• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

My current version of Hinduism

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
There's no evidence we are in the new Satya yuga.

There were lots of points in your post that I see have been answered, thus it may be we just have not yet seen the evidence, when it has been made available.

I sèe Jims post shows people are looking for the answer to this part of your post;

While all religions may be valid, and lead to an ultimate truth, they are valid for their followers, not everyone else... there is no oneness and unity of religions.

I see they do all lead to a single source, many others are finding this also.

Regards Tony
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
This will clarify the OP, so can respond.

All that is written by Abdul'baha and Shoghi Effendi and Universal House of Justice is Authorised under the Covenant of Baha'u'llah. Baha'u'llah has said, it is as He had given it.

It is a faulty authorization, there is no truthful basis for it.
Regards
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
All the same, there is danger in superstitions, including monotheistic ones.
All worldviews and religions have varying degrees of superstitions including the monotheistic faiths. My point was about the attitudes and values for those who want to engage in respectful dialogue with those of differing beliefs. If we have no interest in such a dialogue, then it’s only natural to label others as ignorant and superstitious.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
It is a faulty authorization, there is no truthful basis for it.
Regards

The Quran is clear and supports 100% what Baha'u'llah has offered;

"4:59 "O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination."

Now we can get back to sorting out ideas for Jims OP.

Regards Tony
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
paarsurrey said:
It is a faulty authorization, there is no truthful basis for it.
Regards
The Quran is clear and supports 100% what Baha'u'llah has offered;

"4:59 "O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination."

Now we can get back to sorting out ideas for Jims OP.

Regards Tony

Bahaullah was neither Allah nor Bahaullah was Muhammad nor Bahaullah was charged with any authority among us the Muslims and or he was not ruling over us.

So,no, Bahaullah does not get any authority whatsoever from this verse or the verses in the context.

Regards
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So,no, Bahaullah does not get any authority whatsoever from this verse or the verses in the context.

Regards

Wheras I see this is very applicable to my choices;

"...if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination..."

Regards Tony
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Of course. That is the atheists’ POV for any religion. We’re all entitled to our beliefs. I personally wouldn’t label those who hold a different worldview ignorant. Being respectful of diversity of beliefs is the first step to dialogue.
Except that some religions, such as Hinduism, do not rely entirely on supernaturalism and/or theism.

An atheist has basically no choice when faced with Christianity, Islaam or even Judaism besides deciding that if someone is lying, it should not be him. For my considerable disappointment, the same applies to the Bahai Faith as well.

Not so with IMO more solid religions.
 

siti

Well-Known Member
I don't get one exactly. What is this "A BLAH HAUL", please?

blah - means something that is boring or without meaningful content...blah, blah, blah

a haul can mean an unusually large amount of something (often illegally obtained) - like a haul of arms or drugs - although it can also mean a large amount of something more legally and ordinarily obtained - like a haul of fish for example, and it can also mean to drag or pull (usually a heavy load) along

So "a blah haul" could be a large amount of boring and inconsequential information that is dragged along with considerable effort...but...

...the word play works much better if one doesn't have to explain it - which is probably where most religionists go wrong - they try (incessantly) to explain it ("it" in this case being something inexplicable like "God" or "Nature" - creating huge "hauls" of fresh "blah" in the process. I just thought it was somehow fitting that one of the most prolific writers of "explanations" of the inexplicable should choose for himself a name that happened to be an anagram of "a blah haul".

All that said, an anagram doesn't have to mean anything at all - its just fun to play around with words and letters sometimes. You never know what you're going to turn up next.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Except that some religions, such as Hinduism, do not rely entirely on supernaturalism and/or theism.

An atheist has basically no choice when faced with Christianity, Islaam or even Judaism besides deciding that if someone is lying, it should not be him. For my considerable disappointment, the same applies to the Bahai Faith as well.

Not so with IMO more solid religions.

The Abraham Faiths do not rely entirely on supernaturalism and theism. That's certainly not my experience as one who practices the Baha'i Faith and your statement is not supported by the actual writings of any of the Abrahamic Faiths.

It is not sufficient for a believer merely to accept and observe the teachings. He should, in addition, cultivate the sense of spirituality which he can acquire chiefly by means of prayer. The Bahá’í Faith, like all other Divine Religions, is thus fundamentally mystic in character. Its chief goal is the development of the individual and society, through the acquisition of spiritual virtues and powers.


Bahá'í Reference Library - Directives from the Guardian, Pages 86-87
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
All worldviews and religions have varying degrees of superstitions including the monotheistic faiths. My point was about the attitudes and values for those who want to engage in respectful dialogue with those of differing beliefs. If we have no interest in such a dialogue, then it’s only natural to label others as ignorant and superstitious.
While that is true, it is also besides my point.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
The Abraham Faiths do not rely entirely on supernaturalism and theism. That's certainly not my experience as one who practices the Baha'i Faith and your statement is not supported by the actual writings of any of the Abrahamic Faiths.

Excuse me?
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member

I thought that was quite clear, thus in more words;

As with all Faith from God, or if you do not beleive in God, our actions based on virtue, always speak louder than words. Thus If we all practice what Faith came to teach us, or what is just the right thing to do, then we would all be living together in a unity of virtues, serving each other selflessly.

But the selfish self, is what prevents that in all ages.

Regards Tony
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
Yep, BG 12.5 For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme, advancement is very troublesome. To make progress in that discipline is always difficult for those who are embodied.

Yes. ’unmanifested’ in this refers to prakriti. Higher is the Self. There are three levels. Manifest universe, unmanifest prakriti, and the Self.

We are asked to abide by a mantra or “om’ or ‘sohum’ or ‘net neti’ or a vicara into ‘Who am I?’ All these are directly linked to oneself about existence of which there is no doubt whatsoever.
 
Last edited:

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
I thought that was quite clear, thus in more words;

As with all Faith from God, or if you do not beleive in God, our actions based on virtue, always speak louder than words. Thus If we all practice what Faith came to teach us, or what is just the right thing to do, then we would all be living together in a unity of virtues, serving each other selflessly.

But the selfish self, is what prevents that in all ages.

Regards Tony
I think that ignorance is more of a hindrance, personally.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
One can say then that Krishna, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Bab and Bahaulllah are Avatars whom Saguna Brahman or God had placed in different situations and circumstances to impart knowledge of spirituality and religion.

I agree from the view point of advaita. But from Vaisnava point of view, to which the avatara concept belong, this will not Be agreeable, imo.:)
 
Last edited:

siti

Well-Known Member
...meaning that anyone else would be free to disagree without being wrong?
I'm with that - I disagree with almost everyone and of course I am never wrong (well except for that time I thought England would actually win the World Cup again...oh and when I thought Trump had zero chance of becoming President...and when I thought the British people wouldn't be stupid enough to vote for Brexit - or that the Scots would be stupid enough to vote for independence... OK so it turns out I am completely wrong on lots of (maybe most) things - I admit it...but which religion is this idea of disagreeing without being wrong from?....Oh I see! Not a religion...what a pity - for a moment there I thought I might have found my spiritual home at last - a place to be disagreeable without being wrong...heaven!
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
I was trying to find out what Shoghi Effendi might have meant by saying that Bahá’u’lláh is the tenth avatar, and also a manifestation of Krishna. More precisely, “the Immaculate Manifestation of Krishna.”

Exactly. That was exactly the question I was trying to answer.

Are you being sarcastic or did you not understand what I tried to convey?

As per Gita, which is followed by all three Vedantic schools, Krishna is the Godhead, the Self (self of all). He is the sun, the moon, the sages, the strength, the intelligence..... everything and beyond. Time-space-beings are in Him.

From this POV, not only Baha’u’llah, but we too are expressions of That.

But, from the particular and specific concept of Avatara (of vaisnavas), which is not common to all Vedantic schools, Shogi is wrong, imo. Furthermore, such a claim is never provable.
 
Top