Two approaches towards reforming Islam: the Bahai Faith and Ahmadiyya Islam.

[paarsurrey]

As a Baha'i I believe in an invisible essence called God and that Krishna, Moses, Buddha, Christ and Muhammad are all Manifestations of God. In that sense there's no division and we are all one people, with One God, following one religion. That is my believe but it is not the belief of those who I converse on this thread. That's fine. We're all entitled to our beliefs as you are.

The Abrahamic and Dharmic Faiths do represent two lineages if you like.

Buddha as you know emerged out of Hindu India and then His Teachings spread throughout Asia.

Christianity emerged from Judaism. 600 years later Muhammad encouraged his peoples to turn away from paganism to follow monotheism in the traditions of Moses and Jesus and announced the Qur'an was the next revelation from God surpassing the gospels and Torah.

My RF associates here will argue that the Abrahamic and Dharmic Faiths have such different paradigms as to be irreconcilable. I don't believe that a all of course. Nor do you.

"My RF associates here will argue that the Abrahamic and Dharmic Faiths have such different paradigms as to be irreconcilable. I don't believe that a all of course. Nor do you."

I believe it is an artificial classification that serves no purpose.
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

"My RF associates here will argue that the Abrahamic and Dharmic Faiths have such different paradigms as to be irreconcilable. I don't believe that a all of course. Nor do you."

I believe it is an artificial classification that serves no purpose.
Regards

Not artificial at all. In the categories of religious groups set up on this forum, and in most textbooks of religion where categorisation takes place, done by religious studies scholars, the two are kept separate. There are many excellent reasons for this, but most include huge philosophical differences on the nature of God, what happens when we die, nature of communication with God, lifestyle, tolerance toward other faiths, practice, and many other factors. To think both paradigms are essentially the same is just wishful thinking. Of course anyone is free to be a wishful thinker, but it's not reality. A simple example would be that very few people of the western paradigm could even find themselves entering a Hindu temple, let alone joining in.

 

[LuisDantas]

"My RF associates here will argue that the Abrahamic and Dharmic Faiths have such different paradigms as to be irreconcilable. I don't believe that a all of course. Nor do you."

I believe it is an artificial classification that serves no purpose.
Regards

Oh, it is very much a natural classification with clear meaning and purpose.

Abrahamic presumes a supernatural, divine authority that must be considered.

Dharmic focuses instead on discernible ideas and facts.

 

[paarsurrey]

Not artificial at all. In the categories of religious groups set up on this forum, and in most textbooks of religion where categorisation takes place, done by religious studies scholars, the two are kept separate. There are many excellent reasons for this, but most include huge philosophical differences on the nature of God, what happens when we die, nature of communication with God, lifestyle, tolerance toward other faiths, practice, and many other factors. To think both paradigms are essentially the same is just wishful thinking. Of course anyone is free to be a wishful thinker, but it's not reality. A simple example would be that very few people of the western paradigm could even find themselves entering a Hindu temple, let alone joining in.

"In the categories of religious groups set up on this forum, and in most textbooks of religion where categorisation takes place, done by religious studies scholars, the two are kept separate."

The above categorization is its aspect of being artificial or man-made.
It is not made by G-d. Is it, please?

Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

"In the categories of religious groups set up on this forum, and in most textbooks of religion where categorisation takes place, done by religious studies scholars, the two are kept separate."

The above categorization is its aspect of being artificial or man-made.
It is not made by G-d.

Regards

Please don't confuse God with religion, Paar. God (my God, for sure) loves all, but is not a puppet master. We're not talking about God, we're talking about how people view God, or religion. God is a new discussion.

 

[paarsurrey]

Please don't confuse God with religion, Paar. God (my God, for sure) loves all, but is not a puppet master. We're not talking about God, we're talking about how people view God, or religion. God is a new discussion.

Truthful religion is always revealed by G-d, those who believe it are believers and those who don't believe it are non-believers. I believe this is the natural classification that really matters.


Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

Truthful religion is always revealed by G-d, those who believe it are believers and those who don't believe it are non-believers. I believe this is the natural classification that really matters.
Regards

We disagree, obviously. I see dharmic versus adharmic as much more important. Believers can be horrible people, (Hitler was a believer, so are ISIS) and non-believers can be the nicest people. Personally, I see people by their behaviour, not by their belief. If belief leads us to niceness, sure, but it doesn't.

So for you, all atheist are bad, right?

 

[paarsurrey]

We disagree, obviously. I see dharmic versus adharmic as much more important. Believers can be horrible people, (Hitler was a believer, so are ISIS) and non-believers can be the nicest people. Personally, I see people by their behaviour, not by their belief. If belief leads us to niceness, sure, but it doesn't.

So for you, all atheist are bad, right?

"So for you, all atheist are bad, right?"

I never said that.
Regards

 

[Dawnofhope]

Sometimes we make life complicated when it doesn't need to be. Other times we erect man made barriers that reflect our particular biases.

It is who we become in this life and what we do that defines us. If our faith or religion helps us to become better people then the purpose of religion is achieved and so too our purpose in this life is better fulfilled. If our religion results in us becoming a bigot or hateful, then best to be without that religion.

For Baha'is all genuine religion, whether Buddhist, Hindu, Islam or Christianity is there to carry forward an ever advancing civilisation.

Buddha Himself warned against excessive preoccupation with abstruse theological matters and encouraged us to become the noble beings we were created to become.

 

[Aupmanyav]

@ Aupmanyav Two diasporas over 2 centuries for Indians. I didn't realise the Fijians now have their own diaspora. Little wonder the faith has become quite different. The same is probably true for Trinidad, Guyana, South Africa and others, with the majority settling in former Commonwealth countries. Perhaps the exception is Surinam and The Netherlands.

Fijian Indian diaspora - Wikipedia

Sure, we can have a Fijian diaspora within the Indian diaspora. No. Problem. But they remain 'ours'.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I like many contents of one's post that I have given different colors.

Using different colors makes reading difficult. It shows immaturity on internet.

 

[Marcion]

Yes the Abrahamic and Dharmic paradigms are irreconcilable.

If you look at traditions in a more superficial way, I can understand that you would come to such a conclusion. This type of superficial religious thinking is causing a lot of enmity and violence in the world and it does not have my support.

Having said that, there is a digotomy between the tantric and the vedic practices and the vedic practices (which is more a product of human fantasy) may more easily clash with each other if they are interpreted in a dogmatic way.

 

[LuisDantas]

"In the categories of religious groups set up on this forum, and in most textbooks of religion where categorisation takes place, done by religious studies scholars, the two are kept separate."

The above categorization is its aspect of being artificial or man-made.
It is not made by G-d. Is it, please?

Regards

Well, if you want to go there, it will be very hard to avoid the conclusion that the Abrahamic Faiths are clearly at odds at each other and that reality makes it rather unlikely that there is a God supporting any of them.

 

[LuisDantas]

Truthful religion is always revealed by G-d, those who believe it are believers and those who don't believe it are non-believers. I believe this is the natural classification that really matters.


Regards

By that measure, religion is not something that exists.

 

[Vinayaka]

"So for you, all atheist are bad, right?"

I never said that.
Regards

Good. But what do you think of atheists, since you did suggest you think the biggest spiritual divide is atheism with theism.

Paar, another reason I don't see it this way is that I generally feel far closer in mind to atheists, than I do to Abrahamic theists, even though I'm a dharmic theist. The concept of God is so different in the two, that the dharmic faiths have room for atheism.

 

[Vinayaka]

Sure, we can have a Fijian diaspora within the Indian diaspora. No. Problem. But they remain 'ours'.

Not sure if that goes in both directions, Aup. Most likely it's an individual thing.

 

[Vinayaka]

If you look at traditions in a more superficial way, I can understand that you would come to such a conclusion. This type of superficial religious thinking is causing a lot of enmity and violence in the world and it does not have my support.

Having said that, there is a digotomy between the tantric and the vedic practices and the vedic practices (which is more a product of human fantasy) may more easily clash with each other if they are interpreted in a dogmatic way.

Obviously I disagree. I've looked at religions in much deeper ways, and the fundamental answers to life's questions, like Who am I? Where am I going? etc. have fundamentally different answers. The only way they don't is when you change one side or the other to suit your own agenda, coupled with confirmation bias. I've worked with many Abrahamic people, and once religion comes up, we are very clearly on different wavelengths.

But you have the right to your view.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Not sure if that goes in both directions, Aup. Most likely it's an individual thing.

As I said, it is their wish. That does not change my view.

 

[Marcion]

I've worked with many Abrahamic people, and once religion comes up, we are very clearly on different wavelengths.

There is no denying that many christians and muslims have a sectarian narrow-minded outlook because their way of thinking is not tantric or mystic enough.
However, there are also many so-called hindu or buddhist type of religious folk whose outlook is just as narrow-minded and focussed more on asking for personal boons rather than on growing spiritually.

I have discovered the historical Yeshua to have been profoundly tantric so the start was not bad. And even today there are small christian minorities who still somehow practise this more tantric style of selfless service and devotion to God.

Of course India is much richer in tantric types of teachings, it has the deeper philosophy and more mystics. But I would not dare to say that Indians are percentage wise better at following dharma than westerners are.

In fact my tantra teacher was once asked about this by one of his disciples and he answered that in India the majority of people at this time are dominated by 'tamas' (static factor), whereas westerners are mostly dominated by 'rajas' (mutative factor). Perhaps only the sentient portion of people is then somewhat greater in India but I don't recall my teachers exact words on this.

 

[Vinayaka]

As I said, it is their wish. That does not change my view.

Yes. I think there is some long held resentment to wards both the British, and to the Indian government at the time, about false promises when they were taken away as indentured labour. Life was nowhere near as ideal as it was portrayed, but the same thing happened all around the world. The settlers of Canada, for example had no idea of how brutal the conditions were.