Baha'i

[Mick]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

Namaste mick,

thank you for the informitive posts and welcome to the forum.

by the by... what you've described is not the Big Bang theory.. nor any theory of cosmology that i'm famaliar with...

though we can disucss this further in the science area if you'd like.

Vajradhara,

Thank you for this welcome. I apologize for not seeing this post earlier. Would you share with me the thread name that you mentioned above. I would like to discuss it more. I am sure you can enlighten me on a topic I admit to be less than knowledgeable.

Mick

[Mick]

Vajradhara

You wrote:

you specifically list the Buddha as one of the Prophets, however, in the link that i'm reading http://www.ibiblio.org/Bahai/Texts/EN/SAQ/SAQ-43.html it clearly refutes this.

'Abdu'l-Baha stated the following in this treatise, "The Manifestations of universal Prophethood Who appeared independently are, for example, Abraham, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, the Báb and Bahá'u'lláh." He listed these Manifestations as an example not all inclusive. In fact, as you noticed he actually dealt with the question of the Buddha later quite extensively. Remember these were very short essays, verbally given and transcribed. I use this tome for quick reference, but others for more detailed research. That website has most of the Writings of The Bab, Baha'u'llah, and 'Abdu'l-Baha. There is also a search function that will allow you to find specific topics

moreover, it goes on to further mischaracterize and to even boldy predict that the Buddhadharma is dead.

I apologize but I am not familiar with the Buddhadharma. Could you explain? Dharma...is this the Spirit of Buddha? If this is what you are saying, then, no that is not what 'Abdu'l-Baha was saying at all. I will wait for your reply to expound.

worshipping statues indeed.

I suggest 'Abdu'l-Baha was making reference to the peoples that display large Buddha's and leave foodstuff, flowers and cover with gold leaf as a display of worship. I am not sure how else one would see these practices. I am sure there are wide and varying practices by Buddhist adherents and I am not suggesting that you are worshipping an idol. There is great respect in the Baha'i community for the Guatama Buddha, though most of the time we see the role of the Buddha differently than many of the followers of His teachings.

.

inexplicably, i had rather thought that it wouldn't be the case with the Baha'i faith. eh... who knew?

I suggest that we are still in the early stage of discussion. Oh, please, don't show disappointment so soon. I am, perhaps, not able to answer your questions well.

perhaps, you did not realize that Buddha and Confucious were both cast in the same mold in your tradition?

No, I am not aware of this. Again, let me say the Some Answered Questions is a great starting out document but it is terse and does not dwell deeply in most subjects.

i did not see Lao Tzu mentioned one way or the other... which is interesting to me as i incorporate many aspects of the Taoist praxis into my practice

I wish I could expound more on the Eastern traditions, but,alas, I am not real studied in these areas. I have met many Baha'is that are, though,and some come from these same traditions. I know some that discuss Tao ideologies and would probably also incorporate them into their lives. We believe the Truths of God can be found whereever we look. The source isn't as important as the application.

Very enjoyable to share with such a spiritual individual.

warmly,

Mick

[Mick]

Vajardhara,

I may someday get the hang of this forum. It is a great format, but I keep messing it up. I should have answered this post first. Please forgive me.

1. you said that there is no ministry or preisthood within your tradition, is there a person or group of individuals that represent a guiding council or a "governing body" for resolving disputes amongst adherents?

We do have a Baha'i Administrative Order. It starts with the Local Spiritual Assembly. The Assembly is formed every April 21 wherever 9 or more adult Baha'is reside. They look over the spiritual well being of the community and will use the consultative will of the assembly to resolve disputes between the followers. I sat on an assembly for many years, and surprisingly we used this consultation practice to resolve disputes between non-Baha'is more than between Baha'is. The Assembly is formed through a secret ballot election. There are no nominations or people offering themselves for service. We simply write down the names of the 9 most luminous individuals in the community and whomever receives the most votes, become Local Spiritual Assembley members.

We also have a convention once a year within a district. We spend a day in consultation, prayer, and fellowship and choose a representative to attend a national convention, where 9 luminous individuals will eventually be chosen to sit on the National Spiritual Assembly. Once every five years the National Assemblies of the World meet and they chose 9 luminous individuals from the world as a whole to sit on the Universal House of Justice, which is located in Haifa, Israel on Mount Carmel.

Believe me when I say we have no ministry or Priests. We are all asked to teach this Great Cause through the way we live our life and by responding to questions. We do have a direction warning us against proselytizing. We are told to become attracters, by the way we live, speak and interact with mankind.

2. is the "one truth" that you believe in an absolute truth or a relative truth? in other words, is this a spiritual truth or an ontological truth.. or perhaps, a combination of the two?

You, my friend, are a wordsmith, which I appreciate, but struggle with myself. I had to look up ontological and yes, I would say perhaps a combination of the two. In the Progressive Revelation of God, what once was an absolute truth, could become a relative truth. In the Christian religion, Paul gave directions to slaves as well as slave owners. This could be construed as an absolute truth of the acceptance of slavery. It today is a relative truth, for the time and the absolute truth is the oneness of mankind. This Revelation of God is absolute today, but in the future as new Manifestations reveal themselves, they could become relative. Regardless, the absolutes of God are recognizable in their simplicity and their rightness.

If a religion told you it would be ok to steal so you would have more to donate to their cause, this would be easily recognizable as a falsehood and not of God. If a religion told you that by praying in a certain manner and reciting certain words, you will be rewarded in some other life, this too would be easy to question and say, why? If they told you that through prayer and meditation, you develop your soul and this will affect how you live your life, you may say, yes this is a direction of God. It makes sense and in its simplicity gives ourselves as well as mankind a better existance.

3. Progressive Revelation is a strange thing to me... some monotheistic traditions posit such a thing however, most of them do not. it's not that the concept of progressive understanding is alien to me, rather, its the rather disconcertedness of the whole thing that creates pause within. Progressive Revelation, when taken to its logical conclusion, would lead one to the idea that the information that they have to work with, vis a vie God, is not complete or accurate. as you can imagine, for many monothesitic traditions, this is heresy. hmm... i guess that wasn't much of a question after all.

But a thoughtful moment? Yes. In fact, by definition, Progressive Revelation suggests that it is not complete, but in the future, more will be revealed as mankind can assimilate it. Jesus of Nazereth said, "I have many things to share with you, you cannot bear...", because mankind was not ready for it at that time.

Baha'u'llah told the people of Persia and Iraq that there would come a day when mankind would speak to each other within a matter of seconds and visit each other in a matter of hours, so it is necessary to have an auxiallary language so that we can communicate. You can imagine in 1863, this had little meaning to them. Yet, we can see the need as we write on this forum and the travel industry has managed to put almost anyplace within our reach within a matter of hours.

4. well... needless to say, i'd have to dispute the assertion of the historical Buddha being included as a messenger of any god, let alone God, but we can leave that aside for now. however... seeing as we are on the topic, albeit obtusely, does your tradition have anything resembling the Law of Karma?

Would you be so kind as to explain the law of Karma? Does this have to do with fate or predestination?

my first question is this... are those postings the "official" position of your faith tradition or are they the opinons of an adherent?

'Abdu'l-Baha is the son of Baha'u'llah. When Baha'u'llah passed away in 1892, he told the followers to turn to 'Abdu'l-Baha to learn to live the life. He is called the Exemplar. His writings are considered translations and explanations of the writings of Baha'u'llah and The Bab. They are short treatises that were transcribed from talks he did around the supper table. We don't see them as complete, but we do see them as accurate.

Thankyou for your kind assessments,

warmly,

Mick

[Vajradhara]

Originally Posted by Mick

Vajradhara,

Thank you for this welcome. I apologize for not seeing this post earlier. Would you share with me the thread name that you mentioned above. I would like to discuss it more. I am sure you can enlighten me on a topic I admit to be less than knowledgeable.

Mick

Namaste Mick,

we're just getting going on the thread:

http://www.comparative-religion.com/...read.php?t=565

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Mick,

thank you for the response. don't worry, you're getting the hang of it just fine

Originally Posted by Mick

Vajradhara

You wrote:


'Abdu'l-Baha stated the following in this treatise, "The Manifestations of universal Prophethood Who appeared independently are, for example, Abraham, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, the Báb and Bahá'u'lláh." He listed these Manifestations as an example not all inclusive. In fact, as you noticed he actually dealt with the question of the Buddha later quite extensively. Remember these were very short essays, verbally given and transcribed. I use this tome for quick reference, but others for more detailed research. That website has most of the Writings of The Bab, Baha'u'llah, and 'Abdu'l-Baha. There is also a search function that will allow you to find specific topics

indeed... i took them to be representative samples, however, he specifically talks about the historical Buddha and Confucious in the link that i referenced above. to sum up, his assessment of them is, in my opinon, incorrrect. not least of which is because Confucious or Kung Fu-tze as he was known before the missionaries arrived, didn't create a religion. he created a social paradigm to revitalized the social contract of the nation. remember, he and Lao-tzu (not to mention Lu Bei, Li Er, Chang-tzu et al) were running around during a period of Chinese history called the Warring States Period. eh... we can talk ancient Chinese history some other time though

I apologize but I am not familiar with the Buddhadharma. Could you explain? Dharma...is this the Spirit of Buddha? If this is what you are saying, then, no that is not what 'Abdu'l-Baha was saying at all. I will wait for your reply to expound.

buddhadharma is the truth of the Buddhas teaching. it is, in essence the "mind seal" of the teachings that are passed non-verbally from teacher to student. in a general sense, the term Buddhadharma represents the totality of the teachings of the Buddha, all three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma.

in Buddhism, the spirit is negated.. we do not hold there to be such a thing. we hold consciousness to be the analog of the spirit or soul as posited in those traditions that have them.

I suggest 'Abdu'l-Baha was making reference to the peoples that display large Buddha's and leave foodstuff, flowers and cover with gold leaf as a display of worship. I am not sure how else one would see these practices. I am sure there are wide and varying practices by Buddhist adherents and I am not suggesting that you are worshipping an idol. There is great respect in the Baha'i community for the Guatama Buddha, though most of the time we see the role of the Buddha differently than many of the followers of His teachings.

yes, this is what i was referring to as well. let me provide a modern example. when people visit Elvis' house in Memphis and lay wreaths or flowers or other things at his gate, people do not mistakenly assume that these individuals are worshipping Elvis. they presume that these individuals are deeply moved by Elvis and are offering something as a token of their respect.

this is similar to the methodology of the Buddhist community using statues of Buddha or Avelokiteshavara or what have you. the Buddhists engaged in this aspect of practice may outwardly appear to be "worshipping" the Buddha, but this is a misunderstanding of what is going on. These individuals are very greatful that the historical Buddha, Guatama, revealed the Path of Liberation and are simply paying respect to a worthy teacher.

as an aside... there is a vast difference in the way that a western mind preceives these things and an eastern mind. a quick example, that of the guru.

I suggest that we are still in the early stage of discussion. Oh, please, don't show disappointment so soon. I am, perhaps, not able to answer your questions well.

fair enough

Very enjoyable to share with such a spiritual individual.

warmly,

Mick

the pleasure is mine. i am always very appreciative when someone can explain what they believe and why in a manner that others can understand.

by the by... which of the Baha'i schools do you follow?

[Mick]

Vajradhara,

Just passing through, but thought I should answer this one quickly.

by the by... which of the Baha'i schools do you follow?

The Bab declared His mission in 1844 which was "...to prepare the world for someone Greater than Himself...The Unifier...The Comforter." In 1863 Baha'u'llah stated "I am the Promised One of all religions and if there is a religion that has been forgotten man and it had a Promised One, I am Him too. When He passed in 1892, He told us to turn to 'Abdu'l-Baha to learn to live the life. When 'Abdu'l-Baha passed away in 1921, his will and testament told us to turn to his Grandson, Shoghi Effendi. He is known as the Guardian. When Shoghi Effendi passed away in 1957, The Hands of the Cause of God ( a group of followers appointed by 'Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi, because of their spiritual strength, as guides, but with no administrative powers, on not finding a will and testament chose to form the Universal House of Justice as designed in all the writings of the Central Figures and Shoghi Effendi.

Now here is where the wicket becomes sticky. At each passing, there was a group of followers that banded around one that declard that he should be the new leader. For the most part, the years have caused most of them to die off. The most recent split in 1957, is still around and with the power of the net, seems to have a presence rather than just the few that exist.

I am a member of the Baha'i Faith with no adjectives and no secrets. If a party doesn't recognize one of the above mentioned central figures or institutions, then they are not a member of the Baha'i Faith, they are members of some group that has not recognized the continuation of the Faiths growth.

Allah'u'Abha, dear friend and sorry for the lengthy post when it would seem to most to be a simple answer

warmly,

Mick

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Mick,

thanks for the response.

Originally Posted by Mick

We do have a Baha'i Administrative Order. It starts with the Local Spiritual Assembly. The Assembly is formed every April 21 wherever 9 or more adult Baha'is reside. They look over the spiritual well being of the community and will use the consultative will of the assembly to resolve disputes between the followers. I sat on an assembly for many years, and surprisingly we used this consultation practice to resolve disputes between non-Baha'is more than between Baha'is. The Assembly is formed through a secret ballot election. There are no nominations or people offering themselves for service. We simply write down the names of the 9 most luminous individuals in the community and whomever receives the most votes, become Local Spiritual Assembley members.

are these decisions binding upon the adherent? if so, are there any penalties perscribed for trangression of the collective decision?

You, my friend, are a wordsmith, which I appreciate, but struggle with myself. I had to look up ontological and yes, I would say perhaps a combination of the two. In the Progressive Revelation of God, what once was an absolute truth, could become a relative truth. In the Christian religion, Paul gave directions to slaves as well as slave owners. This could be construed as an absolute truth of the acceptance of slavery. It today is a relative truth, for the time and the absolute truth is the oneness of mankind. This Revelation of God is absolute today, but in the future as new Manifestations reveal themselves, they could become relative. Regardless, the absolutes of God are recognizable in their simplicity and their rightness.

thank you for the compliment, though i am just a bug. hmm... if the absolute truth can become a relative truth, given time, one would have to conclude that it was not an absolute truth to begin with. perhaps, it was a provisional truth that was appropriate to the capacities of the individuals to hear it?

If a religion told you it would be ok to steal so you would have more to donate to their cause, this would be easily recognizable as a falsehood and not of God. If a religion told you that by praying in a certain manner and reciting certain words, you will be rewarded in some other life, this too would be easy to question and say, why? If they told you that through prayer and meditation, you develop your soul and this will affect how you live your life, you may say, yes this is a direction of God. It makes sense and in its simplicity gives ourselves as well as mankind a better existance.

agreed.. if a religion espoused stealing, i would not consider it a valid refuge. refuge is a technical Buddhist term to denote a valid spiritual tradition. we consider a spiritual tradition to be valid if it espouses a positive moral and ethical code. in any event... there are religions that say you must pray in this certain fashion and say these certain words. there is value and use in such a technique for some individuals. prayer and meditation are, as you can imagine, high in the Buddhist praxis heirarchy.

But a thoughtful moment? Yes. In fact, by definition, Progressive Revelation suggests that it is not complete, but in the future, more will be revealed as mankind can assimilate it. Jesus of Nazereth said, "I have many things to share with you, you cannot bear...", because mankind was not ready for it at that time.

this is very similar to our concept of the Three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma. briefly... there are three Buddhist traditions... Hinyana (lesser vehicle), Mahayana (greater vehicle) and Vajrayana (Diamond vehicle) which represent three more progressively esoteric understandings of the teachings. in Buddhism we have a concept called "skillful means" which means that the realized teacher employs teachings that are specifically geared for the needs and understanding capacity of the audience. thus, teachings can, from the same teacher, appear quite contradictory if not viewed with the correct understanding.

Baha'u'llah told the people of Persia and Iraq that there would come a day when mankind would speak to each other within a matter of seconds and visit each other in a matter of hours, so it is necessary to have an auxiallary language so that we can communicate. You can imagine in 1863, this had little meaning to them. Yet, we can see the need as we write on this forum and the travel industry has managed to put almost anyplace within our reach within a matter of hours.

Esparonto, anyone? for those that don't know... Esparonto was created to be a "world wide language" in the late 1890's, iirc. it didn't really catch on

it seems like, despite all it's limitations, English is becoming the "world language".

Would you be so kind as to explain the law of Karma? Does this have to do with fate or predestination?

briefly, Karma is the Moral Law of Cause and Effect. Karma is created by the intentions of ones actions, not by the act itself. in a sense, it can be compared to fate or predestination due to the fact that "what you sow, so shall you reap." however, one thing that is quite different and important to bear in mind is that Karma is not fixed and unchangeable. you can change your Karma for positive or negative, right now... so it doesn't follow that, one must reap what they sow, though that is usually how it happens.

'Abdu'l-Baha is the son of Baha'u'llah. When Baha'u'llah passed away in 1892, he told the followers to turn to 'Abdu'l-Baha to learn to live the life. He is called the Exemplar. His writings are considered translations and explanations of the writings of Baha'u'llah and The Bab. They are short treatises that were transcribed from talks he did around the supper table. We don't see them as complete, but we do see them as accurate.

Thankyou for your kind assessments,

warmly,

Mick

if i understand properly... the Bab predicted the arrival of Baha'u'llah, is that correct? moreover, the Baha'u'llah was already existent at the time of the Bab's death, is that correct?

an unrelated question... how does your faith tradition view homosexuality?

[IMSassafras]

indeed... i took them to be representative samples, however, he specifically talks about the historical Buddha and Confucious in the link that i referenced above. to sum up, his assessment of them is, in my opinon, incorrrect. not least of which is because Confucious or Kung Fu-tze as he was known before the missionaries arrived, didn't create a religion. he created a social paradigm to revitalized the social contract of the nation. remember, he and Lao-tzu (not to mention Lu Bei, Li Er, Chang-tzu et al) were running around during a period of Chinese history called the Warring States Period. eh... we can talk ancient Chinese history some other time though

Actually we are in agreement. We see the Buddha as a Manifestation of God and His message from God. We give credit to the Buddha for our knowledge of the soul or the spirit within. What you wrote about Confucious and Lao-tzu are within the teachings of Baha'u'llah.


I understand your explanation concerning the show of respect to the Buddha's teachings with physical displays of gifts and abasement. On the other hand, we are warned in the Baha'i Faith as the world was warned by Moses not to give adulation to idols. It is only wrong because it directs our worship towards a physical practice and not a spiritual practice. The results of such practices is to give the worshipper a false feeling of doing something worthy, when the reality of the Manifestation is that we are to follow His directions to better ourselves and our world. I am not being overly critical of the practice. Most religions and maybe all of them have some sort of ritual practice that could be construed as abasing to the individual. It is the way it was. Baha'u'llah has simply told us not to do it anymore. That is for us and those that see the harm in the old ways.

Thank you for the site you gave me. I will go there when I have a chance.

warmly,

Mick

[Mick]

Vajradhara

I apologize. I rebooted and it seems my wifes cookie is the default cookie on this site. Sooooo, the last post came out in her name. Confusing enough yet?

Mick

[Mick]

Vajradhara,

are these decisions binding upon the adherent? if so, are there any penalties perscribed for trangression of the collective decision?

Not really. The Assembly is to act in a loving and guiding manner. We are told to accept the decisions of the Local Spiritual Assembly and if they are wrong it will be righted. If we do not follow the suggestions of the Assembly, then we are on our own, I guess. We would initially go to them to have what is right prevail, and not necessarily to just get a judgement that would make us happy. The only thing I can think of that is mandated by the Assembly is if we are breaking one of the laws and our actions would cause harm to the community as a whole. Then we would be told to stop whatever we are doing that is harmful and the Assembly would offer itself as a loving guide to aid the member while he is changing his/hers actions.

thank you for the compliment, though i am just a bug. hmm... if the absolute truth can become a relative truth, given time, one would have to conclude that it was not an absolute truth to begin with. perhaps, it was a provisional truth that was appropriate to the capacities of the individuals to hear it?

Perhaps that is what an absolute truth is. One that an individual has the capacity to understand and hear.

there are religions that say you must pray in this certain fashion and say these certain words. there is value and use in such a technique for some individuals. prayer and meditation are, as you can imagine, high in the Buddhist praxis heirarchy.

And prayer and meditation is the cornerstone of the Baha'i Faith.

in Buddhism we have a concept called "skillful means" which means that the realized teacher employs teachings that are specifically geared for the needs and understanding capacity of the audience. thus, teachings can, from the same teacher, appear quite contradictory if not viewed with the correct understanding.

Exactly, but instead of just within one religion now project that concept to the realm of God. You see, there are many practices in the Buddhist tradition that reflect God. The Progressive Revelation of God is not an invention of Baha'u'llah, but, instead, an explanation of what has already come to pass. Within religions we can see this same Progressive Revelation. One example is the Abraham/Moses/Jesus Progression. Interestingly we see it as two religions, when in reality the Jewish religion is made up of two or more progressions itself.

Esparonto, anyone? for those that don't know... Esparonto was created to be a "world wide language" in the late 1890's, iirc. it didn't really catch on

it seems like, despite all it's limitations, English is becoming the "world language".

Baha'u'llah was asked what the language would be and He never answered. When Esperanto was invented Baha'is took this to 'Abdu'l-Baha and asked if this was the auxilliary language that Baha'u'llah talked of and he said we will see. I was riding on a train between Prague, Czeckos and Bratislava, Slovakia and explaining the auxilliary language concept to a Czeck citizen when he suggested that the English language had already become the auxilliary language Baha'u'llah spoke of. I asked why he would say that and he said the computer has made it so. So, yes, maybe English is the language that we will all use to communicate with each other.

briefly, Karma is the Moral Law of Cause and Effect. Karma is created by the intentions of ones actions, not by the act itself. in a sense, it can be compared to fate or predestination due to the fact that "what you sow, so shall you reap." however, one thing that is quite different and important to bear in mind is that Karma is not fixed and unchangeable. you can change your Karma for positive or negative, right now... so it doesn't follow that, one must reap what they sow, though that is usually how it happens.

This is one of those round robin type of responses that always confuses me. You said Kharma could be compared to predestination but you also said that Kharma is not fixed or unchangeable. My suggestion is that this is as confusing as the explanation for the Trinity. We do not accept predestination in anyway. We are told we have free will, which would include the ability to recognize God or reject Him, to accept the words of one Manifestation over another and to chose to live a spiritual life or a material life. When I say we, I mean all of mankind, not just Baha'is.

if i understand properly... the Bab predicted the arrival of Baha'u'llah, is that correct?

Yes, He called Him, "He whom God would make manifest,"

(Abdu'l-Baha, Tablets of Abdu'l-Baha v1, p. vi)

moreover, the Baha'u'llah was already existent at the time of the Bab's death, is that correct?

Yes. Baha'u'llah knew of His station 10 years before He revealed Himself to the followers in the Garden of Ridvan outside of Bagdad in 1863. The Bab, in the minutes before His martyrdom, sent His personal belongings, including his seal, to Baha'u'llah with explicit instructions concerning the followers. That was in 1850. Baha'u'llah became overwhelmed with His Imbuement in 1853 in the prison of Chihriq. He wrote, "I was but a man lying on a couch, when a breeze wafted over me..." He went on to say that all that was known and all that was to know was given to him. I am not quoting at this moment. We are in the midst of moving and some of my books are not here with me. If you are interested in the exact quote, I can probably find it on the internet. It is a pretty remarkable quote when you stop to think it is the first time a Manifestation was able to describe the process of imbuement by God.

an unrelated question... how does your faith tradition view homosexuality?

Very unpopular subject right now in this permissive world of "If it feels good, do it." We have specific laws regarding chastity outside of marriage. We are told if someone that is openly gay approaches the Baha'i Faith for information, we should welcome them with open arms and teach them the laws concerning chastity and harm of a promiscuous lifestyle. I know this is an avoidance kind of answer. We condemn no one, but are warned that homosexual practices can be harmful and not productive. This information is being given to you by a man that has a daughter that is openly gay with a life partner. I love them both, but pray for some understanding. Maybe this is why it is such a tough subject for me.

warmly,

Mick

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Mick,

thank you for the response

Originally Posted by IMSassafras

Actually we are in agreement. We see the Buddha as a Manifestation of God and His message from God. We give credit to the Buddha for our knowledge of the soul or the spirit within. What you wrote about Confucious and Lao-tzu are within the teachings of Baha'u'llah.

hmm... well... i've not really written much about Lao Tzu, here at least. though i've not found a reference to him in the writings of Baha'u'llah as of yet. if you have a link or a specific reference that talks about him, i'd appreciate it

I understand your explanation concerning the show of respect to the Buddha's teachings with physical displays of gifts and abasement. On the other hand, we are warned in the Baha'i Faith as the world was warned by Moses not to give adulation to idols. It is only wrong because it directs our worship towards a physical practice and not a spiritual practice. The results of such practices is to give the worshipper a false feeling of doing something worthy, when the reality of the Manifestation is that we are to follow His directions to better ourselves and our world. I am not being overly critical of the practice. Most religions and maybe all of them have some sort of ritual practice that could be construed as abasing to the individual. It is the way it was. Baha'u'llah has simply told us not to do it anymore. That is for us and those that see the harm in the old ways.

well... Moses only warned the Jews of this.. though we can leave aside our discussion of Judaism for now

in our tradition, our praxis is non-dual. we make no distinction between a physical practice or ritual and a non-physical practice. in point of fact, we use them both equally as it has been demonstrated that used in combination is the most effective method of rapid spiritual development, at least from our traditions point of view. again, though... it's not really "worship" as is commonly defined. such concepts are western or, more specifically, theistic in nature and have no place within Buddhist praxis. remember... in Buddhism... you are no different than the Buddha.. you ARE the Buddha and the Buddha is you. to say "worship" in this sense is incorrect with regards to Buddhist praxis.

from the Buddhist point of view, the result of such a practice is to generate merit, or positive karmic seeds. if one feels worthy in some fashion, this is simply the ego ursurping the spiritual experience for its own use and is not the defining experience of the practice.

~compassionately~

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Mick,

thank you for the response.

Originally Posted by Mick

Vajradhara,

Not really. The Assembly is to act in a loving and guiding manner. We are told to accept the decisions of the Local Spiritual Assembly and if they are wrong it will be righted. If we do not follow the suggestions of the Assembly, then we are on our own, I guess. We would initially go to them to have what is right prevail, and not necessarily to just get a judgement that would make us happy. The only thing I can think of that is mandated by the Assembly is if we are breaking one of the laws and our actions would cause harm to the community as a whole. Then we would be told to stop whatever we are doing that is harmful and the Assembly would offer itself as a loving guide to aid the member while he is changing his/hers actions.

i suppose i was wondering if there was something like excommunication that would be meted out to a transgressing memeber of the congregation.

Perhaps that is what an absolute truth is. One that an individual has the capacity to understand and hear.

hmm... not from the Buddhist point of view at least... those are relative truths. the absolute truth is inexpressible in our language as our language is rooted in the relative... in the subject/object dichotomy.

Exactly, but instead of just within one religion now project that concept to the realm of God. You see, there are many practices in the Buddhist tradition that reflect God. The Progressive Revelation of God is not an invention of Baha'u'llah, but, instead, an explanation of what has already come to pass. Within religions we can see this same Progressive Revelation. One example is the Abraham/Moses/Jesus Progression. Interestingly we see it as two religions, when in reality the Jewish religion is made up of two or more progressions itself.

i'm unaware of a single practice in Buddhism that reflects any god, let alone a specific Creator Deity. rightly enough, there are some practices in the Vajrayana that can be misconstrued to be a form of deity worship, but this would simply refelect the misunderstanding of the one that held that idea.

moreover... the Buddha specifically refutes the idea of a Creator Deity.. at that time and place, the Creator Deity was Ishvara.

interestingly enough... the Hindus or rather, the Brahamins have attemped a similar maneouver with regards to Buddha... they consider him to be an incarnation of Vishnu.... he just didn't know it. they are incorrect.. Buddha (we are speaking of the historical Buddha.. for clarities sake) specifically refuted the idea that he was a god.. moreover, he also refuted the idea that he was a human. when asked what he was, the Buddha replied: "awake".

This is one of those round robin type of responses that always confuses me. You said Kharma could be compared to predestination but you also said that Kharma is not fixed or unchangeable. My suggestion is that this is as confusing as the explanation for the Trinity. We do not accept predestination in anyway. We are told we have free will, which would include the ability to recognize God or reject Him, to accept the words of one Manifestation over another and to chose to live a spiritual life or a material life. When I say we, I mean all of mankind, not just Baha'is.

it can be comparared to it, but it is not it. you can compare an apple to an orange, but that does not make the apple an orange. often, i try to explain things through a paradigm that the listener already has.. it makes more sense then.

for a fully detailed answer on this, please read this thread. mind it you.. it's very long and has detailed answers. if you have questions after reading it, i'd be happy to try to resolve them for you:

http://www.comparative-religion.com/...read.php?t=259

Very unpopular subject right now in this permissive world of "If it feels good, do it." We have specific laws regarding chastity outside of marriage. We are told if someone that is openly gay approaches the Baha'i Faith for information, we should welcome them with open arms and teach them the laws concerning chastity and harm of a promiscuous lifestyle. I know this is an avoidance kind of answer. We condemn no one, but are warned that homosexual practices can be harmful and not productive. This information is being given to you by a man that has a daughter that is openly gay with a life partner. I love them both, but pray for some understanding. Maybe this is why it is such a tough subject for me.

warmly,

Mick

thank you for sharing that with us, Mick. the reason i was asking about this particular thing is due to the otherwise very well stated concepts of Baha'i equality and non-discrimination. from what i can read, nothing specifically addresses homosexuality in any shape, form or fashion. eh... the limitations of the internet perhaps.... one never knows.

not to point a finger, mind you... Buddhism also doesn't address homosexuality in particular. Buddhism addresses sexuality in general and applies that to all sexual perferences...

[Mick]

Allah'u'Abha Vajradhara

hmm... well... i've not really written much about Lao Tzu, here at least. though i've not found a reference to him in the writings of Baha'u'llah as of yet. if you have a link or a specific reference that talks about him, i'd appreciate it

I apologize. I mistook Lao-tzu for Tao. I did a simple search on a couple of sites and found no mention of Lao-tzu.

well... Moses only warned the Jews of this.. though we can leave aside our discussion of Judaism for now

Well, Baha'u'llah has explained to us that the message of God affects the whole world when it is delivered. For instance, the Ten Commandants has managed to find its way into the jurisprudence codes of all nations. The sytem of order and bureaucracy that Mohammed gave us has again found its way into all political systems. So, even though Moses delivered the Ten Commandants to a particular Jewish people, it has affected all of us.

in our tradition, our praxis is non-dual. we make no distinction between a physical practice or ritual and a non-physical practice. in point of fact, we use them both equally as it has been demonstrated that used in combination is the most effective method of rapid spiritual development, at least from our traditions point of view. again, though... it's not really "worship" as is commonly defined. such concepts are western or, more specifically, theistic in nature and have no place within Buddhist praxis. remember... in Buddhism... you are no different than the Buddha.. you ARE the Buddha and the Buddha is you. to say "worship" in this sense is incorrect with regards to Buddhist praxis.

Maybe. I seem to feel that you are protesting the use of such words as worship and deity too much. The Buddhists I have known have been spiritual as well as thoughtful. No different than the Baha'is or the Christians that have left the dogmatic boundries their church have formed. Same for a couple of Islamic individuals I went to school with. We shared both meditation and prayer. Everything that is written in the Baha'i Faith about the historical Buddha states without reservation, that He was/is a Manifestation of God and 'Abdu'l-Baha has stated numerous times it is the followers that have strayed from this knowledge and have reinvented His message. I can tell you there are 7 million plus Baha'is that give the Buddha geat respect and love for his station.

warmly,

Mick

[Mick]

Allah''u'Abha Vajradhara

i suppose i was wondering if there was something like excommunication that would be meted out to a transgressing memeber of the congregation.

Well there is something called losing one's administrative rights. This could happen because one has continued to live outside of the laws of the Faith. For instance, they continued to use drugs and was bold about it. The individual could lose their administrative rights after a lengthy period of consultation and nurturing by the Assembly. BTW, losing ones administrative rights would mean a person couldn't donate to a Baha'i fund, vote in a Baha'i election or attend a Baha'i convention. One would still be a Baha'i and one would receive his/hers administrative rights back by changing whatever it is they are doing. You know, this is kind of administrative/boring stuff and I am only discussing it because you have brought it up. This seldom happens and if it does, my experience has been it is best for everyone.

The people of Baha are generally kind and generous individuals, but we too have our personal problems. Hopefully with support and love from the community, we can overcome them.

hmm... not from the Buddhist point of view at least... those are relative truths. the absolute truth is inexpressible in our language as our language is rooted in the relative... in the subject/object dichotomy.

I am sure that there are many Baha'is that would love to get involved with a discussion of absolute/relative truths. I find it non-productive. Of course, it could have more pertinent meaning to you in your tradition, than I am able to assimilate. Let's just say that the truths revealed to mankind by the Manifestations are absolute truths. We see them as axiomatic. In the progression of the revelation, though, the next Manifestation may add to this meaning. We feel the most recent message from God is the most complete and so would be the absolute truth. All other messages from previous Manifestations may be either absolute or relative if altered or added to by ensuing Manifestations; relative to the time and culture they were shared with mankind.

i'm unaware of a single practice in Buddhism that reflects any god, let alone a specific Creator Deity. rightly enough, there are some practices in the Vajrayana that can be misconstrued to be a form of deity worship, but this would simply refelect the misunderstanding of the one that held that idea.

And I am surely not the one to tell you what you're practices are. But we are told in the Faith that the Buddha's teachings have been changed by the followers to dilute or even erase His teachings of God and our soul. I mentioned in an earlier post that we give credit to the Buddha for our awareness of our soul within us.

moreover... the Buddha specifically refutes the idea of a Creator Deity.. at that time and place, the Creator Deity was Ishvara.

Really, I am not aware of this. These are pretty strong words. In the west we would answer with 'Chapter and Verse', please. Where would I be able to find this refutation documented?

interestingly enough... the Hindus or rather, the Brahamins have attemped a similar maneouver with regards to Buddha... they consider him to be an incarnation of Vishnu.... he just didn't know it. they are incorrect.. Buddha (we are speaking of the historical Buddha.. for clarities sake) specifically refuted the idea that he was a god.. moreover, he also refuted the idea that he was a human. when asked what he was, the Buddha replied: "awake".

I love it. That is a beautiful response. We do not see the Manifestations as God, either. We use the description of a perfectly polished mirror to describe the Manifestation. This mirror would reflect all the attributes of God, but He would still be a living human and the most "awake" individual on the planet. We also recognize that though these individuals may have been born to become Manifested, until the moment of imbuement, 40 days under the Lote tree if I am correct, they are no more than a human being and these reflective qualities are not present.

for a fully detailed answer on this, please read this thread. mind it you.. it's very long and has detailed answers.

thank you. I have copy/pasted and printed so I may spend time off the computer perusing. Will get back with you when I have a comment or question.

thank you for sharing that with us, Mick. the reason i was asking about this particular thing is due to the otherwise very well stated concepts of Baha'i equality and non-discrimination.

Yes, but don't get it wrong. We are not the sheep that lie with the lion. For instance, individuals that have tried to form their own religion under the guise of the Baha'i Faith, we are directed to shun. Brrrr, what a horrible word. We have very definitive directions concerning criminals. Anybody that is doing something that is disunifying to the whole, can be dealt with firmly. In fact, Baha'u'llah has told us the greatest sin we can do is to back-bite or gossip, because it is so disunifying. He also has told us the greatest prayer we can achieve is treat one of God's creatures in a kind fashion.

We are probably not what in the west one would call liberals, but on the other hand we are a warm and loving community that is concerned about all of humanity.

warmly,

Mick

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Mick,

thanks for the response.

Originally Posted by Mick

Allah'u'Abha Vajradhara

I apologize. I mistook Lao-tzu for Tao. I did a simple search on a couple of sites and found no mention of Lao-tzu.

no worries. Lao-tzu is generally credited with the first flowering of Taoism.. though, in truth, it was the Yellow Emperor... but most folks aren't that interested in the subtleties

Well, Baha'u'llah has explained to us that the message of God affects the whole world when it is delivered. For instance, the Ten Commandants has managed to find its way into the jurisprudence codes of all nations. The sytem of order and bureaucracy that Mohammed gave us has again found its way into all political systems. So, even though Moses delivered the Ten Commandants to a particular Jewish people, it has affected all of us.

hmm... this is not correct, in my opinon. you will not find the Ten Commandments as part of the legal code of Tibet, Laos, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Mongolia, Bhutan, Sikkhim or really any of the Buddhist nations. they use a different value system for the basis of their jurisprudence system. now... it should be clearly said that where missionaries have made strong inroads in these countries, their laws are reflective of such. moral values of the Ten Commandments exist in some form or another in nearly every culture so one would expect to find things like justice, compassion, mercy, non-violence and so forth as part and parcel of any culture that may still exist.

as for political systems. i shall have to disagree with you once more. i am unaware of a democratic style of government postulated within the folds of Islam, no matter the sect. moreover, i am also unaware of a Divine King concept within Islam, as we see with the World Ruling Kings of India, as an earthly political system. from what i've been able to fathom, the Islamic political system is patriarichial in nature with a very strong theocratic model also postulated. in practice, it seems to be a combination of the two.

Maybe. I seem to feel that you are protesting the use of such words as worship and deity too much. The Buddhists I have known have been spiritual as well as thoughtful. No different than the Baha'is or the Christians that have left the dogmatic boundries their church have formed. Same for a couple of Islamic individuals I went to school with. We shared both meditation and prayer. Everything that is written in the Baha'i Faith about the historical Buddha states without reservation, that He was/is a Manifestation of God and 'Abdu'l-Baha has stated numerous times it is the followers that have strayed from this knowledge and have reinvented His message. I can tell you there are 7 million plus Baha'is that give the Buddha geat respect and love for his station.

warmly,

Mick

hmm... well, i'm not sure to what you are saying "maybe." i can tell you for certain that this is how we view it.

i do protest those words.. but its not the words themselves that i protest. it is the implied meaning of those words. what does the word "worship" mean? what does the word "deity" mean? i protest because this is a mischaracterization of the Buddhist praxis and in the interest of inter-religious dialog, it is important for people to have a proper and accurate understanding of each others traditions.

it is all well and fine for your tradition to say that Buddha was a manifestation of God, however, that is certainly not how any Buddhist would view it.. and as this is a forum wherein we exchange information with each other, you should clearly know that no Buddhist would support the position outlined in the referenced texts.... now, i must confess, that i am operating under the presumption that you are interested in our perspective on this. if that is not the case, please let me know and i shall modify my postings in this regard.

imagine, if you will, how the Buddhist would characterize Baha'u'llah. we would say that this individual was a Bodhisattva. undoubtedly, you would not agree with this characterization, however from our point of view, this would be a very good thing. in point of fact, this is exactly the view we have with regards to Jesus and Mohammad, Moses and so forth.

it would appear that you've put the Buddha into a different station than what he claimed for himself. If the Buddha is a manifestation of God, that completely, utterly and entirely destroys his teachings. it is beyond the scope of this disucssion to get into this here, however, rest assured that this is the case. there is no escape and no liberation and the wheel of samsara will continue to roll. this is not a position that i can support.

i also cannot conceive of how you can say "We give credit to the Buddha for our knowledge of the soul or the spirit within" when the Buddha clearly refuted such notions of "soul" or "spirit", perhaps you can explain this to me in a manner in which i can understand?

as for the followers losing the message and straying from the teachings... well... i'm not really sure what to tell you, except that, as you might expect, we do not agree.

let me ask you something... do you think its possible that we may have a greater insight into our tradition and knowledge of our tradition than your tradition has of us? this is specifically why i ask adherents of other faith traditions to explain what and why and all of that... for, though i am a fairly knowledgeable individual vis a vie religion, you cannot get the "feel" of the tradition from a book, it must be communicated in a dynamic fashion for me to approximate an understanding.... well, for me at least