefore your ancestors must have been benevolent great leaders and you are reaping the rewards of their Karma or the idea that others are poor and suffering is just a result of their ancestors being evil and they are thus paying for their mistakes is such a silly and usually a self serving ideology that it is just wrong.

Roll the dice... I got six and you got a 1.... My ancestors were awesome and you enjoy to suffer every pain that comes your way because your ancestors were evil. Take your evil consequences and when you see your great, great grandma tell her to be nicer... Suffer you fool!

I do not want to be disrespectful but its a very wrong and prejudiced point of view that it makes me go out of my way to not say it's stupid. It's a culture thing perhaps but beyond culture it's just ill thought out.

 

[Dawnofhope]

@adrian009

Was trying to figure an example of cultural appropriation (CA) and why its offensive.

It is like if I were married (and assuming you are straight and dont believe in same-sex marriage personally) and my spouse and I had our wedding rings.

Pagan/Catholic CA is when a person comes to us as a married couple, snatches our hands apart, steal our rings, and throws it in the trash. Then later, adopt the color and shape of the ring but put a different meaning behind it hat wasnt originally meant for that symbol of our love intontheir culture, and redefine our marriage.

Bahai is more

Someone coming to us, have a good conversation with us, the say we believe in the Same marriage you believe but we dont have outward symbols to show the same definition by different name. However, throughout the years many people has defined what you two have as a marriage, and whats more, its defined by god. You dont have to agree with us but this is what we believe.

Problem

The problem with number one is simple. It is violent and stealing. Roman catholics acknowledge they have roman culture in their traditions and its not all jewish. Theyd never all it Pagan though. With that acknowledgement, the only thing that needs to be settled really is an apology and letting Pagans believe as they will without violence and stealing.

The problem with Bahai has more of an undertone. What is more interesting is unlike above, you guys dont see it.

Bahai has redefined and even invented our definition of marriage that doesnt exist in it, isnt a foundation of it, or added to it to make your view of marriage (or peace) the same as ours. You ask us our beliefs but you still insist by saying what you believe that what we have is founded on X no matter how many times we say its founded on Y.

Then you say its the "essense" or meaning that counts.

We tell you who is wearing the ring?
Do you know us as a couple and being part of our marriage?
Did you say to us you love us to understand the love we share?

I mean killing and stealing are wrong but at least the abuser recognize her wrongs after awhile. When someone else is oblivious to it then there is a much deeper problem. It doesnt evolve violence but inner respect of another persons or couples being.

Your belief (bahai religion) deprives people of this. Whether individual Bahais agree completely depends. You have more understanding than @loverofhumanity And you are still bahai.

Take your time and read this. Took me awhile to figure a good example.

Interesting example. I can see why you would consider the Baha'is guilty of cultural misappropriation. All analogies like the one you have given have their uses, and at some point they fall down. So I both agree and disagree. Here's why.

Because Baha'is believe in an omnipotent God that has revealed himself through His manifestations, we see that these Teachings are a 'Gift' from God to 'humanity'. So although God revealed Himself to the Jews, Gentiles, Arabs, or whoever, the revelation is ultimately for us all. God's gift to humanity can not be owned or belong to one person or a group of people.

When God revealed Himself through Christ He made it known that there would be a time that His teachings would be corrupted and distorted. The true teachings were likened to the harvest and the false teachings that grew alongside the harvest were called the Tares (a type of weed). God said that He would send another messenger and that the Tares wound be bundled up and put in the fire.

Baha'u'llah is that New Teacher and He has asked His followers to lovingly and wisely let those who are interested know that He was come and it is time for the harvest.

The Baha'is are just the messengers doing what we can to share the message.

The problem comes when we or our descendants imagine that we have ownership of God's revelation to humanity. We don't. It belongs to us all.

 

[loverofhumanity]

No I just think you figure you have knowledge about stuff other than Bahai, when you don't. But that's common. You (or anyone) read from your stuff about other religions, and what else are you supposed to do but believe what others have written.

So if blame is to fall anywhere, its on the people who wrote the false stuff, misinterpreting through an Abrahamic lens. Like I said before, it would have been better for all around if they had said nothing. So things like leaving Krishna off that list or just not commenting about karma at all is a good start.

The only way to clear some things up is to get them out in the open where they can be discussed.

But other things that are part of the Divine Authority of the Bahá'í Covenant are non negotiable such as Krishna and Buddha. It states that the Bab, Baha'u'llah, Abdul-Baha, Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice are infallible so their pronouncements on these matters are Divinely guided not just personal opinions.

In other words, the Divine infallible knowledge possessed by the Central Figures of our Faith, we believe, trumps any amount of human learning and cannot be wrong.

Scholars do not belong in that category.

 

[siti]

The only way to clear some things up is to get them out in the open where they can be discussed.

Start of discussion

In other words, the Divine infallible knowledge possessed by the Central Figures of our Faith, we believe, trumps any amount of human learning and cannot be wrong.

End of discussion.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Indeed. With such a trump card, the road to learning is strictly closed.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Indeed. With such a trump card, the road to learning is strictly closed.

Two world wars and a third on the way. A good report card for our way of doing things?

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

How does that at all relate to "our holy man knows better than anyone"? He is only a man, after all, and no different than any other prophet that claimed to speak for god, and brought war.