• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How are these Great Beings explained?

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Most of what you write I agree with, the main exception is that they were either possessed by, or influenced by what their followers believe was a divine source. I share that belief and I also believe that this divine source is available to many, perhaps all, of us if we pursue it with sufficient devotion and dedication.
The path isn't that complicated but it is extremely difficult. I've found one way that works for me but it took me over a decade to master it and I'm not sure I would recommend it for others.
In my opinion what makes the messengers different from other mystics is that they were chosen by this source for a specific mission, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad weren't exactly volunteers, each expressed doubts and a certain degree of reluctance.
The Buddha on the other hand sought enlightenment with an incredible intensity and failed to achieve it. Only after he gave up on his quest was his quest fulfilled and enlightenment was granted to him. I view that enlightenment to be from the same divine source as the others since it teaches the same basic spiritual lessons which is designed to free up the love that lives withingeach of us and not just for each other but for life in all it's diversities. I consider this to be the divine spark that motivates and activates us.

The only thing I disagree about this is the generalization that there is a divine source in everyone and that The Buddha's enlightenment somehow mirrors or is this divine source. Enlightenment is a fancy word for understanding rebirth. Rebirth is fancy for understanding kamma. Kamma is fancy for laws of cause and affect.

Life is a verb rather than a noun (person/place/thing). It is in constant motion from the energy, heat, and so forth to our emotions and personality some call spirit.

Enlightenment is the understanding of this. It is wisdom it isn't "compassion, love, and unity." That's the benefits of understanding.

In my opinion, there are no "great" beings. Once I make someone greater or lesser than me, it throws me off balance. It's being a hypocrite and that ego-thinking is what The Buddha spoke against.

Why does the divine spark have to be divine? What is keeping god-believers being one with everything rather than in submission to it?

Things like that I think about.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
Thanks, now we're really getting somewhere... where that is I don't know... but we're going.

Adam in the Christian Bible didn't start anything... he started a mess... and God had to send Jesus to die to fix it.

Adam in Judaism I doubt would be considered the founder of a religion, Besides, what would it be? It wasn't Judaism. He was part of the Jewish "mythology". And, also, a manifestation better be smarter than Adam to get fooled so easily. Everybody knows not to eat forbidden fruit... not even if it's organic.

Noah? Same thing. He had flaws. Not to mentioned he is the hero of a mythic tale about a great flood, but was he a real person? What did Baha'u'llah say about him? And didn't we already decide that the flood itself was a myth?

So we have still a lot of problems. Oh, I took a quick look at Jainism, and their founder may qualify as a manifestation too. As if we need to argue about another one.

Noah, according to the Book of Certitude was a Manifestation of God but the flood was symbolical.

We unfortunately don't know everything about all Manifestations as we don't many have records the further back we go.
 
Last edited:

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
Okay, flood symbolic. The resurrection... symbolic. Then how about Adam? The Bible has all the generations listed, people have added up the numbers... just a few thousands years. So can we add Adam to the symbolic list and say that the time frame is off? So, if we do that, how do you come up with a starting date for the "Adamic" cycle?

So now how do we add in Hinduism into the mix? They have their own cycles. I think we better check those out. Oh my God, then there's the Mayan calendar? And who knows what else is out there? But, I'll take a quick search and see what I can find on the cycles in Hinduism.

There's a lot to look up.

“The Adamic Cycle inaugurated 6000 years ago by the Manifestation of God called Adam is only one of the many bygone cycles. Bahá’u’lláh, as you say, is the culmination of the Adamic Cycle.”

Shoghi Effendi
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
There's a lot to look up.

“The Adamic Cycle inaugurated 6000 years ago by the Manifestation of God called Adam is only one of the many bygone cycles. Bahá’u’lláh, as you say, is the culmination of the Adamic Cycle.”

Shoghi Effendi
The Hindu cycles are there. Of course they don't coincide with your cycles. It sounds like we are in the Kali Yuga for a little longer from what one site said.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Noah, according to the Book of Certitude was a Manifestation of God but the flood was symbolical.

We unfortunately don't know everything about all Manifesrations as we don't many have records the furtyer back we go.
Okay, give me the definition of a manifestation again and let's see if Noah fits the description.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
The Hindu cycles are there. Of course they don't coincide with your cycles. It sounds like we are in the Kali Yuga for a little longer from what one site said.


Yes, much larger cycle, not young earth creationism, or whatever its called. lol.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
You have laws and teachings? If so, that is dogma/doctrine.

You have different expressions and your expressions are your religions.

Our laws are given by Baha'u'llah Himself in His Most Holy Book. We cannot add dogma to it. The religion is in the Words of Baha'u'llah.

And becuase they are, a Buddhist who has no god and a Bahai that does has no common foundation/expression regardless if you guys want love and unity. That's your lesser peace.

The Lesser Peace is a political union which has nothing to do with us. The Most Great Peace is when all religions will become one religion. Buddhists, over centuries will come to understand there is a God.

The greater peace, if one likes, can't be established if Bahaullah is abolishing people's traditions. That is just like the Church with paganism.

It depends on which tradition you're talking about. Some traditions are no longer relevant and even today's society would reject them such as slavery and holy war. Baha'u'llah only abolished what is harmful to us.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
...In my opinion, there are no "great" beings. Once I make someone greater or lesser than me, it throws me off balance. It's being a hypocrite and that ego-thinking is what The Buddha spoke against.

Why does the divine spark have to be divine? What is keeping god-believers being one with everything rather than in submission to it?

Things like that I think about.
That is awesome. Nobody likes the guilt trip some religions put on people. "God is up there, and we, the scum, are down here and pathetic." We are told to submit to this invisible God, who spoke to a man, who then told us what to do. If we don't... something bad is going to happen. Fear tactics. Unfortunately, that's how many religions operate.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
Okay, give me the definition of a manifestation again and let's see if Noah fits the description.

“Among the Prophets was Noah”

Excerpt From: Bahá’u’lláh. “The Kitáb-i-Íqán.”

They are Physicians, Warners, Educators. They fulfill many, roles and functions and have many titles including Prophet.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
That is awesome. Nobody likes the guilt trip some religions put on people. "God is up there, and we, the scum, are down here and pathetic." We are told to submit to this invisible God, who spoke to a man, who then told us what to do. If we don't... something bad is going to happen. Fear tactics. Unfortunately, that's how many religions operate.

Actually, for me, I wasn't raised religious and have no reservations with any gods. Never was a god-hated and definitely not a religion-hater.

It's in most religions whether you follow someone as a prophet, guri, god, or refer to "the intelligence" as the universe, force, or spirit behind all life.

The very fact it, he, she, or HaShem, etc are put above or below makes me feel imbalanced. Like if I had children, they are below me all because I had them. That's silly.

Probably why I'm not an activist, politician, evangalist, authority, or any role of contradicting or authoritative nature.

What I find calming, though, is that even though people go haywire about these religions, if they only actually go into these religious temples, mosques, and parishes, they may have a better sense of what they call god without needing to judge whose god is whose.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
For some reason I'm not getting your quotes. Are you using the quote button?

Our laws are given by Baha'u'llah Himself in His Most Holy Book. We cannot add dogma to it. The religion is in the Words of Baha'u'llah.

Those laws are dogma/doctrine. They are teachings that structure an organization or religion (Bahai) to which the followers (Bahais) use in practice, speech, and belief. That is dogma. That's doctrine.

The Lesser Peace is a political union which has nothing to do with us. The Most Great Peace is when all religions will become one religion. Buddhists, over centuries will come to understand there is a God.

You cannot have diversity if you want "all religions [that] will become one religion" who will "come to understand there is a god."

Either you want diversity or you don't.

It depends on which tradition you're talking about. Some traditions are no longer relevant and even today's society would reject them such as slavery and holy war. Baha'u'llah only abolished what is harmful to us.

Now it depends?

All traditions are valuable. This is exactly what gets people killed is because X religion finds value in their teachings and try to preserve it but Y faith wants to kill those people for a new, governed religion.

I'll say it another way, how you are presenting your religion, your faith is not doing anything different than what other religions do and did. The size of your religion doesn't exclude you from making all religions into one under god. People do not agree with you.

Do you want their agreement?

If so, how would you come to an agreement without god?
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
That is dogma. Definition of DOGMA

Just what do you think dogma is?

The definition doesn't cover a Manifestation of God bringing teachings needed for this age.

Baha'u'llah does not bring teachings without adequate grounds.

In an age of disunity He brings teachings concerning unity so the grounds for His teachings and laws are more than adequate. He has come to establish the Most Great Peace in an age where we have already had two world wars. There is more than adequate grounds for His teachings and laws.

His teachings are practical and useful for today which is why the UN have adopted so many of them. He 'reveals truth' as revealed to Him in revelations. He is completely empty of self and it is God's pure Word flowing through Him. It is not human self assertiveness or opinionatedness or arrogance but pure truth He 'reveals'. Dogma is just blind arrogant assertion from a human source. Baha'u'llah's Revelation does not come from his ego or a human source. It comes from an All Knowing Source.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
The definition doesn't cover a Manifestation of God bringing teachings needed for this age.

Here's another definition then.

  1. a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.
    "the Christian dogma of the Trinity"
    synonyms: teaching, belief, tenet, principle, precept, maxim, article of faith, canon; More
    creed, credo, set of beliefs, doctrine, ideology
    "a dogma of the Sikh religion"
So are you saying that Bahai does NOT have a set of principles laid down by an authority (in your case Baha'u'llah) that are true. Is it NOT ateaching, a belief, tenets, doctrine. article of faith, etc.

Once again I think you're either contradicting yourself, or changing the meaning of words to suit your opinion. It's like 'pioneers' instead of 'missionaries' or 'spreading, sharing,' instead of proselytizing.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
@loverofhumanity

Dogma:

Something held as an established opinion; especially; a definite authoritative tenant. A code of such tenants... a point of view or tenant put faith as authoritative without adequate ground.

These are People that you hold in authority and they gave tenants (guidelines for practice) so that you as a Bahai can belief, practice, and follow.

Doctrine:

On that note:

If you go to your Bahai Reference Library you will find a lot of information that this definition of doctrine applies to:

1. something that is taught
2. principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief :
3. statement of fundamental government policy

Loverofhumanity, dogma and doctrine aren't evil words. Bahaullah isn't half man, half god, right? If he isn't, he is a man, your dogma and doctrine comes from a man just as yourself and every other man and woman who put their hand to paper and wrote "god said..."
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Here's another definition then.

  1. a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.
    "the Christian dogma of the Trinity"
    synonyms: teaching, belief, tenet, principle, precept, maxim, article of faith, canon; More
    creed, credo, set of beliefs, doctrine, ideology
    "a dogma of the Sikh religion"
So are you saying that Bahai does NOT have a set of principles laid down by an authority (in your case Baha'u'llah) that are true. Is it NOT ateaching, a belief, tenets, doctrine. article of faith, etc.

Once again I think you're either contradicting yourself, or changing the meaning of words to suit your opinion. It's like 'pioneers' instead of 'missionaries' or 'spreading, sharing,' instead of proselytizing.


Beat me to it!
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
For some reason I'm not getting your quotes. Are you using the quote button?



Those laws are dogma/doctrine. They are teachings that structure an organization or religion (Bahai) to which the followers (Bahais) use in practice, speech, and belief. That is dogma. That's doctrine.



You cannot have diversity if you want "all religions [that] will become one religion" who will "come to understand there is a god."

Either you want diversity or you don't.



Now it depends?

All traditions are valuable. This is exactly what gets people killed is because X religion finds value in their teachings and try to preserve it but Y faith wants to kill those people for a new, governed religion.

I'll say it another way, how you are presenting your religion, your faith is not doing anything different than what other religions do and did. The size of your religion doesn't exclude you from making all religions into one under god. People do not agree with you.

Do you want their agreement?

If so, how would you come to an agreement without god?

Not all traditions are valuable. That's the point. Teachings, laws and traditions for one age may be a remedy but for another may be a poison. Traditions like slavery, holy war, racism and the suppression of women are teachings of bygone ages that are no longer acceptable to the wider world.

Do you understand that the world is abolishing racism. It was once a cape table for races to be segregated in America. That tradition has been destroyed. You want it kept? Was it good that blacks were oppressed?

The Bible says women should not speak or have a say in matters. Today, that's been thrown out the door although it is a part of God's Word. It is no longer relevant. Do we allow Muslims to keep the tradition of holy war once needed to prevent the genicide of Muslims, do we keep this tradition in an age of nuclear weapons?

Regardless of what Baha'u'llah says, humanity are throwing out and rejecting some traditions even the people who once were strong upholders of these traditions.

Traditions of death by stoning and crucifixion have been mostly abandoned and where not are opposed by all humanity and are on the way out. You say keep them? For what? What use is stoning, slavery, crucifixion, holy war, the oppression of women, apartheid, racism, bigotry in our age? Both the world, the UN and Baha'u'llah all are against these things. These are all part and parcel of things you call 'traditions'.

You trying to tell me these traditions are 'valuable'?. Many religions have stoooee practising their own traditions why? Because times have changed and now they see them as cruel and unneeded in this age.

What about traditions like FGM? It IS a tradition like you say. A valuable one?? I beg to differ and ask for common sense to prevail when we say rtraditions across the board should all be upheld. It doesn't stand up to reason.


The history of FGM is not well known but the practice dated back at least 2000 years. It is not known when or where the tradition of Female Genital Mutilation originated from. It was believed that it was practised in ancient Egypt as a sign of distinction amongst the aristocracy.

How many more traditions are harmful? Child slavery. Child prostituion. Child marriage. The beating of wives and children. You accept all these? They have been traditions for centuries.
The world and Baha'u'llah have rejected them. If you see them as ' valuable' then that's your right to believe what you want.

What's wrong with abolishment of slavery, racism, bigotry, discrimination, oppression of women, and many, many more evil traditions??

I'm not saying there aren't good innocent traditions that we should love and respect. I'm saying a lot need to be thrown out and are by the UN and other bodies and governments as no longer acceptable in our age.

Tradition is like medicine. If it is good for the illness ok. But if it makes the patient worse or kills him then it is a poison and some traditions of the past which might have been acceptable like stoning or severe punishments for crimes where there was only desert and no jails or prisons may have been justified then but not today when we have 'corrective facilities' to re educate criminals.

Try to understand that traditions are not all good or all bad but that we can't give a blank cheque to all of them.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
@loverofhumanity

Dogma:

Something held as an established opinion; especially; a definite authoritative tenant. A code of such tenants... a point of view or tenant put faith as authoritative without adequate ground.

These are People that you hold in authority and they gave tenants (guidelines for practice) so that you as a Bahai can belief, practice, and follow.

Doctrine:

On that note:

If you go to your Bahai Reference Library you will find a lot of information that this definition of doctrine applies to:

1. something that is taught
2. principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief :
3. statement of fundamental government policy

Loverofhumanity, dogma and doctrine aren't evil words. Bahaullah isn't half man, half god, right? If he isn't, he is a man, your dogma and doctrine comes from a man just as yourself and every other man and woman who put their hand to paper and wrote "god said..."

These teachings come direct from God through Baha'u'llah. Baha'u'llah isn't the inventor of them nor is He giving His opinion. All His knowledge comes direct from God so it is truth not dogma.

Things like the Eucharist and confession are dogmas where there is no specific law in the Gospels where Christ gives specific instructions that these are to become ritualised practices.

All Baha'u'llah's teachings are NOT without grounds. The majority of His basic teachings are being adopted universally through the UN.

God reveals truth not dogma. He 'received' knowledge and didn't formulate it. We have no dogma as everything is given by Baha'u'llah Himself direct from God to humanity.

"Thou knowest full well that We perused not the books which men possess and We acquired not the learning current amongst them, and yet whenever We desire to quote the sayings of the learned and of the wise, presently there will appear before the face of thy Lord in the form of a tablet all that which hath appeared in the world and is revealed in the Holy Books and Scriptures. Thus do We set down in writing that which the eye perceiveth. Verily His knowledge encompasseth the earth and the heavens." Baha'u'llah
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
I'm sorry, but you simply do not understand the meaning of dogma. Maybe because so many people speak negatively of dogma, you have understood it as a 'bad' thing and are trying to distance yourself from it. I really don't know. It merely refers to a set of rules, perhaps even guidelines if used more loosely./ Surely Bahai has guidelines, or rules.
 
Top