Talk:Bahá'í Faith and world religions

Buddhism

Previous author was confusing Buddah nature with atman, the core Hindu concept which Buddah (in Buddhism Cannon) specifically rejected. He made atman reference as Buddhist concept twice. I have notice that this is quite common mistake some Baha'i followers make. Yoji Hajime

The changes I am making, are not removing any of your statements, as that what this page is for, but changing the style to follow that of the other bullets. Sorry if it seems like I'm removing any content, and please change my edits, if you feel that is the case. -- Jeff3000 06:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There were two reference of atman concept in Buddhist section. I would think it is rather embarassing mistake. It almost akin to saying that "Islam consider Mohhamed to be a son of God, hence he is God". Moreover, I would recommend that someone modify this section. "Buddhist teachings do allude to an "unborn, uncreated, undying, unmanifest" reality which is the closest that Indian culture could come to the concept of theism." I don't intend to touch Baha'i part but both Hindu and Buddhist would think the author is clueless.Yoji Hajime

I have read the "Baha'i Reference Library" link. Wikipedia is a place to present and attribute opinion and is not the place to criticise such opinion. But some of it is quite weak, imo. For example, "Many worship idols although their teaching forbids it". Here is a list which is forbidden by Buddah. http://www.dhammadana.org/en/samgha/vinaya/227.htm I would love to see a quote from sutra in regard to idol worship as quoted in the page. Secondly, the guy don't appear to have read the part refering to taking "refuge" in "triple gems", the core definition of what makes someone buddhist and are repeatedly mentioned in sutras. when Buddhist "worship", they are actually taking "refuge", paying homage to Buddah. Then "the Master asked for the last time. “Still,” answered the disciples, “we will be thankful, for they cause us to be martyrs. What more glorious fate is there than this, to die for the glory of God?” And the Buddha said: “Well done!”" Where is "to die for the glory of God" quote coming from? I would love to see such sutra.Yoji Hajime

Unfortunately, I don't know enough about Buddhism to comment on these things. -- Jeff3000 15:39, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The person that wrote the Buddhist/Hindu sections was not a Baha'i, and I didn't edit them because I don't know much about Buddhistm/Hinduism. Feel free to make whatever edits you want to make them more accurate. Cuñado

- Talk 19:39, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There are number of Mahayana Sutras (out of +130,000) which alude to Buddah nature akin to atman, limiting annata to physical world. This interpretation is criticised on the ground that it will merely rebrand Buddhism into a branch of Hinduism and not entirely accepted even in mahayanan buddhism. Reference to this thinking would make Response section much more credible. I don't intend to touch Baha'i response section so feel free to mention this. Yoji Hajime

I've read the Shunyata page which I think is quite close to various stances of the Baha'i faith on such matters, aside from whether Mahayana ascribed to a true reality to Buddha nature and Nirvana or not - Śūnyatā signifies that everything one encounters in life is empty of soul, permanence, and self-nature. Everything is inter-related, never self-sufficient or independent; nothing has independent reality. Yet śūnyatā never connotes nihilism, which Buddhist doctrine considers to be a delusion, just as it considers materialism to be a delusion.... "It is said that the world is empty, the world is empty, lord. In what respect is it said that the world is empty?" The Buddha replied, "Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self: Thus it is said, Ananda, that the world is empty." - Everything one encounters in life is very impermenent - even people can be empty of soul... and everything is inter-related and only God, something one cannot encounter in an absolute sense is self-sufficient. I think the Baha'i pov can sit very well among such statements without taking either to extremes. There is some permence ascribed to a soul - the survival of personality and memory after death and such - but simply transcending death isn't tantamount to eternal permenence and self-sufficiency. Do Buddhist believe that death is an absolute disolution?--Smkolins 16:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

removing entries

I think that the Hinduism and Buddhism sections are too long. The Jewish, Christian and Muslim sections each have two entries, which are possibly the most debatable and obvious contradictions that should be dealt with. Here are the entries for Hinduism:

Polytheism
Many Paths to the Divine
Status of Krishna
Reincarnation
Status of the Vedas
Yoga

And in Buddhism:

"God" in Buddhism
Buddha as "prophet"
Bahá'í References to Buddhism Superficial?

I think we should keep Polytheism and Reincarnation for Hinduism, and God and Prophets in Buddhism. The others are much less relevant, and those are the major points of dispute. Any opinions before I hit the delete button? Cuñado - Talk 01:15, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No responses, so I deleted them. Cuñado

- Talk 06:27, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Some of them seem important, or at least interesting. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zazaban (talk • contribs).

redirect page

We really need to get rid of this page. Nothing links here, and this is a duplicate of Bahá'í Faith and the unity of religion. The current page is a result of edit warring between editors. Someone came in and wanted to add loads of criticism and this was part of the mess that resulted. I wrote most of this page, and I realize it's unencyclopedic and poorly written. I suggest redirecting. Cuñado - Talk 02:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree - it serves a useful purpose and seems to be in parallel to other pages like it - Christianity and world religions and the whole Comparative_religion#Other_Comparisions_and_topics list.--Smkolins 14:23, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps there is enough material for a Hinduism and Baha'i article....--Smkolins 14:34, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion, this article is very useful. Responses to common arguments are important and help facilitate a better understanding of the Bahai Faith --Bill Bisco 03:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]