How are these Great Beings explained?

[Unveiled Artist]

There is nothing to imagine. God is 'not this and not that'.

I was talking to a Jew on another thread about the definition of the god of abraham. He said practically the same thing. So, how do you know about a god that you guys can't describe? and how does Bahaullah know about this god that you can't learn for yourself? (assuming he is a human being like jesus)

What people think is God is not God because anything you imagine is God is only your imagination of God not God Himself. So when we form this concept of God in our minds and then worship it what we are doing is not worshipping God but our imagination of God.​

What people think is god is not god because anything you imagine is god is only your imagination..... so anything you know about god whether him as an essence, eternal, all knowing... is all in your mind. When you form this concept of god (for example, him being eternal) you are not worshiping god but an imagination of him.

Once you define god as eternal, essense, wahtever, you no longer worship god but an imagination of him. That is going by your logic.

Also, this goes against your teachings. If Bahallauh can describe god as eternal, then he isn't an essence or anything indescribable. He has characteristics that the prophets have explained. So, what you are saying is what the prophets believe are imagination because they have a concept of god where god has no concept.

This applies to the prophets since they are human beings (excluding Krishna since Krishna is a god).

@Aupmanyav Yes, I know. Word Salad. Just thought of that while typing this.

Lover, do you understand where I'm getting at?

 

[loverofhumanity]

Okay. I will make this personal so you can get what I am saying because what you said is an insult.

Rejection has a negative connotation. Find another way to say the same thing and there would be no wars.


It has to make sense. It's not a foreign language. You forget I have experienced god of abraham through jesus christ. You have to read what I say actively before you reply.

I read what you say because I separate it because again I can't reply in all one lump sum.

How do you reject something that does not exist?

Please answer the question.



Of course. From a buddhist perspective, your belief does not make sense.

It is not about you. If you want to put The Buddha into your manifestation and have unity, you have to go by Buddhist (not Bahai-buddhist) point of view.

You cannot go by your point of view if you are talking about the truth of other religions as if you know them.

It is not about you.

I can't reject something that does not exist. God is not a noun, to me. It's an experience.

Please read this sentence again.

When you say 'how do you reject something that does not exist' what are you referring to? It's not clear to me.

We are not referring to Buddhism today but what Buddha originally taught. We believe that in the space of 2,500 years, a lot has been lost.

Again, it is Baha'u'llah, Who claimed to be the return of Buddha, that has told us that what the Buddha actually taught is not what is being taught today.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It's interesting how Carlita and I have incredibly different belief systems, yet we fail to argue about it. We're a microcosm of how this planet should behave. lol.

That is so ironic.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

When you say 'how do you reject something that does not exist' what are you referring to? It's not clear to me.

God of abraham.

How do you reject something (or someone) that does not exist to begin with?

Again, it is Baha'u'llah, Who claimed to be the return of Buddha, that has told us that what the Buddha actually taught is not what is being taught today.

Again, you have to see this from a Buddhist point of view.

Buddhist sects keep their traditions and they all come from the original teachings. You can disagree, but those are the facts.

It is not about you.

Point: If you want unity among diversity, it cannot be about you.

 

[Vinayaka]

That is so ironic.

Oh there are a lot of ironic behaviours in life ... how braggarts trying to impress people only make it worse for themselves, cause nobody likes a braggart, how over-parenting parents raise kids with no life skills, etc.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I was talking to a Jew on another thread about the definition of the god of abraham. He said practically the same thing. So, how do you know about a god that you guys can't describe? and how does Bahaullah know about this god that you can't learn for yourself? (assuming he is a human being like jesus)

What people think is God is not God because anything you imagine is God is only your imagination of God not God Himself. So when we form this concept of God in our minds and then worship it what we are doing is not worshipping God but our imagination of God.​

What people think is god is not god because anything you imagine is god is only your imagination..... so anything you know about god whether him as an essence, eternal, all knowing... is all in your mind. When you form this concept of god (for example, him being eternal) you are not worshiping god but an imagination of him.

Once you define god as eternal, essense, wahtever, you no longer worship god but an imagination of him. That is going by your logic.

Also, this goes against your teachings. If Bahallauh can describe god as eternal, then he isn't an essence or anything indescribable. He has characteristics that the prophets have explained. So, what you are saying is what the prophets believe are imagination because they have a concept of god where god has no concept.

This applies to the prophets since they are human beings (excluding Krishna since Krishna is a god).

@Aupmanyav Yes, I know. Word Salad. Just thought of that while typing this.

Lover, do you understand where I'm getting at?

All we know of God are His attributes like for instance that He is loving, merciful, eternal and so on but we do not know His Essence.

If you read some Bahá'í prayers particularly go to the 'praise' section, you will find we are just confessing our own impotence, helplessness and ignorance of God nothing else. This is an example. See what it says about God's essence.God is 'inaccessible'

In the Name of God, the Most High!

 

[loverofhumanity]

God of abraham.

How do you reject something (or someone) that does not exist to begin with?



Again, you have to see this from a Buddhist point of view.

Buddhist sects keep their traditions and they all come from the original teachings. You can disagree, but those are the facts.

It is not about you.

Point: If you want unity among diversity, it cannot be about you.

People are free to believe what they wish. That's not in question. But Buddha did say, and you can look it up in Sutta Central that His Dhamma would decay over time and it's true meaning would be lost.

So when you say the original teachings have been preserved, Buddha has said the exact opposite. He says His true Dhamma will disappear and be replaced with a different Dhamma. Here's what Buddha says not me..

Just as, Kassapa, gold does not disappear so long as counterfeit gold has not arisen in the world, but when counterfeit gold arises then true gold disappears, so the true Dhamma does not disappear so long as a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has not arisen in the world, but when a counterfeit of the true Dhamma arises in the world, then the true Dhamma disappears.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

All we know of God are His attributes like for instance that He is loving, merciful, eternal and so on but we do not know His Essence.

If you read some Bahá'í prayers particularly go to the 'praise' section, you will find we are just confessing our own impotence, helplessness and ignorance of God nothing else. This is an example. See what it says about God's essence.God is 'inaccessible'

In the Name of God, the Most High!

God is knowable then, since he is loving and caring?

 

[loverofhumanity]

It's interesting how Carlita and I have incredibly different belief systems, yet we fail to argue about it. We're a microcosm of how this planet should behave. lol.

It seems to be that your unity is mainly based upon opposing Baha'u'llah.

 

[loverofhumanity]

God is knowable then, since he is loving and caring?

His Essence is unknowable not His attributes. We know nothing else about God except His attributes which the Manifestations convey to us.

 

[CG Didymus]

No!!!
Baha'i Scriptures confirms Hell, Heaven, Resurrection, Day of Judgement, Reincarnation, Rebirth, Return, Cycles, Trinity, Resurrection of Jesus, Satan, evil, Miracles of Jesus, such as curing blind, Miracles of Moses, such as dividing the River, and Miracles of other Manifestations, angels, transforming Animals to human, Transforming humans to animals...etc.

It only rejects literal interpretations of these concepts. It says, the Prophets, Manifestations, inspired people, whenever they were speaking of these things, they were speaking Symbolically, Not literally. Thus, in Bahai View, all are true, and originated from God, however, they must be interpreted symbolically.

What is the Baha'i Scripture that says what "inspired people" said is to be taking symbolically? I suppose that means every writer, whether we know who they are or not, was "inspired" by God to write what they did in a symbolic language? So the gospel, although seem like they are historical narrative, they are not?

 

[Vinayaka]

It seems to be that your unity is mainly based upon opposing Baha'u'llah.

Not at all. I think all peaceful religions are fine ... for the people who follow them. I only came here to set the record straight about Hinduism, or more accurately, the Baha'i' interpretation of my faith. I've said repeatedly that I understand what the Baha'i' believe but don't share in that belief. I would expect you to correct me if I misinterpreted your faith, or if you feel I did.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

People are free to believe what they wish. That's not in question. But Buddha did say, and you can look it up in Sutta Central that His Dhamma would decay over time and it's true meaning would be lost.

So when you say the original teachings have been preserved, Buddha has said the exact opposite. He says His true Dhamma will disappear and be replaced with a different Dhamma. Here's what Buddha says not me..

Just as, Kassapa, gold does not disappear so long as counterfeit gold has not arisen in the world, but when counterfeit gold arises then true gold disappears, so the true Dhamma does not disappear so long as a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has not arisen in the world, but when a counterfeit of the true Dhamma arises in the world, then the true Dhamma disappears.

The Dhamma is eternal because it is the laws of life and death. It is not separate like god but it is life. The physical teachings in the Lotus Sutra, too, said that the Dharma would decay and The Buddha says, therefore specific Bodhisattvas who will soon become buddhas will carry his Dharma on. It's not written Dharma he is talking about. Buddhism is not a prophet-religion and it's not a religion-of-the-book.

You are looking at the Dharma from an abrahamic perspective. Again and again, I say look at it from a Buddhist perspective.

My all time favorite verse:

The beautiful chariots of kings wear out,
this body too undergoes decay
But the Dhamma of the good does not decay
So the good proclaim along with the good.

~Samyutta Nikaya 3:3; 171 (163-164)

The Dhamma is not like the bible and quran. It is not an inspired book by an inspired prophet. Dhamma are teachings that exist through practice not what is written down. When The Buddha sings the verses in the Lotus and repeats the analogies and in many ways it's for his disciples to remember the verses so they can read, write, and recite the Dhamma through various methods and practices.

Since in The Lotus, The Buddha talks about teaching and practicing the Dhamma in different ways according to how a person understands, there are many sects and many ways to come to enlightenment (full understanding of birth and death).

All of this has no god. The Dhamma does not decay because it is a practice that continues on by monks and buddhist alike. I know this. It's not a belief.

The Buddha does say again and again that the written Dhamma will go. But he emphasized practice not keep the written Dhamma.

Buddhism is not a sacred-book religion. The written Dhamma means nothing. The Dhamma is in the Sangha and in the reverence (in some lineages) of The Buddha. But there is no god.

Again, understand this from a Buddhist point of view. Buddhist know this is a fact. You have an opinion. If you want to learn the facts of other beliefs, put aside your opinions, and give people credit that they know more than you about their own faith regardless of what you believe.

It is not about you.

 

[CG Didymus]

But what if it's true and God did speak? You believe, worship and love God so wouldn't you cherish anything God said?

Yet, there are false prophets who claim they are speaking for God. You always use the "by their fruits you shall know them " from the Bible. But how many people know they are following a false prophet until it's too late? I'm sure they all sounded good at the beginning.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Not at all. I think all peaceful religions are fine ... for the people who follow them. I only came here to set the record straight about Hinduism, or more accurately, the Baha'i' interpretation of my faith. I've said repeatedly that I understand what the Baha'i' believe but don't share in that belief. I would expect you to correct me if I misinterpreted your faith, or if you feel I did.

Well you've done a very good job at setting the recited straight about Hinduism. It enables me to better understand it.

 

[CG Didymus]

Not at all. I think all peaceful religions are fine ... for the people who follow them. I only came here to set the record straight about Hinduism, or more accurately, the Baha'i' interpretation of my faith. I've said repeatedly that I understand what the Baha'i' believe but don't share in that belief. I would expect you to correct me if I misinterpreted your faith, or if you feel I did.

If we said are prophet said everything believed to be true in the Baha'i Faith is only true in our re-interpreted symbolic way, I'm sure we'd hear about it.

 

[Vinayaka]

Well you've done a very good job at setting the recited straight about Hinduism. It enables me to better understand it.

In my view, one cannot understand Hinduism unless he is a Hindu. I openly admit I will never understand Baha'i'. In fact I have a very difficult time understanding any non-Hindu faith at all. In my view, the Dharmic view, we're talking about two very different meanings of 'understanding'. Yours is on an intellectual level. and I'll admit a non-Hindu might understand Hinduism a bit on that level. But when I speak of understanding, I mean 'living it, experiencing it. This is very similar to understanding pain. A person can't understand pain very well without experiencing it. So too with religion. That's why I can't understand Baha'i'. Intellectually yes, but not on any experiential level. I'm not a Baha'i'.

So from that perspective, as much as you or any other Baha'i' may make claims about understanding Hinduism, it is impossible, because you aren't a Hindu.

Again ... very different paradigms. I know and admit when I don't understand something, but for some reason that's really hard to do in Abrahamic faiths. So we have the conundrum of non-Hindus claiming to know more about Hinduism than the Hindus themselves do, lol. Intellectually, maybe. But standing there in front of Ganesha feeling all the warmth, the love, having Him remove obstacles, put a smile on your face where none existed, laugh with your odd insights like a friendly big brother. Nah, you can't get that. You're not a Hindu.

Reincarnation? Same thing. The Baha'i's view it as an intellectual concept, whereas the Hindu views it as an experience. Huge difference.

 

[Vinayaka]

Yet, there are false prophets who claim they are speaking for God. You always use the "by their fruits you shall know them " from the Bible. But how many people know they are following a false prophet until it's too late? I'm sure they all sounded good at the beginning.

Everybody else's prophet is a false prophet. It's so silly to me.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@loverofhumanity

"So this spiritual life, monks, does not have gain, honor, and renown for its benefit, or the attainment of moral discipline for its benefit, or the attainment of concentration for its benefit, or knowledge and vision for its benefit. But it is the unshakable liberation of the mind that is the goal of spiritual life, its heartwood, and its end." ~MN 29 Mahasropama Sutta (I:192-197)​

Enlightenment and The Buddha's teachings has nothing to do with god. It has to do with The Mind and Understanding suffering.

"Nibbana, being himself subject to death, having understood the danger in what is subject to death, he seeks the deathless supreme security from bondage, nibbana being himself subject to sorrow, he seeks the sorrowless supreme security from bondage, nibbana being himself subject to defilement, having understood the danger in what is subject to defilement, he seeks the undefiled supreme security of nibbana. This is the noble search." MN Ariyapariyesana Sutta; I 160-67​

In god of abraham religions, a person seeks answers from their gods and prophets. From Buddhism, a person seeks answers through practices and reflection.

In god of abraham religions, prophets hold the key to understanding god. In Buddhism, there is no god. The key to understand suffering is to practice and understand what it is and your place in the world and that you will die and the nature of death.

Bahaullah, in Buddhism, would be just like you and I and The Buddha who are all subject to suffering. There is no one special in these regards. In the suttas, devas, gods, and humans all experience suffering.

Bahaullah cannot have a place in The Buddha's teachings because the very nature of the foundation of his goals are not the same foundation as The Buddha. Yes, they both want peace and compassion.

But they are different faiths.

Edit Also, I didn't get these suttas online. When I practiced, like @Vinayaka says, us westerners tend to look at things intellectual. So, to me, it helped me a lot spiritually. But you cannot understand it unless you see it from a Buddhist perspective or in all religions, practice the religion before you say anything factual about it. Until then, it's all opinion.

I will never understand the god of abraham but that doesn't mean I can't get it intellectually but just like everything else, GOA believers have different definitions of god.

So why expect me to believe in god when you guys don't have one definition of him?

 

[CG Didymus]

We do not, we just have to use the word as reference for those that do believe in it. The purpose to explain what Baha'u'llah has said is the True meaning of all Doctrines that are made of mans thoughts and not of Gods Word.

Baha'u'llah is the Spirit of Truth that would guide us to all Truth that the Bible promised.

Regards Tony

So reincarnation is "man's thoughts" not God's? Also, with the NT, there was a scene where Moses and Elijah appears. What is the Baha'i explanation of this?