Krishna - Historical or mythological?

[TransmutingSoul]

What is this supposed to mean? Bahaulla is not Krishna - that is too far fetched.
Why can't he just be Bahaulla?

If you would like to explain who Krishna is to you, then I can explain what I posted.

I can offer meanwhile that the meaning of Baha'u'llah, which is in Arabic, is "Glory of God", or "Glory of the Lord".

Regards Tony

 

[Jainarayan]

In the Gita we read a similar idea of progressive revelation

Whenever there is a decline in righteousness and an increase in unrighteousness, at that time I manifest myself on earth" (Gita)

You have a grave misunderstanding of that verse and it’s meaning. It has nothing to do with progression or progressive revelation. Rather, it has to do with maintaining the dharmic status quo. It’s only coincidental that the Gita is a teaching vehicle. Sri Krishna is reminding Arjuna of his dharmic duties as a Kshatriya. The Kurukshetra War was a dismal failure in my opinion. It was a Pyrrhic victory for the Pandavas, and the total destruction of the Kurus.. All sides lost, including Krishna himself when his clan slaughtered themselves, and he died like an ordinary person.

When Vishnu incarnates it’s not to bring new teachings or advancement. It’s to restore order, i.e. dharma and/or destroy an evil force. With the exceptions of Krishna and the Buddha, each of Vishnu’s 24 incarnations appeared to perform a specific task. Those tasks restored order, balanced an imbalance, restored good over evil. But they were not progressive in nature, and not revelatory.

It grates on Hindus’ nerves, and I suspect it holds true for other religion’s believers, when non-Hindus try to interpret Hinduism. I have no problem with Hindu deities being adopted, revered, worshiped in other faiths, as long as it’s within the tenets of Hinduism. I’ve read of Wiccans adopting Shiva and Shakti as their God and Goddess, and that’s fine as long as who and what Shiva and Shakti are is not adulterated.

It probably bothers Christians that I see Jesus as a teacher, yogi, even saint in the traditions of Sri Ramakrishna, Paramhansa Yogananda and other enlightened souls, but not as God. That’s how and why it bothers Hindus, especially Vaishnavas like me, that who we believe to be God is busted in rank to either a prophet, messenger, or at best a Demi-god. That will not win friends among Hindus.

 

[Jainarayan]

I don’t know how I missed this thread originally, but whether Krishna, or Jesus, or Adam and Eve were historical or not is, I think, irrelevant. Irrelevant because whoever or whatever they were or are, we have what they left. Besides, all legends, fables, myths have some kernel of truth.

To answer the question, I chose This poll does not reflect my thinking. There is evidence that the Kurukshetra War took place. If so, then a person we identify as Krishna was probably part of it. There is also the submerged ruins of something off the coast of Gujarat India. Right where Dwaraka was supposed to be. Troy was thought to be a myth for centuries until Heinrich Schliemann found it. But whoever or whatever the earthly Krishna was or was not, he is my envisioning of God. There are sayings, some from Sri Ramakrishna, that God shows himself in whatever way his devotee wants to see him. So, I don’t know whether he was historical, or what he was, except my view of God.

 

[loverofhumanity]

You have a grave misunderstanding of that verse and it’s meaning. It has nothing to do with progression or progressive revelation. Rather, it has to do with maintaining the dharmic status quo. It’s only coincidental that the Gita is a teaching vehicle. Sri Krishna is reminding Arjuna of his dharmic duties as a Kshatriya. The Kurukshetra War was a dismal failure in my opinion. It was a Pyrrhic victory for the Pandavas, and the total destruction of the Kurus.. All sides lost, including Krishna himself when his clan slaughtered themselves, and he died like an ordinary person.

When Vishnu incarnates it’s not to bring new teachings or advancement. It’s to restore order, i.e. dharma and/or destroy an evil force. With the exceptions of Krishna and the Buddha, each of Vishnu’s 24 incarnations appeared to perform a specific task. Those tasks restored order, balanced an imbalance, restored good over evil. But they were not progressive in nature, and not revelatory.

It grates on Hindus’ nerves, and I suspect it holds true for other religion’s believers, when non-Hindus try to interpret Hinduism. I have no problem with Hindu deities being adopted, revered, worshiped in other faiths, as long as it’s within the tenets of Hinduism. I’ve read of Wiccans adopting Shiva and Shakti as their God and Goddess, and that’s fine as long as who and what Shiva and Shakti are is not adulterated.

It probably bothers Christians that I see Jesus as a teacher, yogi, even saint in the traditions of Sri Ramakrishna, Paramhansa Yogananda and other enlightened souls, but not as God. That’s how and why it bothers Hindus, especially Vaishnavas like me, that who we believe to be God is busted in rank to either a prophet, messenger, or at best a Demi-god. That will not win friends among Hindus.

Krishna to me is a Holy and Exalted Being Who taught us many valuable spiritual truths. My belief embraces Krishna and the Bhagavad-Gita. I am absolutely convinced that He has returned as Kalki in the Person of Baha’u’llah. But you are free to disagree and I don’t see you as not a friend because you don’t have the same views.

So let’s be human brothers and not allow differences of view to come between us. To you your belief and to me mine.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Namaste and thanks for your patience while I compiled this:

Historicity of KrishNa

VAsudev-KRshNa (long a sound in VA) , the son of VRshNi prince Vasudev (short a sound), appeared on earth 5300 years ago (we will come back to address this date)

Ample evidence exists for VAsudev-KRshNa through

(i) The existence and narrations of BhAgavatas , the most ancient devotees of VAsudev , also called "VAsudevaka" as in OF/belonging to/devotees of VAsudev - per Grammarian Panini.
175-135 BCE: Garuda pillars erected by BhAgvatas. Krishna (lit. "black one") born a khsatriya among the Yadavas at Mathura, SE of Delhi, son of Vasudeva and Devaki. Brought up by cowherds in the area of Vrindaban.

(ii) Ca. 750 BCE : Mention of Krishna, son of Devaki, in Chandogya Up. (3.17.6).
ChhAndogya Upanishad - one of the original ancient canon of Upanishads mentions KrishNa, Devaki-putra (Krishna, the son of Devaki) along with the sage Ghor Angiras of the Angiras lineage.

(iii) 500 BCE: Panini mentions bhakti in reference to Krishna and references Vasudeva, Krishna's father
Panini's grammar examples: VAsudevaka = Of/belonging to/Devotee Of VAsudev, VAsudev = Son of Vasudev

(iv) 3rd BCE: Patanjali knows of Krishna's escape from the demon prince Kansa as an "anicent" story. Bas relief of "slaughter of infants" from this period now in the Mathura museum. (Patanjali is the father of AshTAnga Yoga and believed to be an avatAr of Adi-Shesh, who inturn is believed to be born as the great Acharya Ramanuja.)

(v) The Greeks who came to India - had a lot of reverence for KRshNa and Balaram, so much that they engraved His pictures on their coins and pillars. They were also His admirers and devotees.
2nd BCE: Greek ambassador Megathenes reports of worship of Krishna, incarnation of Vishnu.


(v) Archelogical findings in Andhra Pradesh of VRshNi heroes Krishna(VAsudev), BalarAm(SankarshaN) - elder brother, Padyumna - son, Aniruddha - grandson, SAmbh (son) , ruins of an ancient city under sea , Dwarka , carbon-dated to 5000 - 10000 years. Most recent expedition in 1980s and 1990s by Dr. Rao of Banglore.

------------
VAsudev-KRshNa - General info


Bactria coin-currency

Krishna on a coin of Agathocles of Bactria, 190-180 BCE
The picture below: The white umbrella that was always above His head - in honor, and the crown is really a war helmet that He had to wear to protect DwarkA from invasions. The wheel is the unique Sudarshan chakra in His hand / on His finger, which He never used but as a last resort to punish extreme wickedness when all else failed.

The VRishNi Heroes - KrishNa-BalarAm a.k.a. VAsudev-SankarshaN
View attachment 47403 View attachment 47404


The 5 VRshNi Heroes
View attachment 47405


Citings in Sanskrit Grammarian Panini's books
He appears in Pāṇinis writings in conjunction with Arjuna as an object of worship, since Pāṇini explains that a vāsudevaka is a devotee (bhakta) of Vāsudeva
(Just as I explained earlier, VAAsudev is son of Vasudev)

Other Religions and geographical regions
Evidence of KRshNa and elder brother Balaram is found, not only in the earliest BhAgvat cult/tradition, but also in the texts of Jainism and Buddhism. According to the Jains, an era has tirthankars, chakravartis, vAsudev and sankarshaN and "A VAsudev is a very powerful and gracious personality, and the earth shakes with His every step." - Dada Bhagwan

ChhAndogya Upanishad - one of the earliest original upanishad cannon
ChhAndogya Up. 3.17.6 :
Ghora Angirasa, after imparting this meditation that was such, to KRshNa, son of Devaki , said, "At the time of death, one should repeat these three mantras: 'You are undecaying(immortal), You are unchanging, You are the vital force (prANa) made completely fine (subtle)". He verily became free from the thirst [for any other kind of meditation]. In this regard, there are 2 Rg Veda ruchis

The Heliodorus pillar & The Temple of VAsudev
- the devotees of VAsudev-KRshNa as Supreme expand beyond Bharat
View attachment 47410


Temple of VAsudev excavations
View attachment 47406View attachment 47407



Date of KRshNa's earthly appearance
The date of JanmshTami 5300 yrs ago was calculated by expert Vedic astronomers based on the arrangement of stars at the time of appearance as narrated in the accounts compared to the arrangement of constellations today. KRshNa was born when the Moon was in RohiNi Nakshatra - a special constellation, in the monsoon season of ShravaN-Bhadrapad (Aup-Sep of English caendar. We can go into the papers on the details.

Vasudev (with a short a sound) : Krishna, Balaram and Subhadra's father


VRshNi coin:
View attachment 47408


Vrishnis in ancient literature



Demo: VAsudevaka = a devotee of VAsudev -- grammar example by Panini

Panini's table - AshTAdhyayi: Ashtadhyayi | work by Panini
Wiki:


Back to the Greeks: "Harkales" --- "Hari-KRshNa" ?
Wiki sources:

Vāsudeva is often identified with Megasthenes' Herakles, the deity similar to the Greek God Herakles, son of Zeus, who, according to Megasthenes was revered in Mathura at the time of his writing, circa 300 BCE:[39][1]
Such, then are the traditions regarding Dionysus and his descendants current among the Indians who inhabit the hill-country. They further assert that Herakles also was born among them. They assign to him like Greeks, the clubs and the lion's skin. He far surpassed other men in personal strength and prowess, and cleared sea and land of evil beasts. Marrying many wives he begot many sons, but one daughter only. The sons having reached man's estate, he divided all India into equal portions for his children, whom he made kings in different parts of his dominion. He provided similarly for his daughter, whom he reared up and made a queen. He was the founder, also, of no small number of cities, the most renowned and greatest of which he called Palibothra (Pataliputra).
— Extract from Megasthenes's Indica[40]
Arrian, in Indika, quoting from Megasthenes, also mentions Mathura and the Yamuna river in relation with this Indian god identified as Herakles:
About Herakles he writes: "Herakles, however, who is currently reported to have come as a stranger into the country, is said to have been in reality a native of India. This Herakles (Hari-Krishna) is held in a special honor by the Sourasenoi (Sursena-clan - Vasudev's father is Sursen), an Indian tribe that possesses two large cities, Methora (MathurA) and Kleisobora (KRshNapur?), and through whose country flows a navigable river called Iobares (Yamuna) "
— Arrian, Indika Chapter VIII.[41]


It has also been proposed to identify the word "Herakles" with "Hari-Krishna".[39] According to Upinder Singh, "Vāsudeva-Krishna was the Indian God bearing the closest resemblance to the Greek God Herakles".[1]

[/QUOTE]

Namaste. This is amazing!!! I’m trying to find a way of saving your meticulous work to study more deeply. This is truly a gift for anyone believing in Lord Krishna.

Is there a way to get your post in PDF form? I tried to save it but not with much success. It’s a keeper for me. Invaluable information. You put so much hard work into this.

No words can possibly express adequately my deepest gratitude.

 

[ameyAtmA]

Namaste. This is amazing!!! I’m trying to find a way of saving your meticulous work to study more deeply. This is truly a gift for anyone believing in Lord Krishna.

Is there a way to get your post in PDF form? I tried to save it but not with much success. It’s a keeper for me. Invaluable information. You put so much hard work into this.

No words can possibly express adequately my deepest gratitude.

Hi loverofhumanity

Thanks for your kind words, but it was my pleasure to compile it and always grateful to and supporting Wikipedia, thanks also to other sources, their contributors and the internet.

Let me know if you have problems downloading the attached PDF

 

[Jainarayan]

Krishna to me is a Holy and Exalted Being Who taught us many valuable spiritual truths. My belief embraces Krishna and the Bhagavad-Gita. I am absolutely convinced that He has returned as Kalki in the Person of Baha’u’llah. But you are free to disagree and I don’t see you as not a friend because you don’t have the same views.

So let’s be human brothers and not allow differences of view to come between us. To you your belief and to me mine.

The views I have are of a practicing Hindu, a practitioner and follower of a 5,000 year old tradition. Your views are a co-opting of what our millennia-old scriptures say. There is no middle ground. Hindus did not cause the differences. You can believe what you like, but do so with the knowledge that it is offensive to at least one billion Hindus. That’s all I’ll say on it.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Hi loverofhumanity

Thanks for your kind words, but it was my pleasure to compile it and always grateful to and supporting Wikipedia, thanks also to other sources, their contributors and the internet.

Let me know if you have problems downloading the attached PDF

Beyond my highest expectations. Got it and am very grateful.

 

[ameyAtmA]

 

[loverofhumanity]

The views I have are of a practicing Hindu, a practitioner and follower of a 5,000 year old tradition. Your views are a co-opting of what our millennia-old scriptures say. There is no middle ground. Hindus did not cause the differences. You can believe what you like, but do so with the knowledge that it is offensive to at least one billion Hindus. That’s all I’ll say on it.

I believe true religion teaches tolerance and love so I see we all are family despite differing views and opinions.

However, all those who have arisen and told the truth have always been opposed, shunned and rejected.

It’s like in the times of Jesus. Simple fishermen recognised Christ, while those learned in the scriptures, the Sadducees, rejected the truth and opposed those who accepted Him.

 

[CG Didymus]

Krishna to me is a Holy and Exalted Being Who taught us many valuable spiritual truths. My belief embraces Krishna and the Bhagavad-Gita. I am absolutely convinced that He has returned as Kalki in the Person of Baha’u’llah.

Okay, this is related to the other thread that asks if the Hindu's got things wrong about the life of Krishna. So what do those Hindus that believe in Krishna say about him? What I have heard and read is that he is an incarnation of the Lord Vishnu. That is not compatible with what Baha'is say about him.

Also, that prior to being Krishna, the Lord Vishnu had incarnated before this. As far as I know, Baha'is don't acknowledge any of those as being true, Or do they? Then about the return as Kalki. When, where and to whom I think are mentioned. And they aren't to a Persian nobleman in Teheran in the 1800's. How do Baha'is make the Kalki prophecies about Baha'u'llah. And, can they tie in The Bab as being a "twin manifestation" that was promised?

Then, since Krishna, there has been numerous "manifestations". Were they also prophesied in Hindu Scripture as being incarnations of Vishnu and why weren't they Kalki? Some of this has, I know, been asked before to other Baha'is. Their answers weren't all that great and seemed like they were guessing at what might be some kind of a "symbolic" interpretation. Thanks.

 

[Jainarayan]

What I have heard and read is that he is an incarnation of the Lord Vishnu.

Also, that prior to being Krishna, the Lord Vishnu had incarnated before this.

You are correct. There are a couple of Hindu views about both Krishna and Lord Vishnu. To Vaishnavas like me, devotees of Lord Vishnu, he is God, The Supreme Being. Sri Krishna is an incarnation of Lord Vishnu, who has 24 incarnations (23 so far, we believe Kalki is yet to come)... full avatars (purnavatara), partial avatars (anshavatara), and expansions. To non-Vaishnavas Vishnu is a deity, with Krishna as an incarnation. But he isn't the Supreme God.

Baha'is see Krishna on a par with Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, hence the prophet/messenger belief, but to them he isn't God or even a god. And all that is fine for their beliefs but some are quite vocal and insistent that that's how it is, Hindu or not. that's the impression I've gotten. It's not unlike my belief that Jesus is a prophet, a saint, a yogi, a sage, which probably offends some Christians. It's not my intention, it's just a personal observation about him, he's not part of my belief system. In fact, to most Hindus he's irrelevant. Not disrespected, just having no connection to or involvement in Hindu belief or worship.

But the insistence that Krishna is just a messenger or prophet doesn't sit well with his followers who believe him to be God. It's all the worse because this comes from non-Hindus. Even Hindus who are not Vaishnavas recognize Krishna as divine, a god in the pantheon along with Ganesha, Hanuman, Shiva, or the Goddesses. Moreover, it personally sticks in my craw to say that Kalki has appeared, when none of the conditions of his prophecy have been met.

Was Baháʼu'lláh born where Kalki is prophesied to be born, to the parents and family the prophecy says. Did he appear on or in a white vehicle with a weapon (the prophecy says a white horse and sword but it could be a white SUV and RPG launcher in 2067). Has Baháʼu'lláh met those conditions? It's like saying "nope, nope, the Hindu scriptures are wrong, he already appeared". However preposterous anyone may think the prophecy is, it's part of Hindu scripture and belief.

 

[CG Didymus]

You are correct. There are a couple of Hindu views about both Krishna and Lord Vishnu. To Vaishnavas like me, devotees of Lord Vishnu, he is God, The Supreme Being. Sri Krishna is an incarnation of Lord Vishnu, who has 24 incarnations (23 so far, we believe Kalki is yet to come)... full avatars (purnavatara), partial avatars (anshavatara), and expansions. To non-Vaishnavas Vishnu is a deity, with Krishna as an incarnation. But he isn't the Supreme God.

Baha'is see Krishna on a par with Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, hence the prophet/messenger belief, but to them he isn't God or even a god. And all that is fine for their beliefs but some are quite vocal and insistent that that's how it is, Hindu or not. that's the impression I've gotten. It's not unlike my belief that Jesus is a prophet, a saint, a yogi, a sage, which probably offends some Christians. It's not my intention, it's just a personal observation about him, he's not part of my belief system. In fact, to most Hindus he's irrelevant. Not disrespected, just having no connection to or involvement in Hindu belief or worship.

But the insistence that Krishna is just a messenger or prophet doesn't sit well with his followers who believe him to be God. It's all the worse because this comes from non-Hindus. Even Hindus who are not Vaishnavas recognize Krishna as divine, a god in the pantheon along with Ganesha, Hanuman, Shiva, or the Goddesses. Moreover, it personally sticks in my craw to say that Kalki has appeared, when none of the conditions of his prophecy have been met.

Was Baháʼu'lláh born where Kalki is prophesied to be born, to the parents and family the prophecy says. Did he appear on or in a white vehicle with a weapon (the prophecy says a white horse and sword but it could be a white SUV and RPG launcher in 2067). Has Baháʼu'lláh met those conditions? It's like saying "nope, nope, the Hindu scriptures are wrong, he already appeared". However preposterous anyone may think the prophecy is, it's part of Hindu scripture and belief.

I don't remember how Baha'is explained the where and to whom Kalki would be born, but with the time they did some creative manipulating of the numbers to get to where they need to be, usually 1844.

The quandary we all face is we have been given an opportunity to consider if the Most Great Spirit,’ the ’Tenth Avatar,’ the ‘Immaculate Manifestation of Krishna’ has now come.

This "Tenth Avatar" is off also. Since Baha'is do put all of the people they say are specially created "manifestations" as equals, then Moses, Zoroaster, Jesus, Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah all have to be Avatars. So he should be the 15th, that is if Buddha is already counted as number nine. That's why I asked...

Then, since Krishna, there has been numerous "manifestations". Were they also prophesied in Hindu Scripture as being incarnations of Vishnu and why weren't they Kalki?

Can't wait to here the answer. Thanks Jainarayan.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Okay, this is related to the other thread that asks if the Hindu's got things wrong about the life of Krishna. So what do those Hindus that believe in Krishna say about him? What I have heard and read is that he is an incarnation of the Lord Vishnu. That is not compatible with what Baha'is say about him.

Also, that prior to being Krishna, the Lord Vishnu had incarnated before this. As far as I know, Baha'is don't acknowledge any of those as being true, Or do they? Then about the return as Kalki. When, where and to whom I think are mentioned. And they aren't to a Persian nobleman in Teheran in the 1800's. How do Baha'is make the Kalki prophecies about Baha'u'llah. And, can they tie in The Bab as being a "twin manifestation" that was promised?

Then, since Krishna, there has been numerous "manifestations". Were they also prophesied in Hindu Scripture as being incarnations of Vishnu and why weren't they Kalki? Some of this has, I know, been asked before to other Baha'is. Their answers weren't all that great and seemed like they were guessing at what might be some kind of a "symbolic" interpretation. Thanks.

Hi CG. We all have our differing views about what we believe and we accept that many don’t agree Baha’u’llah is the Promised One and are not offended because that is people’s right. And we accept all people whether they agree with us or not because religion teaches brotherhood, tolerance and love.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I don't remember how Baha'is explained the where and to whom Kalki would be born, but with the time they did some creative manipulating of the numbers to get to where they need to be, usually 1844.

This "Tenth Avatar" is off also. Since Baha'is do put all of the people they say are specially created "manifestations" as equals, then Moses, Zoroaster, Jesus, Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah all have to be Avatars. So he should be the 15th, that is if Buddha is already counted as number nine. That's why I asked...

Can't wait to here the answer. Thanks Jainarayan.

This passage from Baha’u’llah explains the divinity of the Manifestations, Prophets or Avatars and this includes Krishna.

“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God!” He verily speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His name and His attributes, are made manifest in the world.” (Baha’u’llah)

When speaking about prophecies of the end times - to Hindus they await an Avatar named Kalki, Christians - Christ returned in the Glory of the Father, Buddhists - the Fifth Buddha Maitreya, Muslims - the 12th Imam, Zoroastrians - Shah Bahram, Jews - Messiah Ben David.

The point I wish to kindly make is that, in their own scriptural terminology, all religions await a Great One Who will usher in a Golden Age, known also as the Kingdom of God and the Krita age.

We are saying that this age has begun in 1844 with the dawn of a new scientific age. Since that time, knowledge and inventions have transformed the world to the point where world civilisation is possible and we believe this new age dawned because of the spiritual forces released by the Promised One of all faiths when He appeared, Who is known by a different title in different religions, but we believe is the same Person, Baha’u’llah.

 

[CG Didymus]

This passage from Baha’u’llah explains the divinity of the Manifestations, Prophets or Avatars and this includes Krishna.

“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God!” He verily speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His name and His attributes, are made manifest in the world.” (Baha’u’llah)

When speaking about prophecies of the end times - to Hindus they await an Avatar named Kalki, Christians - Christ returned in the Glory of the Father, Buddhists - the Fifth Buddha Maitreya, Muslims - the 12th Imam, Zoroastrians - Shah Bahram, Jews - Messiah Ben David.

The point I wish to kindly make is that, in their own scriptural terminology, all religions await a Great One Who will usher in a Golden Age, known also as the Kingdom of God and the Krita age.

We are saying that this age has begun in 1844 with the dawn of a new scientific age. Since that time, knowledge and inventions have transformed the world to the point where world civilisation is possible and we believe this new age dawned because of the spiritual forces released by the Promised One of all faiths when He appeared, Who is known by a different title in different religions, but we believe is the same Person, Baha’u’llah.

But, if they are all "Avatars" or "manifestations", then why not count them all. Why jump over some of them and only prophecy about the The Bab and Baha'u'llah. And then in some religions, Baha'is do believe there are prophecies that point to Jesus and Muhammad along with The Bab and Baha'u'llah. Then there are always some issues with the "fulfillment" of the Maitreya and Kalki prophecies. Baha'is find very creative ways to make them work and get to the dates needed. Then there is always the question of... Was the Promised One supposed to establish peace and rule or just lay down some rules, die, and leave it up to people to someday establish peace. But, anyway, back to Krishna... If he returns from time to time, then shouldn't that include all the other manifestations that came after him?

 

[Vinayaka]

The point I wish to kindly make is that, in their own scriptural terminology, all religions await a Great One Who will usher in a Golden Age, known also as the Kingdom of God and the Krita age.

(Sigh.) No they don't. Kalki applies to one sect of Hindus, and there are many other religions that don't believe in such a Great One coming. How many times will folks have to point this out? Please desist projecting Baha'i only ideas onto the rest of the world's religions. They don't apply.

 

[loverofhumanity]

But, if they are all "Avatars" or "manifestations", then why not count them all. Why jump over some of them and only prophecy about the The Bab and Baha'u'llah. And then in some religions, Baha'is do believe there are prophecies that point to Jesus and Muhammad along with The Bab and Baha'u'llah. Then there are always some issues with the "fulfillment" of the Maitreya and Kalki prophecies. Baha'is find very creative ways to make them work and get to the dates needed. Then there is always the question of... Was the Promised One supposed to establish peace and rule or just lay down some rules, die, and leave it up to people to someday establish peace. But, anyway, back to Krishna... If he returns from time to time, then shouldn't that include all the other manifestations that came after him?

Because they are each designated by their own terminology in their own scriptures and their own scriptures determine which One the followers await not us. In the Book of Certitude Baha’u’llah says They are all One and the same in essence but that doesn’t change the fact their scriptures have a designated name for the One Who is to come in their own language and terminology.

We are talking about ‘end time’ here so according to Hindus, Kalki Avatar will usher in a golden age. Yes we can call them all Krishna or Buddha or Jesus, but in reference to end time prophecy they each await a certain Figure Who will perform certain duties such as establish the kingdom of God on earth, destroy wicked kings, unite the sects (wolf and lamb) and bring world peace.

This passage from the Book of Certitude should help clarify about Names.

“As to the matter of names, Muhammad, Himself, declared: “I am Jesus.” He recognized the truth of the signs, prophecies, and words of Jesus, and testified that they were all of God. In this sense, neither the person of Jesus nor His writings hath differed from that of Muhammad and of His holy Book, inasmuch as both have championed the Cause of God, uttered His praise, and revealed His commandments” (Baha’u’llah)

And this..

“It is clear and evident to thee that all the Prophets are the Temples of the Cause of God, Who have appeared clothed in divers attire. If thou wilt observe with discriminating eyes, thou wilt behold them all abiding in the same tabernacle, soaring in the same heaven, seated upon the same throne, uttering the same speech, and proclaiming the same Faith. Such is the unity of those Essences of being, those Luminaries of infinite and immeasurable splendour. Wherefore, should one of these Manifestations of Holiness proclaim saying: “I am the return of all the Prophets,” He verily speaketh the truth.”

Bahá’u’lláh

 

[loverofhumanity]

(Sigh.) No they don't. Kalki applies to one sect of Hindus, and there are many other religions that don't believe in such a Great One coming. How many times will folks have to point this out? Please desist projecting Baha'i only ideas onto the rest of the world's religions. They don't apply.

As far as I can tell, belief in Kalki it seems, apples to the ‘major’ and ‘largest’ sect of Hinduism which comprises about 70% of Hinduism and they also believe in avatars and holy books.

Kalki is not a Bahá’í idea but the belief of the majority of Hindus which has its foundations in their own Holy Scriptures.

So aren’t Vaishnavites Hindus or part of Hinduism? Cant we just refer to them as Hindus or Hinduism?

According to a 2010 estimate by Johnson and Grim, the Vaishnavism tradition is the largest group with about 641 million or 67.6% of Hindus, followed by Shaivism with 252 million or 26.6%, Shaktism with 30 million or 3.2% and other traditions including Neo-Hinduism and Reform Hinduism with 25 million or 2.6%.

 

[Vinayaka]

As far as I can tell, belief in Kalki it seems, apples to the ‘major’ and ‘largest’ sect of Hinduism which comprises about 70% of Hinduism and they also believe in avatars and holy books.

Kalki is not a Bahá’í idea but the belief of the majority of Hindus which has its foundations in their own Holy Scriptures.

So aren’t Vaishnavites Hindus or part of Hinduism? Cant we just refer to them as Hindus or Hinduism?

According to a 2010 estimate by Johnson and Grim, the Vaishnavism tradition is the largest group with about 641 million or 67.6% of Hindus, followed by Shaivism with 252 million or 26.6%, Shaktism with 30 million or 3.2% and other traditions including Neo-Hinduism and Reform Hinduism with 25 million or 2.6%.

Yes Kalki is a Vaishnavite Hindu idea. It's only the idea that He has already come as Baha'u'llah that is the Baha'i part, and that part is what is objected to, as do all other religions object to it. You're outnumbered about 4 billion to 1 million. That's 4000 to 1. And that doesn't address the other 3 billion folks on this planet, including the 253 million Saivites like me.

So this belief is unique to the small and insignificant Baha'i faith, and not common to mankind at all, as you insinuate. For a faith that preaches harmony, you guys sure know how to insult other religions.