Baha'i/Ananda Marga

[QueryGuy]

Originally Posted by Vapour

Just that if your project is everyone converting to your idea, I just kinda think it's far fetched? And your world government thingy, I'm not saying it won't happen. EU is a good example but you know, it probably work if everyone can agree to disagree.

Baha'is strongly favor a world government (federated, not totalitarian) that is as close to Baha'u'llah's teachings as possible. However... Baha'u'llah encourages tolerance of other religions in all walks of life. A world government influenced by Baha'i teachings would allow people of any religion to practice their faith as they wished. (Provided, of course, that such practices wouldn't encourage war, terrorism, or severe abuse on an individual level.)

Please keep in mind, Baha'is don't feel that those of other faiths are damned if they don't convert, and they don't feel other religions are a plague to be extinguished.

QG

[QueryGuy]

Originally Posted by barefootgal9

hope somewhere in all this I have at least sort of answered your questions!

Ah, you beat me to it with a much more detailed post. Nice post, though.

QG

[Vapour]

So the world government is more of prohecy. o.k. Thanks.

As of the different religions uniting under Baha'i interpretation, I don't see it happening.

Baha'i interpretation of other religions appeart to go against core principle of these religion. For example, islam, the prophet mohammed being not the last prophet or, for buddism, idea of monotheism and almighty creator. I mean, if the prophet mohammed wasn't supposed to be the last prohpet, I would assume the god has made that part bit clear by clearly indicating the distinction between two terms. That interpretation just looks too streched.

Accepting such interpretation appear to be no different from converting from one faith to another because it offer no clear way to show that such interpretation is superior than the other numerous interpretation for employing symbolic interpretation.

Why do you think Baha'i's interpretation is better. Is it matter of faith as I have been saying or is there something else?

Oh, and thanks for detailed reply for the last question.

[barefootgal9]

Truthfully, that distinction argument is one I, too, find a bit difficult. Probably because I really am a poor student of Islam! I find Baha'u'llah's discussion of the essential unity of the Manaifestations -- and Their unity with God -- more assuring.

(from the Kitab-i-Iqan):

71 Notwithstanding the obviousness of this theme, in the eyes of those that have quaffed the wine of knowledge and certitude, yet how many are those who, through failure to understand its meaning, have allowed the term "Seal of the Prophets" to obscure their understanding, and deprive them of the grace of all His manifold bounties! Hath not Muhammad, Himself, declared: "I am all the Prophets?" Hath He not said as We have already mentioned: "I am Adam, Noah, Moses, and Jesus?" Why should Muhammad, that immortal Beauty, Who hath said: "I am the first Adam" be incapable of saying also: "I am the last Adam"? For even as He regarded Himself to be the "First of the Prophets"--that is Adam--in like manner, the "Seal of the Prophets" is also applicable unto that Divine Beauty. It is admittedly obvious that being the "First of the Prophets," He likewise is their "Seal."

72 The mystery of this theme hath, in this Dispensation, been a sore test unto all mankind. Behold, how many are those who, clinging unto these words, have disbelieved Him Who is their true Revealer. What, We ask, could this people presume the terms "first" and "last"--when referring to God--glorified be His Name!--to mean? If they maintain that these terms bear reference to this material universe, how could it be possible, when the visible order of things is still manifestly existing? Nay, in this instance, by "first" is meant no other than the "last" and by "last" no other than the "first."

73 Even as in the "Beginning that hath no beginnings" the term "last" is truly applicable unto Him who is the Educator of the visible and of the invisible, in like manner, are the terms "first" and "last" applicable unto His Manifestations.

It is also, I think, worth nothing that "Seal" has other connotations than "last" -- Muhammad, Baha'u'llah, and millions of people for probably at least two millenia have placed their seal upon documents to attest to their authenticity. So, to me, Muhammad's title of the "Seal of the Prophets" indicates His affirmation of them.

BTW -- Hi Papist!

[barefootgal9]

>So the world government is more of prohecy. o.k. Thanks.<

Prophecy, AND tools, and principles -- and a "workforce" (the Baha'is) for bringing it into being.

[barefootgal9]

Originally Posted by QueryGuy

Ah, you beat me to it with a much more detailed post. Nice post, though.

QG

Hey Q-Guy!

thx

bfg

[barefootgal9]

>Why do you think Baha'i's interpretation is better. Is it matter of faith as I have been saying or is there something else?<

something else (IMO)... God is doing this...

(He's good at stuff we don't have the power to do....)

;-)

[I, Brian]

It is indeed a matter of Faith, though, as is required with any religious and spiritual belief.

As for a world government - I'm not convinced that Baha'is have considered the realities of politics here - but that is a topic I'd like to explore in "Politics and Society".

[barefootgal9]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

IAs for a world government - I'm not convinced that Baha'is have considered the realities of politics here - but that is a topic I'd like to explore in "Politics and Society".

Are you starting a thread there? If so, I will take a look.

I don't think the Baha'is as a whole are naive (some may be, but eventually experience knocks that off) about the realities of politics -- as I suggested, the transition from one condition to another is not expected to be either easy or painless ... or even, neccessarily in a straight line. But yes, we do have faith that we are moving, overall, in the direction of global civilization.

Besides my faith, however, I am mindful that we are talking about a cycle of development to span hundreds, up to 1000+ years. It doesn't seem to me really hard to believe that we are on the threshold of a global era -- however rocky and precarious it may be in my own short lifetime. That's a growing opinion outside the Baha'i Faith as well. When I look at today's world and compare it to 1000 AD I have some confidence that human attitudes can go through substantial -- and even remarkable -- changes in 10-20 lifetimes. And the increasing levels and means of communication, accellerating scientific discoveries, etc. suggest to me that we are very likely transitioning at a much faster pace that at any time in human history.

What, for instance, will be the long-term outcome of the scientific revolution -- which is really, in the span of human existance, very young and only beginning to make its impact felt? What commonly held assumptions may change as it becomes generally known, and ultimately accepted, that within the human genome, no such thing as a "pure race" can be discerned, but what is revealed is that virtually all the genes of humanity have been swapped around and shared for at least 55,000 years?

The expansion of science is only one of myriad factors that are reshaping our perceptions and will continue to do so. Where it will all lead, and how erratic or difficult the path, how much opposition will be mounted against new ideas, or how violent the battles may be (all of these things Baha'u'llah told us we must expect) -- no one can see clearly. (In fact, He stated in one passage that He was forbidden to reveal these things, lest we despair!) But I think the general direction outlined by Baha'u'llah is increasingly confirmed.

[barefootgal9]

Vapour, just a little more on:

[QUOTE=Vapour]So the world government is more of prohecy. o.k. Thanks.

As of the different religions uniting under Baha'i interpretation, I don't see it happening./QUOTE]

I don't know that that will happen. But spouses holding very different viewpoints and opinions can be in a state of unity if they are respectful and loving towards each other, and both can both grow, understand and learn from each other because they are both committed to the goal of a loving relationship. So can religious faiths choose friendship and communication instead of suspicion and enmity. The Baha'i Faith uses the phrase "unity in diversity" -- not the elimination of diversity.

As to Buddhist "non-gods" versus western "Yahweh" or "Allah" --to me, either tradition is speaking of an Unknowablle, Underlying Spiritual Reality. It has never seemed a barrier to me that one tradition speaks of this in abstract terms while the other personifies it. I draw delight and insight from both POVs. I think the more people become familiar with both traditions, the less significant the choices of words and terminologies become. The froth on the waves takes any manner of form, but the Ocean is the same.

[arthra]

Vapour wrote:

So the world government is more of prohecy. o.k. Thanks.

Reply:

Baha'u'llah advised the rulers of HIs day to send reps to a world parliament and reduce their armaments also a world court of arbitration was to be set up... so far we have today the UN and a world court...so things are moving along somewhat although delayed a bit I would say....

Vapour:

As of the different religions uniting under Baha'i interpretation, I don't see it happening.

Reply:

I think there will always be various religions..what will be different is how we relate to one another... In time I think the religions will support similar goals and work more in harmony...There are only five to six million Baha'is in the world but the Faith is growing in many areas.. It will in my view become more prominent and influence cultures of future societies.

Vapour:

Baha'i interpretation of other religions appeart to go against core principle of these religion. For example, islam, the prophet mohammed being not the last prophet or, for buddism, idea of monotheism and almighty creator. I mean, if the prophet mohammed wasn't supposed to be the last prohpet, I would assume the god has made that part bit clear by clearly indicating the distinction between two terms. That interpretation just looks too streched.

Reply:

I don't know how much you've read of our scriptures but there's a great deal relating to Islamic topics... Most early Baha'is were Moslem students and scholars and were well versed. The issue of Buddhism is under another topic here... and you can apprise yourself of that.

Vapour:

Accepting such interpretation appear to be no different from converting from one faith to another because it offer no clear way to show that such interpretation is superior than the other numerous interpretation for employing symbolic interpretation.

Reply:

It's true the spiritual interpretations are more valued by us than literalist ones and also if you read holy scriptures in very literal word for word ways you probably will not grasp their deeper significances I think and be lost in arguments with other litaralists....

Vapour:

Why do you think Baha'i's interpretation is better. Is it matter of faith as I have been saying or is there something else?

Reply:

I think you should probably read the Kitab-i-Iqan revealed by Baha'u'llah to appreciate the significance of Baha'i interpretation and this book was revealed in three days time in repsonse to some literalist questions about Qur'an and Holy Scriptures....The online edition can be found at:

http://bahai-library.com/writings/bahaullah/iqan/

God's blessings!

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by arthra

Baha'u'llah advised the rulers of HIs day to send reps to a world parliament and reduce their armaments also a world court of arbitration was to be set up... so far we have today the UN and a world court...so things are moving along somewhat although delayed a bit I would say....

Usually a parliament is an elected body, though - and we all know that the USA has opted out of the International Court of Justice, and has pressured other nations to abandon the project.

But, indeed, there is a One World Government thread in Politics and Society.

[BruceDLimber]

Hi, Brian! :-)

Originally Posted by I, Brian

As for a world government - I'm not convinced that Baha'is have considered the realities of politics here. . . .

What you appear to overlook is the fact that what Baha'is see as "government" is radically different from conventional present-day governmental systems in a number of major ways!

The Baha'i administrative system, completely eliminates partisanship and division from the picture! While fully democratic, with elected leadership, it has no nominations and no campaigning, and even discussion of individual personalities is forbidden! Instead, the Bahai's of a community gather together in an atmosphere of prayer, and each individual votes by secret ballot for those individuals he or she feels are best qualified to hold the office. Those receiving the most votes are automatically elected. (There is also a special tie-breaking system that explicitly favors tying minority members, the definition of "minority" varying from place to place.)

There is thus no chance either to "run for office" or, once elected, to refuse to serve (save on grounds such as medical inability). This completely eliminates the classic corruption process of "I voted for you; now here's what I want you to do for me!"

And Baha'i administration operates not by divisive or antagonistic methods, but through consultation, which seeks to build consensus (tho' failing this, a majority vote may prevail) and in which no one may remain wedded to whatever her original proposal was.

The seven million Baha'is have already been using this very administrative system internally world wide, in essentially every country on earth, at the local, regional, national, and world levels! So we know that it can and does work, and that it also serves will to foster unity rather than alienation (as contrasted with the divide-and-conquer methods of conventional politics)!

As the saying goes, "Try it; you'll like it!" :-)

Best,

Bruce

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings!

Originally Posted by Vapour

[I]f the prophet mohammed wasn't supposed to be the last prohpet, I would assume the god has made that part bit clear by clearly indicating the distinction between two terms. That interpretation just looks too streched.

Nothing is "stretched" in the least! Meaning no offense, you seem to be objecting to a fantasy of your own devising.

Muhammad specifically said He was the Seal of the nabi (the minor prophets), as specifically and explicitly recorded in the Qur'an! He DID NOT say of the Rasu'l (major Divine Messengers); He said of the nabi! So we're simply taking HIm at His word on this!

We have stretched nothing whatever: He said X, and we believe He meant X. YOU are the one who has the problem in this respect because He said X, and you wish to claim He meant Y!

Simple as that.

Peace,

Bruce

[Vajradhara]

Originally Posted by BruceDLimber

Hi, Brian! :-)



What you appear to overlook is the fact that what Baha'is see as "government" is radically different from conventional present-day governmental systems in a number of major ways!

The Baha'i administrative system, completely eliminates partisanship and division from the picture! While fully democratic, with elected leadership, it has no nominations and no campaigning, and even discussion of individual personalities is forbidden! Instead, the Bahai's of a community gather together in an atmosphere of prayer, and each individual votes by secret ballot for those individuals he or she feels are best qualified to hold the office. Those receiving the most votes are automatically elected. (There is also a special tie-breaking system that explicitly favors tying minority members, the definition of "minority" varying from place to place.)

There is thus no chance either to "run for office" or, once elected, to refuse to serve (save on grounds such as medical inability). This completely eliminates the classic corruption process of "I voted for you; now here's what I want you to do for me!"

And Baha'i administration operates not by divisive or antagonistic methods, but through consultation, which seeks to build consensus (tho' failing this, a majority vote may prevail) and in which no one may remain wedded to whatever her original proposal was.

The seven million Baha'is have already been using this very administrative system internally world wide, in essentially every country on earth, at the local, regional, national, and world levels! So we know that it can and does work, and that it also serves will to foster unity rather than alienation (as contrasted with the divide-and-conquer methods of conventional politics)!

As the saying goes, "Try it; you'll like it!" :-)

Best,

Bruce

Namaste Bruce,

thank you for the post.

how many females are elected to the House of Justice in Hafia?

how much turn over has there been of the N.S.B. (National Spiritual Board..iirc) in North America since 1900?