How different Great Religions are?

[InvestigateTruth]

Or its the rebirth part that's really the true mesage and the resurrection part that is the false one?

I believe both rebirth and resurrection are true, albeit figuratively, not literally. When Buddha or Krishna spoke of return and rebirth, they meant exactly what Bahaullah means it in the following quote. I can quote from Buddha, to show He also did not mean a literal reincarnation, but He meant exactly how Bahaullah explained. But because people of krishna or Buddha's time, had a previous belief in literal reincarnation, they thought Buddha or Krishna are also speaking literally. Here is what Bahaullah says:


"O brother, behold how the inner mysteries of “rebirth,” of “return,” and of “resurrection” have each, through these all-sufficing, these unanswerable, and conclusive utterances, been unveiled and unraveled before thine eyes. God grant that through His gracious and invisible assistance, thou mayest divest thy body and soul of the old garment, and array thyself with the new and imperishable attire.
Therefore, those who in every subsequent Dispensation preceded the rest of mankind in embracing the Faith of God, who quaffed the clear waters of knowledge at the hand of the divine Beauty, and attained the loftiest summits of faith and certitude, these can be regarded, in name, in reality, in deeds, in words, and in rank, as the “return” of those who in a former Dispensation had achieved similar distinctions. For whatsoever the people of a former Dispensation have manifested, the same hath been shown by the people of this latter generation. Consider the rose: whether it blossometh in the East or in the West, it is nonetheless a rose. For what mattereth in this respect is not the outward shape and form of the rose, but rather the smell and fragrance which it doth impart."
Book of Iqan.

Didn't buddha say, Rebirth is associated with a new Age or eons?
An age or eon is just a period of time, beginning by appearence of a Buddha. Just as a Buddha is symbolically return of the previous Buddha, likewise the followers of a new Buddha, symbolically are return of a previous Buddha. In same manner, the enemies of a new Buddha and transgressors are symbolically return of previous transgressors.

 

[ManSinha]

I believe both rebirth and resurrection are true, albeit figuratively, not literally

What is the difference?

 

[Vinayaka]

What is the difference?

One is a physical body becoming alive again, and the other refers to the soul being reborn into a different physical body. But if you change the definitions, they are 'identical'.

Merely saying something is true, or changing classic definitions to suit one's agenda is folly. If you have the mindset that every single person you see will be a criminal, and thus ought to be feared, then eventually that mindset becomes a way of life. So the folly, the illogical conclusion, is all a result of conditioning.

 

[CG Didymus]

I believe both rebirth and resurrection are true, albeit figuratively, not literally.

Easy for you to say, 'cause that is what your religions teaches you. But other religions teach that a person will keep being reborn into this world until they break free from the cycle of birth and death. While Christianity teaches that there will be a resurrection. But, to say they were always meant to be taken figuratively doesn't make God or the messenger very trustworthy. If you can't take them literal, if you can't take what they say as the literal truth, then what are God and the messengers even talking for? Tell people straight out.

 

[CG Didymus]

One is a physical body becoming alive again, and the other refers to the soul being reborn into a different physical body. But if you change the definitions, they are 'identical'.

Merely saying something is true, or changing classic definitions to suit one's agenda is folly. If you have the mindset that every single person you see will be a criminal, and thus ought to be feared, then eventually that mindset becomes a way of life. So the folly, the illogical conclusion, is all a result of conditioning.

I know the Baha'is think they have it all nailed down and can show you from your Scriptures how they, the Baha'is, are right. Is there anything that you've read from your Scriptures that would indicate that it was clearly and obviously figurative?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Easy for you to say, 'cause that is what your religions teaches you. But other religions teach that a person will keep being reborn into this world until they break free from the cycle of birth and death. While Christianity teaches that there will be a resurrection. But, to say they were always meant to be taken figuratively doesn't make God or the messenger very trustworthy. If you can't take them literal, if you can't take what they say as the literal truth, then what are God and the messengers even talking for? Tell people straight out.

You need to quote from Buddha to make your point. Buddha in some cases clarified He is not talking about physical death.


"Those who live at home dissipate themselves unto death, while those who leave home live on with wisdom."

The Sutra of Mañjuśrī’s Questions

Does Buddha mean, if they stay home, they literally, and physically die!?. And if they leave home, they will literally live on, and never die!?

He continues and says:


"Those who live at home lose inner deliberation, while those who leave home obtain inner deliberation"


Here, 'death' is the 'death of wisdom'. It is not a physical death. It is that same death, when Jesus says 'let the dead, bury their own dead.'
'Dead' in these cases, is the misguided, lacking wisdom and true understanding.
When Buddha says, He resurrected them, He is saying, they were lacking true understanding, and thus, were as 'dead', and He guided them, gave them true understanding, and wisdom, thus He made them alive.

I suppose, in the same way, Jesus asked His disciples to go out and preach Christ teachings, Buddha, is asking same, encouraging them not to stay home, but go and teach.


Consequently, rebirth after this death, cannot be a physical rebirth.

 

[Vinayaka]

I know the Baha'is think they have it all nailed down and can show you from your Scriptures how they, the Baha'is, are right. Is there anything that you've read from your Scriptures that would indicate that it was clearly and obviously figurative?

My scriptures don't talk about other faiths. We just live and let live.

As far as I know, though, the Buddhist 'rebirth' is indeed similar to the Hindu 'reincarnation' and both are totally different from the Abrahamic 'resurrection'. The fact that one paradigm deals with soul, while the other with the physical body is reflected in the practices of cremation, and burial. One wouldn't want to resurrect a pile of ashes.

 

[Valjean]

@sayak83 , @Vinayaka , @ManSinha, @Valjean,

No, I don't think identical teaching is stretch, and I tell you why by giving you an example, to show what i mean by teachings.

For example Buddha said, the one of defilements is going after gold:


"There are some ascetics and brahmins who accept gold
and silver and do not refrain from receiving gold and silver.
This is the third defilement of ascetics and brahmins because
of which some ascetics and brahmins do not shine, blaze, and
radiate." Buddha

Now, Bahaullah, Jesus, or Muhammad and other Manifestations said the same thing:

“He is the true servant of God, who, in this day, were he to pass through cities of silver and gold, would not deign to look upon them, and whose heart would remain pure and undefiled from whatever things can be seen in this world, be they its goods or its treasures. " Bahaullah

When we look at these two quotes, they are identical teachings, even though they are different wordings.
We can surely find same teaching from Muhammad, Krishna, or Zoroaster, and Jesus. They may not be the same wording, but does that mean they are not identical teachings?


Moreover, for example, Jesus said only through Him, they can come to Father. This is an exclusive claim. But Buddha, also said in essence same thing. He said only by practicing his teachings they can become liberated and go to heaven. Now, if we consider, the same person spoke through Them, we just note the differences is only relate to their mission. Jesus appeared among Jews, with a different culture than Hindus. So, He presented Himself in different ways than Buddha, yet, their essential teachings are identical. Another example is drinking alcohol. All those Manifestations did not approve drinking alcohol as a good thing.

You'd expect Social rules to be pretty similar, so I'd expect a certain amount of convergent evolution. The difference isn't in the day to day rules of interaction, but in the goals and metaphysics. East and West are whole different worlds.

The Abrahamic religions believe in a real world, with real people and a real God. Eastern philosophies believe it's all an illusion; a dream.
Abrahamic religions don't have the concept of levels of consciousness or alternate realities. These are the very foundation of the Eastern religions.
Western religions posit a lawmaking, punative, creator God that judges you at death and metes out a punishment or reward. Eastern religions don't believe in judgement -- or objectively real gods. Results of actions are automatic, like laws of motion or thermodynamics.

 

[CG Didymus]

You need to quote from Buddha to make your point. Buddha in some cases clarified He is not talking about physical death.


"Those who live at home dissipate themselves unto death, while those who leave home live on with wisdom."

The Sutra of Mañjuśrī’s Questions

Does Buddha mean, if they stay home, they literally, and physically die!?. And if they leave home, they will literally live on, and never die!?

He continues and says:


"Those who live at home lose inner deliberation, while those who leave home obtain inner deliberation"


Here, 'death' is the 'death of wisdom'. It is not a physical death. It is that same death, when Jesus says 'let the dead, bury their own dead.'
'Dead' in these cases, is the misguided, lacking wisdom and true understanding.
When Buddha says, He resurrected them, He is saying, they were lacking true understanding, and thus, were as 'dead', and He guided them, gave them true understanding, and wisdom, thus He made them alive.

I suppose, in the same way, Jesus asked His disciples to go out and preach Christ teachings, Buddha, is asking same, encouraging them not to stay home, but go and teach.


Consequently, rebirth after this death, cannot be a physical rebirth.

I'd say let the Buddhists speak for themselves. Just because you find a quote to suit your purposes doesn't mean much. If Buddhism and Hinduism didn't teach and believe that reincarnation is real they wouldn't go around saying that is what they believe.

But go "teach"? That sounds so Baha'i. And besides, even if a verse clearly say that there is a rebirth of a soul into another physical body, Baha'is would not and could not accept it. They would say it was figurative or a mistranslation or an added tradition and not in the original teachings. Heck, for all I know, the verses you quote aren't in the original. But if the soul or spirit or whatever it is we are supposed to have is real, placing it into a body once isn't much different than placing it in another body later. After all, isn't it supposedly added to the growing fetus at conception or something?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

What is the difference?

If it is meant to be spiritual, then we have spiritual rebirth, and spiritual resurrection.
Spiritual rebirth, means, when someone is spiritually dead, is reborn spiritually again. That is spiritual reviving. Spiritual resurrection is when someone spiritually dies, his spirituality is revived again.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I'd say let the Buddhists speak for themselves. Just because you find a quote to suit your purposes doesn't mean much. If Buddhism and Hinduism didn't teach and believe that reincarnation is real they wouldn't go around saying that is what they believe.

But go "teach"? That sounds so Baha'i. And besides, even if a verse clearly say that there is a rebirth of a soul into another physical body, Baha'is would not and could not accept it. They would say it was figurative or a mistranslation or an added tradition and not in the original teachings. Heck, for all I know, the verses you quote aren't in the original. But if the soul or spirit or whatever it is we are supposed to have is real, placing it into a body once isn't much different than placing it in another body later. After all, isn't it supposedly added to the growing fetus at conception or something?

I'd say let's Buddha speak for himself, by quoting from Him. Why not?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You'd expect Social rules to be pretty similar, so I'd expect a certain amount of convergent evolution. The difference isn't in the day to day rules of interaction, but in the goals and metaphysics. East and West are whole different worlds.

The Abrahamic religions believe in a real world, with real people and a real God. Eastern philosophies believe it's all an illusion; a dream.
Abrahamic religions don't have the concept of levels of consciousness or alternate realities. These are the very foundation of the Eastern religions.
Western religions posit a lawmaking, punative, creator God that judges you at death and metes out a punishment or reward. Eastern religions don't believe in judgement -- or objectively real gods. Results of actions are automatic, like laws of motion or thermodynamics.

Thus the Truth may lay in the combination of both these quoted schools of thought. Baha'u'llah has shown us the balance and has said all Faiths have taught these eternal Truths, it is our perception that differs.

From a Baha'i perspective this world is real to our senses but is an Illusion for our Spiritual Growth.

Baha'u'llah has taught that this is but one level of consciousness in one of the many worlds of God.

Sin is also a balance of the two views you have put forward.

I see that balance is in all the Holy Books.

Regards Tony

 

[ManSinha]

I believe both rebirth and resurrection are true, albeit figuratively, not literally. When Buddha or Krishna spoke of return and rebirth, they meant exactly what Bahaullah means it in the following quote. I can quote from Buddha, to show He also did not mean a literal reincarnation, but He meant exactly how Bahaullah explained. But because people of krishna or Buddha's time, had a previous belief in literal reincarnation, they thought Buddha or Krishna are also speaking literally. Here is what Bahaullah says:


"O brother, behold how the inner mysteries of “rebirth,” of “return,” and of “resurrection” have each, through these all-sufficing, these unanswerable, and conclusive utterances, been unveiled and unraveled before thine eyes. God grant that through His gracious and invisible assistance, thou mayest divest thy body and soul of the old garment, and array thyself with the new and imperishable attire.
Therefore, those who in every subsequent Dispensation preceded the rest of mankind in embracing the Faith of God, who quaffed the clear waters of knowledge at the hand of the divine Beauty, and attained the loftiest summits of faith and certitude, these can be regarded, in name, in reality, in deeds, in words, and in rank, as the “return” of those who in a former Dispensation had achieved similar distinctions. For whatsoever the people of a former Dispensation have manifested, the same hath been shown by the people of this latter generation. Consider the rose: whether it blossometh in the East or in the West, it is nonetheless a rose. For what mattereth in this respect is not the outward shape and form of the rose, but rather the smell and fragrance which it doth impart."
Book of Iqan.

Didn't buddha say, Rebirth is associated with a new Age or eons?
An age or eon is just a period of time, beginning by appearence of a Buddha. Just as a Buddha is symbolically return of the previous Buddha, likewise the followers of a new Buddha, symbolically are return of a previous Buddha. In same manner, the enemies of a new Buddha and transgressors are symbolically return of previous transgressors.

I have been doing some research and you are totally inaccurate with your statements about the Buddhist view of reincarnation

This is what it says - which is a lot closer to what I have been saying - "hell" is getting to come back over and over until one merges with the light

There is no figuratively - this is literal

I grew up being taught about the various religions and the Jataka tales were one of the parables used to illustrate the life of the soul known as Bodhisattva - a selection of the tales meant for children is here and there is another perspective here

On the one hand I can appreciate what you are trying to do - on the other hand I am somewhat compelled to point out, as have others, that you are failing miserably at it

Trying to call actual reincarnation "figurative" so it fits in your world view - is a hole that many dharmics could drive a mack truck through.

My advice to you: Clear your mind and sit down and read about Samkhya and Adwaita Vedanta and Sikhism - and not from Wikipedia

As @Jainarayan has indicated elsewhere - this is very real according to dharmic thought - read one perspective here

 

[CG Didymus]

I'd say let's Buddha speak for himself, by quoting from Him. Why not?

And are you sure that is what Buddha said? I've heard many Baha'is question things in the NT, but now what you have is an exact quote... and you know exactly what he meant by it? I think if Buddhist believe in rebirth, a soul coming back into a different body, that's fine. It's just as plausible as what Baha'is think happens. But who really knows? The only reason you think you know is because Baha'u'llah said so. Well, Buddhists think the Buddha said so. But Baha'is are so presumptuous to think they know better than the followers of another religion.

Same with resurrection, it's what Christians believe is taught by Jesus. But Baha'is don't even believe Jesus, himself, resurrected from the dead. What do you think, he was "spiritually" dead? Oh no, I remember, his followers are his body and they were spiritually dead and back to life. All Baha'is are doing is twisting the beliefs of the other religions to fit theirs. Good luck with that.

 

[CG Didymus]

I have been doing some research and you are totally inaccurate with your statements about the Buddhist view of reincarnation

This is what it says - which is a lot closer to what I have been saying - "hell" is getting to come back over and over until one merges with the light

There is no figuratively - this is literal

I grew up being taught about the various religions and the Jataka tales were one of the parables used to illustrate the life of the soul known as Bodhisattva - a selection of the tales meant for children is here and there is another perspective here

On the one hand I can appreciate what you are trying to do - on the other hand I am somewhat compelled to point out, as have others, that you are failing miserably at it

Trying to call actual reincarnation "figurative" so it fits in your world view - is a hole that many dharmics could drive a mack truck through.

My advice to you: Clear your mind and sit down and read about Samkhya and Adwaita Vedanta and Sikhism - and not from Wikipedia

As @Jainarayan has indicated elsewhere - this is very real according to dharmic thought - read one perspective here

Unfortunately, the greater good that Baha'is could be doing is lost in trying to convince everybody else that they have misunderstood the teachings from their own religion. If a religion believes all religions are one... in spirit, then they should live it and build up the other religions. But they seem to be trying to make all religions the same not "one" by removing the differences in belief.

 

[Valjean]

Thus the Truth may lay in the combination of both these quoted schools of thought. Baha'u'llah has shown us the balance and has said all Faiths have taught these eternal Truths, it is our perception that differs.

From a Baha'i perspective this world is real to our senses but is an Illusion for our Spiritual Growth.

Baha'u'llah has taught that this is but one level of consciousness in one of the many worlds of God.

Sin is also a balance of the two views you have put forward.

I see that balance is in all the Holy Books.

Regards Tony

What is the spiritual goal of Baha'i?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

What is the spiritual goal of Baha'i?

Ultimately it is to know and Love God, to do that one must know their True self.

"..Dost thou deem thyself a small and puny form, When thou foldest within thyself the greater world?"

We are told that this life is the Matrix of the Spiritual World. That we are created at the end of darkness and the beginning of light. Thus to develop all our spiritual limbs in this life is possible and thus is the ultimate goal. Each virtue is a required limb and recognition of Gods Messenger is the required Spiritual light.

The Seven Valleys of Baha'u'llah shows us what we must do to be successful in this journey;

The Call of the Divine Beloved | Bahá’í Reference Library

It is a great mystical work.

Regards Tony

 

[Valjean]

Ultimately it is to know and Love God, to do that one must know their True self.

"..Dost thou deem thyself a small and puny form, When thou foldest within thyself the greater world?"

We are told that this life is the Matrix of the Spiritual World. That we are created at the end of darkness and the beginning of light. Thus to develop all our spiritual limbs in this life is possible and thus is the ultimate goal. Each virtue is a required limb and recognition of Gods Messenger is the required Spiritual light.

The Seven Valleys of Baha'u'llah shows us what we must do to be successful in this journey;

The Call of the Divine Beloved | Bahá’í Reference Library

It is a great mystical work.

Regards Tony

The goal of the "Eastern religions" is to merge with and eventually transcend God; to become greater than and absorb the imaginary Gods we've created as spiritual aids; to merge with the unitary Cosmic Consciousness. The goal is to wake up.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The goal of the "Eastern religions" is to merge with and eventually transcend God; to become greater than and absorb the imaginary Gods we've created as spiritual aids; to merge with the unitary Cosmic Consciousness. The goal is to wake up.

I see there is great truths enshrined within these goals you have put forward, reflected in scriptures.

The key here is that no one really knows what we have added to those goals and what is our actual potential.

Thus instead of dividing east and west, it could be that all points of the compass do need to merge before we can wake up.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The goal is to wake up.

This could be what happens, when one is born again.

Regards Tony