Identical symbolism in Non-Abrahami and Abrahamic Scriptures

[CG Didymus]

Certainly the disciples of Buddha, as well as Buddha believed Buddha was divine, as can be seen, in certain occasions, His disciples consider Him as All-knowing, and All-powerful, and Buddha confirms it. They may not have used the term God in His case, but in terms of attributes, He was described as divine. Now, He presented Himself as someone who became divine, after getting enlightened, but that is just so, others would not be disturbed by His claim, saying why you did not proclaim from beginning. Similar to Jesus, or the Bab and Bahaullah.

But, I thought Buddhism teaches that anyone can, and many have, reached enlightenment? And these others are not manifestations. So what are they? Are they truly enlightened the way the Buddha was? 'Cause if he was, as you say, a manifestation, then those others are not the same or like the Buddha. But anyway, since you believe the Buddha is a manifestation, then the question is what are these other people? Just supper spiritual and almost enlightened?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

But, I thought Buddhism teaches that anyone can, and many have, reached enlightenment? And these others are not manifestations. So what are they? Are they truly enlightened the way the Buddha was? 'Cause if he was, as you say, a manifestation, then those others are not the same or like the Buddha. But anyway, since you believe the Buddha is a manifestation, then the question is what are these other people? Just supper spiritual and almost enlightened?

A manifestation of God, has a different nature. No body can become like Them in essence. But its analogy is, what you can also see in Bible. Our soul is like a mirror. When it is cleaned, and detached from worldly things, then it can manifest the attributes of the Manifestation of God. It is what jesus say, I am in you.
Manifestation has a different nature. But those others who became like Buddha, have reached the maximum perfection. For Bahais, Abdulbaha is an example of a Perfect Bahai. He, by nature, is ordinary man. But because He has achieved the highest possible human perfection, He became all-knowing. Things that He knew, were not through learning, but He was divinely inspired. In Islam, Shia Imams, and in Christianity the Apostles are the highest perfection.

 

[CG Didymus]

A manifestation of God, has a different nature. No body can become like Them in essence. But its analogy is, what you can also see in Bible. Our soul is like a mirror. When it is cleaned, and detached from worldly things, then it can manifest the attributes of the Manifestation of God. It is what jesus say, I am in you.
Manifestation has a different nature. But those others who became like Buddha, have reached the maximum perfection. For Bahais, Abdulbaha is an example of a Perfect Bahai. He, by nature, is ordinary man. But because He has achieved the highest possible human perfection, He became all-knowing. Things that He knew, were not through learning, but He was divinely inspired. In Islam, Shia Imams, and in Christianity the Apostles are the highest perfection.

Well then, the question I always ask is... Abraham and Moses in the Bible stories are not perfect mirrors. They are very, very human. They made mistakes along the way. So how is that explained by Baha'is? And, of course, I don't think Jews would call Abraham a manifestation of God.

 

[siti]

It is a translation of Buddhism Sutta. Not a text of 19th century. Right?

It is apparently a translation of a passage from Mara Upasatha Sutra - but you didn't know that did you? You just cut and paste from a web version of a 19th century English compilation of supposed sayings of Buddha. I have read that book (the 19th century "Gospel of Buddha" - I have a PDF version on my PC - its a great story). I have no idea how long after the supposed life of Buddha this 'event' was committed to writing - but my guess is it would be somewhere between 2 and 5 centuries. So we really have no idea whether Gautama Buddha really said that or whether a slightly less ancient sage made it up. In any case...

Only in Scriptures of great religions, you can find 'dead', and 'living', having this figurative meaning, and only those scriptures that Bahai Scriptures confirm to be from One God.

Well that I don't know. I am not going to spend a lot of time on it because

(a) even if you are right (to some extent at least) it still doesn't follow that using the same literary devices makes one the same person as another - if we take the idea of a resurrection as an example, that would presumably mean that Shakespeare, Tolkien, Dickens and J.K. Rowlings are all the same person...and

(b) I have no idea whether the word translated "quickened" meant a "figurative" or "spiritual" "resurrection" because that word can also simply mean "enlivened" or "invigorated"...etc...and given that Buddhism has no concept of a bodily resurrection (as in the main sects of Abrahamic religions) I see no reason why they would have used such a figure of speech in that way. On the other hand, if it was simply indicating that it was "as if" the Monks had returned to life after hearing the Buddha's discourse, well I don't think that really stands out as particularly special...

...anyway, really, you have so far presented only a similarity between one short passage of Buddhist "scripture" and an interpretation of Christian scripture that is not held by the majority of professed Christians (namely that the resurrection is purely figurative)...I think rather than asking me about what Joseph Smith etc. may or may not have written on the subject, you should be asking yourself whether you can find any Hindu, Zoroastrian...etc. scriptures which use the same metaphorical language. That might, perhaps, lend a bit more credence to your argument, but so far all you seem to have is:

"...two religiously important figures of ancient times were reported to have used a possibly similar figurative sense of the word "dead" and/or "resurrection" "

It is an enormous leap from that to "therefore they were the same person...namely, God"!

 

[InvestigateTruth]

It is apparently a translation of a passage from Mara Upasatha Sutra - but you didn't know that did you? You just cut and paste from a web version of a 19th century English compilation of supposed sayings of Buddha. I have read that book (the 19th century "Gospel of Buddha" - I have a PDF version on my PC - its a great story). I have no idea how long after the supposed life of Buddha this 'event' was committed to writing - but my guess is it would be somewhere between 2 and 5 centuries. So we really have no idea whether Gautama Buddha really said that or whether a slightly less ancient sage made it up. In any case...

Of course I knew, but it does not matter if I knew or not. We are discussing similarities of Scriptures, not my personal knowledge.

Well that I don't know. I am not going to spend a lot of time on it because

(a) even if you are right (to some extent at least) it still doesn't follow that using the same literary devices makes one the same person as another - if we take the idea of a resurrection as an example, that would presumably mean that Shakespeare, Tolkien, Dickens and J.K. Rowlings are all the same person...and

(b) I have no idea whether the word translated "quickened" meant a "figurative" or "spiritual" "resurrection" because that word can also simply mean "enlivened" or "invigorated"...etc...and given that Buddhism has no concept of a bodily resurrection (as in the main sects of Abrahamic religions) I see no reason why they would have used such a figure of speech in that way. On the other hand, if it was simply indicating that it was "as if" the Monks had returned to life after hearing the Buddha's discourse, well I don't think that really stands out as particularly special...

...anyway, really, you have so far presented only a similarity between one short passage of Buddhist "scripture" and an interpretation of Christian scripture that is not held by the majority of professed Christians (namely that the resurrection is purely figurative)...I think rather than asking me about what Joseph Smith etc. may or may not have written on the subject, you should be asking yourself whether you can find any Hindu, Zoroastrian...etc. scriptures which use the same metaphorical language. That might, perhaps, lend a bit more credence to your argument, but so far all you seem to have is:

"...two religiously important figures of ancient times were reported to have used a possibly similar figurative sense of the word "dead" and/or "resurrection" "

It is an enormous leap from that to "therefore they were the same person...namely, God"!

It is not only one similarity. There are countless. I have shown many other ones, in other threads. Not job to convince. I can only put some info, as much as my time allows, and leave it as that...and anyone who really wants to see more similarities, can investigate on their own.

 

[ManSinha]

It is not only one similarity. There are countless. I have shown many other ones, in other threads.

Actually @InvestigateTruth - you have not - you may have convinced (read deluded) people of your own faith - not a single dharmic on here believes your fanciful ideas of cross representation for an instant. Sorry to say - as far as I am concerned your efforts are completely flat on their face.

There are some common threads but the forced - somewhat ingenious comparisons you are trying to make - only exist in your fertile imagination.

 

[ecco]

It is not only one similarity. There are countless.

But the one you chose was found to be a very poor, easily dismissed example. Why would you choose so poorly?

 

[siti]

Of course I knew, but it does not matter if I knew or not. We are discussing similarities of Scriptures, not my personal knowledge.

Of course you did. And of course we are "discussing similarities of scriptures" - one might have thought that the actual "scripture" reference might have been helpful though - wouldn't you say? Anyway, moving on...

It is not only one similarity. There are countless. I have shown many other ones, in other threads. Not job to convince. I can only put some info, as much as my time allows, and leave it as that...and anyone who really wants to see more similarities, can investigate on their own.

Well I think somebody has already pointed out that you have not shown any real similarity between the teaching of Buddha and the teaching of Christ in this thread. Such factual assessments aside, have you seen the thread about seeing angels in the clouds? For some reason, the word pareidolia springs to my mind in this thread as well. Let's all take a trip to pattern city...oops...I mean patternicity.