How are these Great Beings explained?

[TransmutingSoul]

This, honestly, was what the whole thread was about give or take. Endless circle.

In Faith wisdom is not granted, it is earned.

It is a hard lesson to learn wisdom, we are all just learning and in the process we will and do get it wrong. We can not go back, just forward to do better.

If we know this, then the first step has been taken and how can we ever be angry with another?

Peace be upon you.

 

[Vinayaka]

I expected that you would say that about Krishna and that is why i mentioned it.

It really does not matter what Baha'is believe or what Hindus believe about that.... Logically speaking, there can only be one truth. Either Krishna was a Manifestation of God (Prophet, Messenger of God) or not.

What is the actual Hindi view? How can we know what the original Hindu religion taught unless we have authentic scriptures written by Krishna? I had a good Hindu friend on another forum who believed that Krishna was a Prophet of God. The same applies to the Buddha. I had a good Buddhist friend who believed Buddha revealed God. Some Buddhists believe in God yet we have others, probably most Buddhists, who do not believe in God. I think this opens up a virtual Pandora's Box.

Of course, I am biased because I believe that Baha'u'llah had the last word regarding God, but since He did not write about these older religions I do not have a set belief about them. It could have been that the Buddha did not speak of Himself as a Prophet of God because of where mankind was at in the stage of their spiritual evolution at that time, that they were not ready to hear that, and that the Buddha being a Great Teacher was more palatable. It could have been that Krishna spoke of "many gods" because of where mankind was at in the stage of their spiritual evolution at that time. Logically speaking, reality is whatever it is, so there is either one God or many gods. The many gods did not get together and become one God later, when Moses came along.

I think according to the Baha'i Faith, but I like to reason things out and think outside of the Baha'i Box. All Truth does not fit into one tiny little box.

Yes, but it still contradicts your saying there was naught to say about Hinduism, Baha'i had no opinion.

FYI, Hindi is a language. There are two common views about Krishna, and many not so common ones. What you encountered was one of those less common ones. There are a bout a billion adherents of Hinduism, compared to a million or so Bahai. From that stat alone, we're incredibly diverse.

Most Vaishnava sects hold that Krishna is God ... period. An avatar, not a prophet, not a manifestation, just God. Other Hindus like me see Krishna as avatar for Vaishnavites, and largely irrelevant to our sect. Both the Shakta sect and the Saiva sect don't have the concept of avatar in them period, although there is some horizontal projection from Vaishnavism.

Now ... I will withdraw from the thread once again. I see no point in reiterating for two new members to this forum, the circular and inconclusive arguments we already went through here. Adrian, Lover Of Humanity, Tony Bristow-Stagg were the key Bahaì participants with a few others chipping in here and there. I simply don`t wish to watch the same movie over again, as it will no doubt be repetitive. Perhaps, if you or Antony actually wish to learn more about Hinduism for your own benefit, you can popm over to the Hindu DIR and ask respectful questions, as per the rules of the forum. Either that, or go back through about 800 pages of discussion here.

So I'm out. Aum

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I`m out. Aum

Peace be with you.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

In Faith wisdom is not granted, it is earned.

It is a hard lesson to learn wisdom, we are all just learning and in the process we will and do get it wrong. We can not go back, just forward to do better.

If we know this, then the first step has been taken and how can we ever be angry with another?

Peace be upon you.

Anger is a natural emotion just like other flight-fright ones. Its a survival mechanism. So, instead of relieving it, you learn to acknowledge your anger and transform it to something you accept and experience for yourself.

When you accept that you are angry and angry at someone else, that knowledge actually propels you (you meaning people in general) to look more into why and how you act and think as you do. Anger helps with meditation excercises and expression.

What does it mean to try not to be angry at someone else?

Accept and redirect than reject and suppress type of thing. Unless we are Spock from the Original Star Trek, but even he sliped up a couple of times.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, but it still contradicts your saying there was naught to say about Hinduism, Baha'i had no opinion.

FYI, Hindi is a language. There are two common views about Krishna, and many not so common ones. What you encountered was one of those less common ones. There are a bout a billion adherents of Hinduism, compared to a million or so Bahai. From that stat alone, we're incredibly diverse.

Most Vaishnava sects hold that Krishna is God ... period. An avatar, not a prophet, not a manifestation, just God. Other Hindus like me see Krishna as avatar for Vaishnavites, and largely irrelevant to our sect. Both the Shakta sect and the Saiva sect don't have the concept of avatar in them period, although there is some horizontal projection from Vaishnavism.

Now ... I will withdraw from the thread once again. I see no point in reiterating for two new members to this forum, the circular and inconclusive arguments we already went through here. Adrian, Lover Of Humanity, Tony Bristow-Stagg were the key Bahaì participants with a few others chipping in here and there. I simply don`t wish to watch the same movie over again, as it will no doubt be repetitive. Perhaps, if you or Antony actually wish to learn more about Hinduism for your own benefit, you can popm over to the Hindu DIR and ask respectful questions, as per the rules of the forum. Either that, or go back through about 800 pages of discussion here.

So I'm out. Aum

I do not know how I got involved in this thread but I should probably quit while I am ahead... Besides, I have to get back to the thread Questions for Atheists and Agnostics that I started and I have to get back to my atheist friends on another forum...

I do not normally talk much about religions other than Baha'i because I do not know enough about them... I only know enough about Christianity to be dangerous. I normally prefer talking to atheists since I have an atheist bent. Buddhism and Hinduism are interesting though.... I only wish I had more time.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Anger is a natural emotion just like other flight-fright ones. Its a survival mechanism. So, instead of relieving it, you learn to acknowledge your anger and transform it to something you accept and experience for yourself.

When you accept that you are angry and angry at someone else, that knowledge actually propels you (you meaning people in general) to look more into why and how you act and think as you do. Anger helps with meditation excercises and expression.

What does it mean to try not to be angry at someone else?

Accept and redirect than reject and suppress type of thing. Unless we are Spock from the Original Star Trek, but even he sliped up a couple of times.

View attachment 23441

Anger can be a virtue when used for the right reasons, in the right frame of mind.

I see that is our challenge, as we live in a world of Light and lack of light. How do we balance the two to live as we should.

To be angry at a child making mistakes without the knowledge, is not a good use of anger. Anger that is controlled towards a child that should know beter, but disobeys is well directed is constructive.

Negative hate driven anger has no place.

Peace be with you.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Anger can be a virtue when used for the right reasons, in the right frame of mind.

I see that is our challenge, as we live in a world of Light and lack of light. How do we balance the two to live as we should.

To be angry at a child making mistakes without the knowledge, is not a good use of anger. Anger that is controlled towards a child that should know beter, but disobeys is well directed is constructive.

Negative hate driven anger has no place.

Peace be with you.

I don't see how we can change anger to be healthy or not. We can change our response to external stimuli and address the anger once realized. It's a transformation of the spirit and body and mind.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I don't see how we can change anger to be healthy or not. We can change our response to external stimuli and address the anger once realized. It's a transformation of the spirit and body and mind.

Yes I see my explanation was not good, so I looked up what might have sparked that thought. I try to base my replies on things I have read from all the worlds religious writings, this thought came from this quote, but as you can see I got it out of context;

"If he exercises his anger and wrath against the bloodthirsty tyrants who are like ferocious beasts, it is very praiseworthy; but if he does not use these qualities in a right way, they are blameworthy."
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions, p. 215)

Personally I see we do get angry. It is learning how to subdue anger that will lead to negative consequences and directing it to acheive a positive outcome that I was offering.

Peace be with you.

 

[loverofhumanity]

The thing I wish to point out is that the principles, ideas and concepts Baha’u’llah teaches are influencing our world today in every facet of life and are what we need for peace.

The concept of world unity, of equal human rights of international trade and solidarity, all concepts embedded in a religion for the first time in human history are being promoted by organisations and seen as the way forward for our world.

Baha’u’llah has made some good points such as being free from prejudice and racism and being tolerant towards all religions, these things are attitudes we need today not just nice platitudes for things like racism, wars built on prejudice and terrorism plague society and the only solution is a change of mindset not any treaty or policing.

Baha’u’llah is about transforming our attitudes to become friends of all humanity rejecting none and welcoming all regardless of race, religion or no religion, nationality, class, culture or nationality.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Baha’u’llah is about transforming our attitudes to become friends of all humanity rejecting none and welcoming all regardless of race, religion or no religion, nationality, class, culture or nationality.

From what I have read, this is correct.

Peace be with you and all.

 

[Marcion]

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.

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?

I am aware that I am somewhat repeating myself by answering in this thread.
The way I see it comes from my own tantra-yoga tradition and will differ from the Bahai and other religious viewpoints.
It is approximately as follows:

The most important (by far the greatest) personalities of divine status came to this planet in physically ordinary human form at crucial points in history when humanity needed a tremendous push in order to change its course in the right (dharmic) direction.
The descriptions of the first two of these tantric Maha-kaulas Lord Shiva and Lord Krishna have been greatly expanded or embelished with religious myth but they once walked the earth looking like ordinary (but very charismatic) human beings as tantric type Guru's who had an enormous impact on the human society of their day (not just in South Asia) by their example and their teachings. They changed the destiny of humanity by their advent.

Lord Shiva lived just before 7000 years ago and Lord Krishna before 3500 years ago both at the time of great stagnancy and upheavals in human society.
A kaula is someone who can raise their kulakundalini at will from the base of the spine up to the seat of God. A Maha-kaula can raise the kulakundalini of any other being with a spinal column at will and meditates on the creatures in His creation.
The third Maha-kaula was Lord Anandamurti who lived from 1921 to 1990 (roughly the years of fascism and communism), also in South-Asia.

Their teachings are tantric-yogic in nature, not religious but focussing on furthering and adjusting the practice of human Dharma to the needs of the times that continued to change during the course of history.
They are not mere human incarnations but are said to come from the borderline between the Unqualified Consciousness and the Qualified Consciousness and in more or less full control of their own unique destiny.

Of course there have been many other great guru's or teachers called rishi's, prophets, son-of-God, founders of important movements, some more tantric, some less so.
Notable ones were Moses, Lord Buddha, Lord Mahavira, Lord Chaitanya (founder of the bhakti movement), Lord Yeshua, Muhammed, Bahaullah to name just a few of them.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I am aware that I am somewhat repeating myself by answering in this thread.
The way I see it comes from my own tantra-yoga tradition and will differ from the Bahai and other religious viewpoints.
It is approximately as follows:

The most important (by far the greatest) personalities of divine status came to this planet in physically ordinary human form at crucial points in history when humanity needed a tremendous push in order to change its course in the right (dharmic) direction.
The descriptions of the first two of these tantric Maha-kaulas Lord Shiva and Lord Krishna have been greatly expanded or embelished with religious myth but they once walked the earth looking like ordinary (but very charismatic) human beings as tantric type Guru's who had an enormous impact on the human society of their day (not just in South Asia) by their example and their teachings. They changed the destiny of humanity by their advent.

Lord Shiva lived just before 7000 years ago and Lord Krishna before 3500 years ago both at the time of great stagnancy and upheavals in human society.
A kaula is someone who can raise their kulakundalini at will from the base of the spine up to the seat of God. A Maha-kaula can raise the kulakundalini of any other being with a spinal column at will and meditates on the creatures in His creation.
The third Maha-kaula was Lord Anandamurti who lived from 1921 to 1990 (roughly the years of fascism and communism), also in South-Asia.

Their teachings are tantric-yogic in nature, not religious but focussing on furthering and adjusting the practice of human Dharma to the needs of the times that continued to change during the course of history.
They are not mere human incarnations but are said to come from the borderline between the Unqualified Consciousness and the Qualified Consciousness and in more or less full control of their own unique destiny.

Of course there have been many other great guru's or teachers called rishi's, prophets, son-of-God, founders of important movements, some more tantric, some less so.
Notable ones were Moses, Lord Buddha, Lord Mahavira, Lord Chaitanya (founder of the bhakti movement), Lord Yeshua, Muhammed, Bahaullah to name just a few of them.

I think this view personally helps contribute towards tolerance between people of different faiths and beliefs and also helps the mind and heart to embrace more and more truth.

Truth manifests itself in so many forms and through so many avenues and teachers that if we are open minded we stand to gain and enrich ourselves spiritually by being receptive to truth no matter where it comes from.

It means we try and look for the truth in other systems of belief to learn from them as there is so much truth in them.

Also having universal views and attitudes helps to eliminate prejudice from our midst. Any person who appreciates and has tolerance for the views of others, in my humble opinion, is contributing to world peace and brotherhood.

Peace to you.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I think this view personally helps contribute towards tolerance between people of different faiths and beliefs and also helps the mind and heart to embrace more and more truth.

Truth manifests itself in so many forms and through so many avenues and teachers that if we are open minded we stand to gain and enrich ourselves spiritually by being receptive to truth no matter where it comes from.

It means we try and look for the truth in other systems of belief to learn from them as there is so much truth in them.

Also having universal views and attitudes helps to eliminate prejudice from our midst. Any person who appreciates and has tolerance for the views of others, in my humble opinion, is contributing to world peace and brotherhood.

Peace to you.

Ha ha, found this when searching. We have been a long time away from this thread, ha ha what a marathon it was and it was a great lesson for me.

Hope all is well.

Regards Tony