Reincarnation

Aug 2019
8
Potsdam
That's true, Bahaullah never separated religions in east or west – but if you have investigated the eastern religions and traditions of Hinduism than you realize that most statements doesn't fit to eastern religion. At the end of the day Bahaullah don't talk of "western religion", but in fact he speaks only about western/abrahamic religions.
 
Jul 2018
105
Tarshish, bound for Nineveh
Reisender,

It may be the case that when one speaks to practitioners (we cannot speak to religions, after all) we may find conflicting or incompatible statements. But the religion of God is not of the East nor of the West, and it is only one religion, the changeless faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. But alas, religionsists always have and no doubt always will found ways to diverge and disagree. Its all part of fallibility and humanity, but it is also because the pure light falls upon different tongues and cultures, and these refract the light into different colors and hues. Yet, the lpure light refracted, contains them all.

Cheers
 
Aug 2019
8
Potsdam
Reisender,

It may be the case that when one speaks to practitioners (we cannot speak to religions, after all) we may find conflicting or incompatible statements. But the religion of God is not of the East nor of the West, and it is only one religion, the changeless faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. But alas, religionsists always have and no doubt always will found ways to diverge and disagree. Its all part of fallibility and humanity, but it is also because the pure light falls upon different tongues and cultures, and these refract the light into different colors and hues. Yet, the lpure light refracted, contains them all.

Cheers
Yes, there is one religion, sanatana-dharma. If Bahá’u’lláh define some points that are not compatible with eastern Religion, but it fits to Western religion, then he doesn‘t speak for all traditions, but de facto only for the abrahamic religions. That is logically evident. If there is a progressive revelation, why gives the older revelation of Krishna more detailed information about after life and the processes within the material and spiritual worlds than the new revelation of Bahá’u’lláh? It makes no sense. The explanations of the Bhagavad Gita about religions fit to Western and Eastern religions, so it seems it is near to the truth then Bahá’u’lláh. In hinduism, there are also prophets for the current age, their teachings are according to the Vedas (so you can proof that they are true), and they have renewed the principles according to Time, Space and Circumstances, why not follow them?
 
Jul 2018
105
Tarshish, bound for Nineveh
Yes, there is one religion, sanatana-dharma. If Bahá’u’lláh define some points that are not compatible with eastern Religion, but it fits to Western religion, then he doesn‘t speak for all traditions, but de facto only for the abrahamic religions. That is logically evident. If there is a progressive revelation, why gives the older revelation of Krishna more detailed information about after life and the processes within the material and spiritual worlds than the new revelation of Bahá’u’lláh? It makes no sense. The explanations of the Bhagavad Gita about religions fit to Western and Eastern religions, so it seems it is near to the truth then Bahá’u’lláh. In hinduism, there are also prophets for the current age, their teachings are according to the Vedas (so you can proof that they are true), and they have renewed the principles according to Time, Space and Circumstances, why not follow them?
Reisender,

Keep something in mind. If Baha'u'llah "defined" something, it exists in the written texts of his revelation. Similarly, when you speak of dharma, you must also reference a text.

If you and I are both speakers of language X, both in time a, and culture b, then the schemata underlying our communication will share large commonalities. Nevertheless, when I compose a text for you to read, I attempt to code my thoughts into written language as accurately as I can. You then attempt to decode my composition into thoughts, the best that you can. Even though we share so much as a basis, clarifications are probably necessary because the coding and decoding processes are imperfect. I can write something that does not convey my thoughts as accurately as I intended and you can read my message and come to an understanding that I did not intend. Now consider how much more complex and problematic this becomes if must translate my message from language X to language Y and or from time a to time a2 or culture b to culture b2. There will be much greater errors in encoding and decoding, however, it does not follow that the source thoughts are inconsistent or contradictory.

Cheers
 
Aug 2019
8
Potsdam
Yes that will be our problem, but both of us don't proclaim to be a manifestation of God. But Bahaullah, as your religion stated, proclaim to be a manifestation of God. Why he should not have the complete knowledge about all religions and why he should have problems to explain the words of God?
And, the main point, again, why should the current manifestation has lesser knowledge about the universe than one of the older manifestations? It's a logical contradiction to the idea of progressive revelation.
Don't misunderstand me. I like the idea that Bahaullah has spoken out and I think, that a person who write such many books must be inspired, but for me there are too many logical contradictions and inconsistencies to accept Bahaullah as prophet for the whole world. Yes, he may be a Shaktiaveshaavatar for the abrahamic traditions, so that they can find together and can smash down the excluding picture of God that was the root of so many wars and problems.
 
Jul 2018
105
Tarshish, bound for Nineveh
Yes that will be our problem, but both of us don't proclaim to be a manifestation of God. But Bahaullah, as your religion stated, proclaim to be a manifestation of God. Why he should not have the complete knowledge about all religions and why he should have problems to explain the words of God?
And, the main point, again, why should the current manifestation has lesser knowledge about the universe than one of the older manifestations? It's a logical contradiction to the idea of progressive revelation.
Don't misunderstand me. I like the idea that Bahaullah has spoken out and I think, that a person who write such many books must be inspired, but for me there are too many logical contradictions and inconsistencies to accept Bahaullah as prophet for the whole world. Yes, he may be a Shaktiaveshaavatar for the abrahamic traditions, so that they can find together and can smash down the excluding picture of God that was the root of so many wars and problems.
You haven't completely understood my point. The manifestation of God, Avatar of God, is perfect in knowledge but they communicate with our imperfect systems of language to beings of limited comprehension and capacity. The Manifestation encodes a message in language that is decoded by us. Naturally, there will be variations in our decoding of the message. Now add the other confounding variables the passage of time, the changing of culture, the changing of knowledge, the changing of language, the different ages, the different cultures, the different languages, etc., and imagine all the possible variations that will now be expected when transferring and decoding the texts of Manifestation X of t1, c1, l1 doing the same with Manifestation Z of t2, c2, l3 and then compare. It is not difficult to imagine they will seem to be different and divergent in many aspects and slightly similar in other aspects. Now this would only relate to messages of manifestation X and Z that are actually identical in thought and expression at the source. Throw in to that the fact that other messages at the source of X and Z are in fact different or even opposing in nature because due to the different times of X and Z they gave specific and uniquely different teachings and commands suited to the necessities of those times. Ie, the manifestation of winter commands to wear coats, and the manifestation of summer has no such requirements. Consider all of these factors, and I suspect you would have a scenario that looks very much like we see today. The very thing which you have described. But if that is that case, it would also be the very thing that Baha'u'llah described as well: One religion, one God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. The differences we perceive are caused by out limitations.

Cheers
 
Aug 2019
8
Potsdam
Too theoretical, abstract, philosophical speculativ. I was talking about very specific points. It seems that followers of Bahaullah couldn't give specific answers to specific questions concerning their own concepts.
 
Jul 2018
105
Tarshish, bound for Nineveh
Too theoretical, abstract, philosophical speculativ. I was talking about very specific points. It seems that followers of Bahaullah couldn't give specific answers to specific questions concerning their own concepts.
I was only trying to discuss how it is possible faiths can be one yet at the same time appear different by applying my understanding of the teachings of Baha'u'llah and also of linguistics and how language works. I apologize if I misunderstood your question. Perhaps you could restate it? I will try and answer a specific question if I am able.

Cheers
 
Sep 2010
4,604
Normanton, Far North West Queensland
That's true, Bahaullah never separated religions in east or west – but if you have investigated the eastern religions and traditions of Hinduism than you realize that most statements doesn't fit to eastern religion. At the end of the day Bahaullah don't talk of "western religion", but in fact he speaks only about western/abrahamic religions.
Personally I see all Messages reflected in the Message of Baha'u'llah, East and West, North and South. Also where is the boundary of the East?

I see it requires us to drop the divides in our own mind and open it to the Oneness that is enshrined in all of God's given Messages.

Then comes the part causing most separation, what part of those messages have been replaced by human thought.

An example is that of reincarnation. I see many of the concepts are enshrined in the writing's of the Baha'i Faith, but the writings make it clear that reincarnation as a doctrinal teaching is not correct.

This is where we have the chance to embrace the progressive thought given be a new Manifestation of God. We can choose to consider what was offered is a correction of misunderstood spiritual concepts given in the past.

Another example would be that if the Trinity doctrine. The Message of Muhammad given in the Quran corrected this doctrinal thought, showing us it was not right to literally think of Jesus as God. Baha'u'llah confirms this and gives a detailed explanation of the connection between God and His chosen Manifestations.

Life is indeed a journey of discovering the potential of our own self.

Regards Tony
 
Aug 2019
86
Berlin
Interesting discussion.
I would add something. The Bhagavad-Gita was spoken 5000 years before, but it was written down in the year 400-500 B.C. You can believe that from the revelation of the battlefield of Kurukshetra in the year 3000 B.C. to the scripture that was written down in the year 500 B.C. nothing has altered, but it's only a believe.
Concerning the reincarnation, most scholars gives us the information that it came with the year 800 B.C. I have checked some sources during my last time I was here active. But also there are people who say there are some verses in the Vedas that proof reincarnation. It seems not so clear. But are the Veda da oldest scriptures? Not really. Before the Vedas there were the Indus culture in the area that is now known as India. The Egyptian belief systems are older then the Vedas, e.g. first pictures of Seth are from the year 4000 B.C. But are the Egyptian belief systems the first belief of mankind? Not really, before that there were Animism and such things. Mankind is over 400000 years old. The "hidden religion" was long before the Vedas, the Egypts, Christian and other religions. You can find many traditions that are part and reflection of the cultural development of human species for a specific time. But no-one can define the "root religion".