What if we accepted each others Religion?

[InvestigateTruth]

So what’s the purpose of telling us these details about messengers per Quran.

There are multiple purposes.

To teach Muslims the Right path and wrong Path, by giving the stories of older Messengers and how people responded to the Messengers.
The Wrongdoers and People of falsehood always opposed Prophets and called them liars, and told the Messengers that they Want to keep the religion of their forefathers. The people of truth, believed in the Messengers after seeing the Verses and Logical Arguments.

The people of falsehood always asked the Messengers to perform miracles, but the People of truth never did. The people of truth believed after hearing the Verses of God revealed. They recognized the light of God, manifested through the Messengers.

Thus for the Muslims, there are lessons in the stories of older Messengers.

why do Muslims need to take lessons from those older stories?

- because they will be tested when the next Messenger comes to them.

if they learned from lessons in the Quran, then at the time of Manifestation of the next Messenger, they do not fail. They wont act like people of falsehood.
But if they dont take lessons, then they fail just as previous people.

But just as God teaches lessons, He also Tests, and the Tests of God are not easy!
He says, Muhammad is "Seal of Prophets". He says, Messengers did miracles, they resurrected dead, split the moon, etc. By these words, He is speaking Mutishabihat! He does that, so, people of falsehood, at the time of Manifestation of the next Messenger, fail to recognize Him. This is how He misguides the people of falsehood. It is through speaking in Mutishabihaat, so, the people of falsehood follow these verses, and think, there will not be any Messengers after "Seal of Prophets", and even if a Mahdi comes, He must do Miracles to prove it, becuase previous Imams and Prophets did so.

But people of truth, know the purpose of God. They recognize the Mutishabihat and do not follow them. They know, God wants to tests them by these verses. Thus, when the next Meaaenger comes, the people of truth, investigate Him with an open heart, and clear mind from fanaticism. This is how God guides them.

 

[Link]

There are multiple purposes.

To teach Muslims the Right path and wrong Path, by giving the stories of older Messengers and how people responded to the Messengers.
The Wrongdoers and People of falsehood always opposed Prophets and called them liars, and told the Messengers that they Want to keep the religion of their forefathers. The people of truth, believed in the Messengers after seeing the Verses and Logical Arguments.

The people of falsehood always asked the Messengers to perform miracles, but the People of truth never did. The people of truth believed after hearing the Verses of God revealed. They recognized the light of God, manifested through the Messengers.

Thus for the Muslims, there are lessons in the stories of older Messengers.

why do Muslims need to take lessons from those older stories?

- because they will be tested when the next Messenger comes to them.

if they learned from lessons in the Quran, then at the time of Manifestation of the next Messenger, they do not fail. They wont act like people of falsehood.
But if they dont take lessons, then they fail just as previous people.

But just as God teaches lessons, He also Tests, and the Tests of God are not easy!
He says, Muhammad is "Seal of Prophets". He says, Messengers did miracles, they resurrected dead, split the moon, etc. By these words, He is speaking Mutishabihat! He does that, so, people of falsehood, at the time of Manifestation of the next Messenger, fail to recognize Him. This is how He misguides the people of falsehood. It is through speaking in Mutishabihaat, so, the people of falsehood follow these verses, and think, there will not be any Messengers after "Seal of Prophets", and even if a Mahdi comes, He must do Miracles to prove it, becuase previous Imams and Prophets did so.

But people of truth, know the purpose of God. They recognize the Mutishabihat and do not follow them. They know, God wants to tests them by these verses. Thus, when the next Meaaenger comes, the people of truth, investigate Him with an open heart, and clear mind from fanaticism. This is how God guides them.

The Mahdi will perform miracles. This is the purpose of telling us about miracles to prepare the world to accept them when they come.

People will say aliens, sorcery, technology you name it, they will say it, but we are on track with few accepting miracles.

The TV shows and movies and games and fiction in general all have it so people are incepted to reject miracles.

The destruction warned about with Mohammad was avoided but if Yathrib messianic Jews didn’t do what they did and invite Mohammad and accept him and support him, Mecca would have been destroyed per Quran.

But it can’t be that all the threats and repeated warnings about destruction are all recorded for an event that never happened and so Quran would be stuck in the past. The verses are all warning and contextualize that all cities will be destroyed before the day of judgment or punished severely, and God never destroys a people as so without sending a Messenger.

You ignore that context because it didn’t happen before day of judgement per your interpretation and so you ignore the context of the destruction verses and make it to be spiritual destruction.

It’s as if there is no set of words possible to convey the proper way Quran talks about the Mahdi to you because you are set to interpret and twist left right and center where it doesn’t suit you.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Which parts of the Baha'i faith do you feel need clarification, and non-Baha'i's here have misunderstanding about?

There are several areas of misunderstanding that require work.

1/ How the Baha'i Faith views Hinduism and Buddhism.

2/ How the Baha'i Faith views humanities religious experience and development generally.

3/ How the Baha'i Faith views religions that are not on our usual "list" of religions.

 

[Vinayaka]

There are several areas of misunderstanding that require work.

1/ How the Baha'i Faith views Hinduism and Buddhism.

2/ How the Baha'i Faith views humanities religious experience and development generally.

3/ How the Baha'i Faith views religions that are not on our usual "list" of religions.

Well, that's difficult, because the Baha'is here often tell differing and contradictory stories. Just whose story should we believe.
1)Initially I read Moomen's article as it was the only thing I could find. So I should discard his views?
2) Eventually everyone will naturally become Baha'is, and the Baha'i message is the current message for mankind, as it updates and modernises previous messages, and Baha'u'llah is the current manifestation, replacing Muhammad, Christ, and the others. What am I getting wrong?
3) How do you view them, and why are they not included? Why is atheism not included?

 

[JustGeorge]

There are several areas of misunderstanding that require work.

1/ How the Baha'i Faith views Hinduism and Buddhism.

2/ How the Baha'i Faith views humanities religious experience and development generally.

3/ How the Baha'i Faith views religions that are not on our usual "list" of religions.

I think communication between Baha'is and non-Baha'is in general could improve. Other than a few individual Baha'is, I often feel like when I'm communicating with them that I'm... not, well, communicating. Like they're half listening, so they can pick out some similarity between our faiths and hint out how maybe its time to "embrace the coming age/religion/prophecy/etc".

Honestly, even learning about the Baha'i religion is hard. The information I've come across are always half veiled, and I get the feeling they're trying to push you to contact someone(so they can, of course, start the push to convert you). I don't want to be converted. I just wanted to learn the basics, so I could understand what was being said... (I eventually found a couple videos from a neutral source that explained it well.)

 

[Dawnofhope]

I think communication between Baha'is and non-Baha'is in general could improve. Other than a few individual Baha'is, I often feel like when I'm communicating with them that I'm... not, well, communicating. Like they're half listening, so they can pick out some similarity between our faiths and hint out how maybe its time to "embrace the coming age/religion/prophecy/etc".

Honestly, even learning about the Baha'i religion is hard. The information I've come across are always half veiled, and I get the feeling they're trying to push you to contact someone(so they can, of course, start the push to convert you). I don't want to be converted. I just wanted to learn the basics, so I could understand what was being said... (I eventually found a couple videos from a neutral source that explained it well.)

Thanks for sharing your experience. I don’t think you are alone. What I've picked up on through others is the Baha'i Faith is perceived as an evangelical, proselytizing religion on this forum.

The experience of veiled communication is not new either.

I believe that is something us Baha'is need to hear and think about.

I'm pleased you were able to find a neutral source to provide you what you wanted to learn.

 

[Dawnofhope]

, that's difficult, because the Baha'is here often tell differing and contradictory stories. Just whose story should we believe.

It's inevitable there will be contradiction as we are all such different people. None of us are communication experts or appointed to be here because we have the right skills and attitudes. I'm not aware that anyone us are professional teachers or religious educators. We're a disparate group of lay people.

This is a forum where anyone from any background can participate. It will of course lead to mixed messages and contradictions. That's not necessarily a bad thing though has contributed to misunderstandings.

1)Initially I read Moomen's article as it was the only thing I could find. So I should discard his views?

As I understand it, Moomen has no more authority than any other Baha'i. I don't view him as an expert in Buddhism or Hinduism. His book isn't authoritative and nor are any of the views of any Baha'is on this forum.

2) Eventually everyone will naturally become Baha'is, and the Baha'i message is the current message for mankind, as it updates and modernises previous messages, and Baha'u'llah is the current manifestation, replacing Muhammad, Christ, and the others. What am I getting wrong?

Sounds about right, though I can't see it happening anytime soon. Although you didn't explicitly say it, it is an extremely radical set of beliefs. Its not what I had it mind though when I posted. Rather the origins of religion until the present day, from Indigenous practices to the modern day.

How do you view them, and why are they not included? Why is atheism not included?

Atheism isn't a religion and I'm sure most atheists would agree.

A religion is considered such because it meets criteria that are understood and agreed on by those with experience or expertise in the field of comparitive religion. Baha'is don't have special knowledge in this area unless they take the time to carefully undergo the necessary study like anyone else.

 

[sayak83]

We accept that the Buddha Gautama prophesied Maitreya the future Buddha and that He has appeared. If it’s true then that confirms that Buddha Maitreya is confirming by the fact He is Who Gautama spoke of that Gautama originally taught the oneness of God.

So I believe we are accepting the Buddhas prophecies which Buddhists are supposed to accept also. The prophecies about Maitreya are there in the Buddhist scriptures for a reason so when He appears Buddhists will turn to Him. We have accepted Him so we believe we are loyal to Buddha.

You do understand that this is precisely what exclusivist religions are like? They forcibly appropriate incompatible religious traditions by shoehorning their theology or prophet into them in order to consume the other tradition.
That is how pagan Solstice traditions became Christmas or Amerindian ancestor worship traditions became Halloween.
That is why Islam says that Christians misinterpreted Jesus and how his life ended.
Now Bahai are saying all previous traditions are misinterpreted or lost or corrupted and their interpretation of those traditions is the true one.

Older polytheist and animist syncretic traditions were better. They did not consume...they added a foreign God as an additional guy in their pantheon. Much of their practices were certainly violent...but in this tendency they scored over today's variants.

 

[loverofhumanity]

What Vedic verse from which translation is that? I googled it and got nothing, except an excerpt from an archeology book. It's pretty vague, and hard to understand. (as is common for the Vedas)

It’s from the Rig Veda by Griffith.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Reading on to the next sentence:

"In light, however, of the other statements of the Guardian, in which he stresses the paucity of our information about the beginnings of Hinduism, we should be cautious not to assert the historical accuracy of specific stories related about Krishna. A similar case where allegorical statements and legends surround the figure of a known Manifestation of God is that of Adam."

The risk for Baha'is is to start making inferences and assumptions that are not supported by the Baha'i writings and risk alienating Hindus.

Examples;

1/ Assuming Krishna is the Founder of Hinduism. No historian or scholar of religion or educated Hindu would believe that as there isn’t any evidence.

2/ Krishna is the only Manifestation that emerged from the Indian subcontinent.

3/ Vaisnavism should be seen as the more correct view of Hinduism as Sha'i Islam is the correct view of Islam.

4/ Many Hindus are yearning for the advent of Kalki as many Christians hope for the Return of Christ.

When the Baha'i writings refer to Hinduism as a religion of Divine origin, there is no good reason to assume such a statement refers to any specific groups in Hinduism such as Vaisnavism.

The only point being made was that according to the Baha’i Writings, Krishna is considered to be a Manifestation of God. Nothing else.

 

[Vinayaka]

It’s from the Rig Veda by Griffith.

Oh, now I found it. Here it is in its entirety.
5. Loose me from sin as from a bond that binds me: may we swell, Varuna, thy spring of Order.
Let not my thread, while I weave song, be severed, nor my work's sum, before the time, be shattered.

What exactly, in your own words, does it mean to you?

Varuna, BTW, is my main landscaping helper.

 

[loverofhumanity]

You do understand that this is precisely what exclusivist religions are like? They forcibly appropriate incompatible religious traditions by shoehorning their theology or prophet into them in order to consume the other tradition.
That is how pagan Solstice traditions became Christmas or Amerindian ancestor worship traditions became Halloween.
That is why Islam says that Christians misinterpreted Jesus and how his life ended.
Now Bahai are saying all previous traditions are misinterpreted or lost or corrupted and their interpretation of those traditions is the true one.

Older polytheist and animist syncretic traditions were better. They did not consume...they added a foreign God as an additional guy in their pantheon. Much of their practices were certainly violent...but in this tendency they scored over today's variants.

It’s common that a Prophet/Messenger of a subsequent religion corrects some misconceptions of the followers of the previous religion. The purpose of any Messenger is to bring truth and so we find that whenever a new Prophet arises and does not comply with the current beliefs, He is tortured and killed in many instances.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Oh, now I found it. Here it is in its entirety.
5. Loose me from sin as from a bond that binds me: may we swell, Varuna, thy spring of Order.
Let not my thread, while I weave song, be severed, nor my work's sum, before the time, be shattered.

What exactly, in your own words, does it mean to you?

Varuna, BTW, is my main landscaping helper.

That’s the closest I found to the one read at the Temple which was portraying one’s life as a song and to let the song be sung before the life comes to an end.

 

[sayak83]

It’s common that a Prophet/Messenger of a subsequent religion corrects some misconceptions of the followers of the previous religion. The purpose of any Messenger is to bring truth and so we find that whenever a new Prophet arises and does not comply with the current beliefs, He is tortured and killed in many instances.

No. It's simply an imperialist strategy of a new religion who wishes to take over from an older one.

 

[loverofhumanity]

No. It's simply an imperialist strategy of a new religion who wishes to take over from an older one.

I think it depends. There are some religious sects that just want to make money and have worldly power, but then there are some religions that are from God and have pure intent.

 

[sayak83]

I think it depends. There are some religious sects that just want to make money and have worldly power, but then there are some religions that are from God and have pure intent.

The point is not the intention of an individual believer. I am sure that many Christian pastors, Muslim imams or Buddhist monks who went to different parts of the world to spread the faith had good intentions and never wanted worldly power but only share their new message from God (as they believed). But the very model is exclusivist by its very nature.
By definition if your model of God-Man relationship is that God sends periodic new editions of his revelations in the hands of newly elected semi divine messengers...then by definition the new editions make the older ones obsolete whom YOU exclude by saying they have been corrupted and what not. This is an exclusivist replacement model at its very core and it can only create violence and conflict as the older tradition declare the new one heretical and false by necessity so as not to get replaced. What you have then... inevitably is competition and conflict. Religion's version of Darwinism. Your religion follows the same tradition and hence is part of the problem only. It cannot be the solution by virtue of how it has been conceived by your founders.
Sorry. It's the truth as far as I see it.

 

[Vinayaka]

That’s the closest I found to the one read at the Temple which was portraying one’s life as a song and to let the song be sung before the life comes to an end.

And this comment about life has deep meaning to you how exactly?

At your temple was it from a Baha'i book of selections from the Vedas, or was it the entire collection of Griffiths. Of course all translations will miss out on the subtleties in some ways. This is one translation of many, and the use of archaic English doen't help, but apparently there are worse translations out there.

 

[sayak83]

Oh, now I found it. Here it is in its entirety.
5. Loose me from sin as from a bond that binds me: may we swell, Varuna, thy spring of Order.
Let not my thread, while I weave song, be severed, nor my work's sum, before the time, be shattered.

What exactly, in your own words, does it mean to you?

Varuna, BTW, is my main landscaping helper.

Which mandala is this?

 

[Vinayaka]

It’s common that a Prophet/Messenger of a subsequent religion corrects some misconceptions of the followers of the previous religion. The purpose of any Messenger is to bring truth and so we find that whenever a new Prophet arises and does not comply with the current beliefs, He is tortured and killed in many instances.

And which one of these List of messiah claimants - Wikipedia has come to correct the misconceptions of the Baha'i faith?

With this, I'm just trying to put you in our boots. What if a more current messenger claimant came to say he was the new revised version of Baha'u'llah? How would you receive him? (Not that that will happen, because Baha'u'llah historically is so insignificant compared to Christ or Muhammad.) Maybe some day we'll have such a one come and proselytize to you. We have had a few drop by, claiming to be God or the return of Christ, and I didn't see anyone, including Baha'is, going all a agog about it. We also have a few people here who are followers of messiah claimants, but they don't proselytize like a couple of the Baha'i folks here do, so they're far less to have their claims countered.

 

[Vinayaka]

Which mandala is this?

Not sure exactly what you mean ... but it's Rig Book 2, hymn 28:5 Griffiths translation.