My current version of Hinduism

Marcion · May 30, 2019

SalixIncendium said:
Saguna Brahman can be "one God." However, Nirguna Brahman, in my view, is not.

Is Saguna Brahma not the Cosmic Mind including the whole of its projected universe?
Nirguna Brahma is beyond that, so can never be grasped by any human mind (or indeed be called God).

So, if there have been or still are expressions of God in the universe, They must come from the tangential line between the two (called Taraka Brahma), belonging neither to Saguna nor to Nirguna but forming the bridge between the two.

Without the grace of such a bridge an individual entity can never escape from Saguna Brahma.

Jim · May 30, 2019

atanu said:
So, from these POVs, Shogi Effendi could not be correct in saying that Baha’u’llah was an avatar of Krishna. Nether he could be correct from Vaisnava POV.

Shoghi Effendi didn’t say that. I said that. What Shoghi Effendi said was that the Bhagavad Gita referred to Bahá’u’lláh as the "Most Great Spirit," the "Tenth Avatar," and the "Immaculate Manifestation of Krishna." I read “avatar of Krishna” into that, but afterwards I retracted that.

SalixIncendium · May 30, 2019

Marcion said:
Is Saguna Brahma not the Cosmic Mind including the whole of its projected universe?
Nirguna Brahma is beyond that, so can never be grasped by any human mind (or indeed be called God).

So, if there have been or still are expressions of God in the universe, They must come from the tangential line between the two (called Taraka Brahma), belonging neither to Saguna nor to Nirguna but forming the bridge between the two.

Without the grace of such a bridge an individual entity can never escape from Saguna Brahma.

Before I answer, I need to be clear on how you are defining "Cosmic Mind" and "Brahma" (which in my understanding is the creator god of the Trimurti). Without clear definitions of what we are discussing here, we're just talking past each other.

Jim · May 30, 2019

Tony Bristow-Stagg said:
Good cheer, best wishes, stimulating conversation, boundless love, friendship.

Thats what I try to offer.

SalixIncendium said:
Then why does it perpetually come across as proselytizing?

(edited to mark this post as satire)
(satire)That’s because you’re confusing stimulating conversation with proselytizing.

(/satire)

Aupmanyav · May 30, 2019

atanu said:
Brahman is one God too. Else Bhagwan Krishna would not be God.

Nirguna Brahman is not a God.

Aupmanyav · May 30, 2019

atanu said:
Yes. Agreed. The point however is that as long as one is an individual, where is nirguna? So, saguna is more true than an ego that denies the saguna.

Nirguna is everywhere. The person him/herself and everything outside of him/her. That is the only thing that exists (dwiteeyo nasti). Ah! you mean all those great people who were talking about 'nirguna' over the millenniums in Hinduism were egoists and fakes?

SalixIncendium · May 30, 2019

Jim said:
That’s because you’re confusing stimulating conversation with proselytizing.

I can assure you that I'm not confused about the difference between the two.

While you're welcome to your personal opinion, it is both condescending and uninformed. When one consistently includes others in their personal truths by using pronouns such as 'we' and 'us' when discussing them, and implies in discussion that their view is the one correct view, that, my friend, is proselytizing. And I can assure you that the incidence of such posts has been plentiful.

Aupmanyav · May 30, 2019

Marcion said:
Nirguna Brahma is beyond that, so can never be grasped by any human mind (or indeed be called God).

Nirguna Brahman is easy to understand but not without wiping biases from mind. With biases, prejudices, Nirguna is just impossible to understand.

Jedster · May 30, 2019

SalixIncendium said:
So spontaneous mystical experience, then?

Yes, I like things direct with ideally no intermediaries.

Vinayaka · May 30, 2019

SalixIncendium said:
I can assure you that I'm not confused about the difference between the two.

While you're welcome to your personal opinion, it is both condescending and uninformed. When one consistently includes others in their personal truths by using pronouns such as 'we' and 'us' when discussing them, and implies in discussion that their view is the one correct view, that, my friend, is proselytizing. And I can assure the incidence of such posts have been plentiful.

In the old days of that other very long thread I stayed in far too long, the stated goal of the Baha'i faith about Hinduism from the UHJ, and it's predecessors was 'to bring Hinduism to it's natural conclusion' which of course simply means to convert all Hindus to the Baha'i faith. Whether done passively or aggressively, consciously or unconsciously, the end result is the same .., an end to the deepest philosophical system on this planet. Fortunately Sanatana Dharma cannot be destroyed because it's found within everyone at the microcosm level.

Aupmanyav · May 30, 2019

Jim said:
What Shoghi Effendi said was that the Bhagavad Gita referred to Bahá’u’lláh as the "Most Great Spirit," the "Tenth Avatar," and the "Immaculate Manifestation of Krishna." I read “avatar of Krishna” into that, but afterwards I retracted that.

If Shoghi Effendi said that, then it was a blantant (white) lie.

SalixIncendium · May 30, 2019

Vinayaka said:
...the stated goal of the Baha'i faith about Hinduism from the UHJ, and it's predecessors was 'to bring Hinduism to it's natural conclusion' which of course simply means to convert all Hindus to the Baha'i faith.

Admittedly, I was unaware of this. But it certainly explains a great deal of what I've seen in these threads.

Aupmanyav · May 30, 2019

SalixIncendium said:
Before I answer, I need to be clear on how you are defining "Cosmic Mind" and "Brahma" (which in my understanding is the creator god of the Trimurti). Without clear definitions of what we are discussing here, we're just talking past each other.

Marcion will mean Brahmā, one of the Trinity, because his perceptor claimed to be 'Tāraka Brahmā', the one who can take you across the fjord. Though Hindus generally use any of these two terms for the same - Brahman and Brahma (without the elongation of the last vowel). The universe also is referred to as Brahma (again without elongation). That will mean that Brahman and the Universe are the same thing and not different.

Jim said:
That’s because you’re confusing stimulating conversation with proselytizing.

Really? A stimulating converstion! It is more of a drag. The Hindus saying one thing and the Bahais insisting on showing us Hindus what BhagawadGita said.

ajay0 · May 30, 2019

atanu said:
Yes. So, from these POVs, Shogi Effendi could not be correct in saying that Baha’u’llah was an avatar of Krishna. Nether he could be correct from Vaisnava POV.

Bahaulah can be stated to be a prophet like figure similar to Krishna, Muhammad, Guru Nanak as per the Sikh narrative.

Guru Gobind Singh similarly acknowledges the Avatars but consider them to be different from the incorporeal God.

As per him, whenever evil predominates, saviors of humanity (avatars) emerge by His hukam (order), to re-establish righteousness.

LuisDantas · May 30, 2019

Jim said:
((False. Most of what you’ve been saying about your Baha’i Faith, in some of your posts, blatantly contradicts what I’ve said, repeatedly, about mine. If you’re trying to test my patience, you’re doing a good job.))

Not at all, and I stand surprised that see fit to say such a thing.

It is not my fault that you saddle yourself with utterly unnecessary contradictions and conflicts. The same is true of any other Bahai, or for that matter Christian or Muslim.

ajay0 · May 30, 2019

Ancient temple traditions in Kashi, Rameshwaram, Triprayar and Guruvayur indicate that Rama, Sita, Hanuman and Krishna worshipped the Shivalingam.

Swami Vivekananda stated that the Shivalingam is a cosmic pillar of light. Jyotirlingam is also an another name for the Shivalingam, with Jyoti meaning light.

The Prajapita Brahmakumaris similarly state that the Shivalingam represents or stands for God being an incorporeal point of light.

LuisDantas · May 30, 2019

Jim said:
@Aupmanyav @LuisDantas Have you decided not to answer this question? Do you think that all the Baha’is who used to think they were Hindus, without any exceptions, were never really Hindus?

That should be obvious.

I have little notion of how often it happens, but statistically at the very least it should happen that some genuine Hindus do in fact become Bahais at some point in their lives.

There are Hindus that convert to Islaam. Why not to the Bahai Faith, which is no less welcoming?

What I do maintain is that in so doing they become, well, Bahais, and therefore Abrahamists, and it would take considerable effort to even attempt to claim that they are somehow still Hindus.

The premises of the respective religious models are not compatible, despite a lot of effort from the Bahai Faith.

Jim · May 30, 2019

Apparently a laughing face is not enough to mark a post as satire,

LuisDantas · May 30, 2019

Jim said:
@LuisDantas @Aupmanyav I would still like to see your answer to that question, but I have another one. Do you think that all the Baha’is who used to think they were Hindus are less honest, less responsible, or less well informed about Hinduism than you?

Boy, you are angry. You did not even wait for my response to the previous question.

The answer to this one is "I do not know for a fact that there is any difference between thinking that one is Hindu to truly being one". Therefore, no idea. I do not know whether such Bahais even exist.

SalixIncendium · May 30, 2019

Jim said:
Apparently a laughing face is not enough to mark a post as satire,

Sadly, no, especially in this venue.

In my experience, a few of the Baha'i posters here traditionally use ratings and emotes as a means of taunting, heckling, or disapproval.

My current version of Hinduism

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma

Nets of Wonder

अग्निविलोवनन्दः

Nets of Wonder

Be your own guru

Be your own guru

अग्निविलोवनन्दः

Be your own guru

Well-Known Member

devotee

Be your own guru

अग्निविलोवनन्दः

Be your own guru

Well-Known Member

Aura of atheification

Well-Known Member

Aura of atheification

Nets of Wonder

Aura of atheification

अग्निविलोवनन्दः